Dear Larry Fink and employees,
In his book, Conspiracy Theories, Objectivism, and the Real Conspiracy, Robert X George writes:
“In my view, today’s pragmatist business leaders are members of a true conspiracy. Starting with anti-capitalist Marxist critical theory, they promote the “class struggle” and an anti-capitalist critique. They do not represent something small and meaningless... You can call theirs a cabal or a conspiracy but, it goes without saying, that the WEF (World Economic Forum) , BlackRock, the Business Roundtable and other groups are a huge threat to individual rights and freedom around the world. This is a demonstrable fact, an inductive generalization. If they gain power, they will certainly destroy the constitution and the individual rights of many people and replace them with collective enclaves operating according to the principles of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governmental) and DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion). They will not go away with a mere coming election.
“To claim that these individuals and organizations are not a conspiracy of bad actors is technically untrue. There is objective knowledge that they are working toward the same goals, and they all want to destroy capitalism by means of altruistic appeals to human sacrifice. They are certainly a group of incompetents pretending to be technocrats. But to say that all of the many critics of these groups are conspiracy theorists ignores, very shortsightedly, the true threat these people pose to our country. They are analogous to the early communists who declared that they wanted to take over the factories and machines so they could create economic abundance (that never happened). These communists destroyed their own economies as will the conspirators surrounding today’s pragmatist CEOs.
“These leftists are the heads of the largest corporations in the world, and they are trying to create the next worldwide socialist state. They are not capitalists by any means, but they do believe that their ends justify their means.”
“In her books, Ayn Rand identified two types of business leaders, the Reardens and Galts (capitalists on strike) versus the statists and political manipulators (who used their riches to obtain government power, regulations, and re-distribution of income). Shouldn’t we assume that Rand was presenting two opposed real conspiracies? If so, isn’t a description of George Soros and his fellow conspirators, as they are known in the media today, far worse than the treacherous Mouches and Boyles in Atlas Shrugged? If not, they are certainly very similar.
“In our society, Rand’s “good guys,” the Reardens and Galts, have nothing in common with the BlackRock/WEF/Soros/G20 crowd, to name a few. These organizations are made up of pragmatists seeking to use political force to create monopolies and enrich themselves – many of them call themselves effective altruists who favor “democracy.” Others are using altruistic/social justice swindles such as ESG and DEI to fool people into accepting their pragmatist goals. But these people are not “small potatoes.” To say they do not represent a real conspiracy is ludicrous.”
(ESG = Environmental, Social, and Governance (meaning fascism). DEI = Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (all based upon social justice swindles that try to reverse the goals of society and turn them into the advancement of the goals of Marxist critical theory and critical race theory.)
In my book, Effective Altruism, I wrote:
“Name: Larry Fink
“Field/Company: Finance/BlackRock
“Description: This company is steeped in corporate altruism. It claims to support “stakeholders” which is a general term for socialism’s “downtrodden” or poor. The company uses moral force and threats of exclusion for any company that does not openly succumb to the company’s ESG policies (See below).
Here I insert the very words of Larry Fink as he discusses what they intend to do to companies that make up their portfolio:
"You have to force behaviors. If you don't force behaviors, whether it's gender or race or just any way you want to say the composition of your team, you're going to be impacted. That not just recruiting, it's development," Fink said. "We're gonna have to force change."
Mr. Fink here is declaring that he is the moral authority who will force companies to adopt DEI policies and programs. This means he assumes that no one should question the moral supremacy of DEI which cannot possibly be true. Here is a businessperson who thinks he has the right to determine what companies will do regardless of the rightfulness of DEI. To hear Fink say it, companies must implement DEI without question.
The question must be asked: How can one businessperson assume the right to dictate to other business people how they should run their businesses? How can such an independent businessperson assume that certain principles are his to enforce upon his clients?
To continue the quote from Effective Altruism:
“According to a Judiciary Committee letter to BlackRock (July 6, 2023), “BlackRock is the world’s largest asset manager, with over $9 trillion of assets under management as of March 31, 2023. As of the end of 2021, BlackRock owns 7.7% of the shares and casts 9.8% of the votes of the entire Standard and Poor’s (S&P) 500. Together with State Street Corporation and The Vanguard Group, Inc., BlackRock is one of the so-called “Big Three” asset managers that own a combined 21.9% and vote a combined 24.9% of the shares of the S&P 500.
““BlackRock is a member of both Climate Action 100—and the Net Zero Asset Managers initiative (NZAM). Through Climate Action 100—, BlackRock appears to have reached a collusive agreement with other institutional investors to “work with the companies in which [they] invest to…deliver [] net zero [greenhouse gas (GHG)] emissions by 2050.” Similarly, through NZAM, BlackRock appears to collusively have agreed with other asset managers to “[w]ork in partnership with asset owner clients on decarbonization goals, consistent with an ambition to reach net zero emissions by 2050 or sooner across all assets under management.”
““These collusive agreements to “decarboni[ze]” and reduce emissions to net zero by 2050 would require draconian “declines in the use of coal, oil and gas”: as much as 98% for coal, 94% for oil, and 86% for fossil fuels overall. This, in turn, would require radical steps such as halting sales of new internal combustion engine passenger cars by 2035, and phasing out all unabated coal and oil power plants by 2040.” It also would mean “that no new oil and gas fields must be developed,” choking off investment in these industries. Such restrictions limit output and increase prices and deprive businesses of investments and consumers of choices. The potential consequences for American freedom and economic well-being are far-reaching.”
“On the corporate website, “Larry Fink discusses rising rates, banking sector stresses, and a fragmenting global economy – but emphasizes client choice and the importance of hope for investors.” This (like Soros and others) represents altruist claptrap intended to portray the company as a social justice champion. Remember, we have argued that altruism does not work because it requires the self-sacrifice of the productive sectors of the economy for the sake of the nonproductive sectors.
“BlackRock has come up with a social justice management tool in its ESG strategy. The investment firm issues ESG ratings for any business it invests in. For BlackRock, ESG is an empty investment strategy. By focusing investments on companies that subscribe to the ESG strategy, BlackRock thinks [it] can focus dollars on Environmental, Social, and Governance matters. You could call ESG strategy a way of identifying the companies ripe for exploitation. If you are successful and you have a good ESG rating, you are in.
“BlackRock’s stress on the government/business alliance also resurrects leftist politics, pragmatism, and indeterminacy into a system that skims money from corporations. In effect, they are stealing the trappings of capitalism as a way of undermining capitalism for the sake of “the planet”. Again, remember that altruism doesn’t work (it exploits). (parenthesis mine).
“Let me state clearly that ESG is a destructive philosophy that cannot and does not have the clients and shareholders in mind. To put re-distributionist concepts (such as ESG) at the forefront of corporations will destroy the company bottom lines. (parenthesis mine)
“The reason companies such as BlackRock exert so much pressure on corporations to adopt ESG is the philosophy of altruism. Today, both liberals and conservatives advocate altruism, the sacrifice of the individual to society. Not only are most CEOs thoroughly pragmatic when they seek to avoid being shamed by ESG, they are blind to the fact that if they challenge ESG, they will not only lose profits but also become morally corrupt (in the eyes of ESG advocates). (parenthesis mine)
“Yet, even individuals within these corporations see altruism as a positive benefit for society. They think it is great that their companies are spending huge dollars helping the poor, completely oblivious to the fact that it is the profits they have worked to create that are paying for environmental programs that cost the economy millions of dollars annually.
“Moral fear moves them to applaud ESG as it helps the government establish central planning and dictatorship. This is the mistake that is causing the decline and destruction of capitalism. Until society returns to individualism, the rights of individuals to the pursuit of happiness, the stormtroopers of altruism, Fink, and his minions, will eventually destroy society. We must challenge altruism for the evil moral system that it is. It not only destroys productive citizens, it also violates the principle that production comes before consumption. It is altruism that leads to genocide and mass murder as history has shown.
“How do they get away with this? Using the flowery language of love for mankind, of kindness and the beauty of giving, they slide by, pretending to be loving people who care about others, they fool productive people into giving their values to people who do not care about creating their own values. In fact, they don’t realize that it is (shareholder) capitalism, fossil-fuel based machines, and the profit-motive that are beautifying the planet. In particular, it is fossil fuels and the machines they power that are creating abundance and human flourishing on our planet. (parenthesis mine)
“ESG is a fascist device used by companies that don’t want to compete fairly. Their goal is to destroy capitalism under the false notion that diverting profits to charity actually does good for those corporations. Yet, the strategy that lies beneath ESG is the notion that companies that don’t subscribe to … ESG should be put out of business by the government. It is a good business strategy, thinks Larry Fink, to show people that corporations are not selfish. They are instead eager to show that they hate money unless it is given away. Wait for the law of diminishing returns as increases in altruistic spending grow beyond the bottom line. (The law of diminishing returns says that, if you keep increasing one factor in the production of goods (such as your workforce) while keeping all other factors the same, you’ll reach a point beyond which additional increases will result in a progressive decline in output. In other words, there’s a point when adding more inputs will begin to hamper the production process. Source: https://www.britannica.com/money/diminishing-returns)
“BlackRock’s goal is to destroy capitalism and turn society into a re-distribution industry. Anytime you force companies to divert profits to so-called stakeholders rather than shareholders, you will cause shareholders to exit, and, in the long run, BlackRock will destroy itself as each of the companies in which it invests begin to lose profits. Fink’s gambit of ESG will eventually fail. It is fooling no one.”
ESG and DEI, imposed upon American companies, will turn the American economy into a fascist state that promises collectivism and sacrifice of the individual until, eventually, it destroys individual rights and freedom. Investors should take note and run as fast as they can from these false promises. I shall be the one to say it: whenever companies are forced to give up profits for the sake of altruistic giving, the end of affluence is over.
Sincerely,
Robert Villegas
If you would like to read Mr. Villegas’ book Effective Altruism – the Same Old Altruism, you can find it here: Effective Altruism - the Same Old Altruism
No comments:
Post a Comment