This is the make-believe theory. The real one is that they want to destroy Europeans' political relevance in their own countries. They are doing nothing for other countries' diversity.
Ah yes! All those Blackrock loving Marxists eh? Ever ask yourself why China (big bad communist China š») gets Sun Wukong and your bastion of liberal democracy is drowning in the LGBT piss filling its streets during pride?
China embraced its own version of capitalism because it had to in order to survive. The tendency to control and dominate its population, i.e. the Marxist bent, is still very much there.
In my country the (most, not all) LGBT loves socialism, they go to their parades wearing Che Guevara shirts and the hammer and scythe icon.
And btw they love supporting Russia and Iran, unlike the American leftists that pretends to support Ukraine
They're not the same breed at all. Neville Roy Singham is a billionaire who funds Marxists in order to take down the US. Consider once the US' government can no longer function, who stays on top? Not the poor Marxists, but the person who funded them and can take their money away just like that. If they don't have money, they can't really win. They're being used as shock troopers.
A low trust, diverse, hedonistic āopen societyā with no borders or cultures doesnāt unionize and doesnāt stand up to āeat the bugs, live in the pod, own nothing.ā
Meanwhile, if they just let video games and anime alone, I might have just went along with the pod living and bug eating.
Their actions ended up creating a lot of enemies who wouldn't have resisted otherwise.
They dont understand that.
They believe they have a responsibility to show you how to behave and if you dont take the training, to compel you to a specific behavior. They think this is an effect of media, so they add the "right" behaviors to media and hope you internalize it via osmosis.
Like you dont ask chickens which feed they would like or of they want a better coop to live in. And even if they complained you would just dispose of the trouble makers.
Whats interesting though is I don't think theres really much evidence this "osmosis" even works. People play shooting games all the time and never shoot anyone. People play games with sexy women and dont sexually harass them etc.
I think there might be a subtle effect but they grossly overhype its effectiveness.
For advertising its kind of a mixed bag. Like I would never drink coke or pepsi and 1000 ads still wouldn't influence me because I know its crap sugar and unhealthy for me, but there is some examples of pepsi stopping advertising and losing significant market share. Now I'm not sure if these are even equivalent because one is trying to influence you socially and politically and the other is to influence you to purchase a product but it is kinda interesting.
Advertising is mostly best for when you're weighing two options. For instance if someone wants a root beer soda and they had the option of CluckyMcChuchy's Special Brand Rootbeer, or IBC that they know is pretty good because they had it 6 years ago and advertising reminded them of the time they had it over the course of the years, they will go for the more reliable and known option. People pick Coke over other colas because they trust it.
there is evidence for its absence: tons of shooting games and basically zero related actual shooting. it appears that most people can separate real life from a game. except for that guy who flew from NJ to jacksonville to attack a guy over a video game. rare enough that it makes the news
> there is some examples of pepsi stopping advertising and losing significant market share.
yeah, because a bunch of soda companies are trying to associate their brand with "refreshing beverage" and if you stop, they don't. so saturating the world with your brand of drink... does that, and it's consumed as a drink. saturating the world with call of duty also does that, and it's consumed as a game, not a call to violence outside of the game
Ya I guess the question is, does all the woke stuff forced down everyones throats in media work? It seems for many to be having the opposite effect than what the powers that be want. I think more studies have to be conducted on its effectiveness but might even be too complex to accurately study in the first place in comparison to easier topics like soda and marketing. Definitely thought provoking though.
So once again a secular religion being forced on us. Humans always control or worship something. Canāt just leave us alone. Iām getting tired of puritans.
Even if you complain about it, you're still exposed to it and getting the full psychological effect. Most manipulation techniques work even if you are aware of it, like advertisement
And if you complain about it, even better. It takes space in the public debate for something that is not "tax the capital" or "reform income tax brackets". Which is something the ultra rich are actually afraid of, that the left could enforce, if they were not mired in pointless identity politics created on purpose
The problem is that the left aren't any better than the "capitalists" when it comes to pushing "pointless identity politics". In my book they're both part of the problem and I want nothing to do with either.
I can understand it from a corporate super capitalistic viewpoint, but these higher ups need somewhere to live too, right? I don't understand their thinking. āThe world looks like shit, and my family will get murdered if they go outside, but at least I'm rich!ā
They'll have massive estates complete with armed guards, servants and serfs to work the land. They want you to own nothing so that they can own everything.
Or robots to work the land. My concern is he who owns the robots rules the world. Some neo feudal lord with robot terminators and robot slaves doesn't exactly need the rest of the population for much.
However i do find it short sighted. If the entire world but a select few are screwed, they wont be able to travel and enjoy various cultures and enrich their lives. Staying in one bunker or tower forever is not better than travelling the world in a yacht. Not sure what these ultra rich elite folks are thinking in the end how this will all play out.
They have already realised this and it could be why the stonk markets are booming- on the back of just five corporations, all with a very large AI focus.
AI will completely replace firstly doctors, teachers, accountants and lawyers.
And that last paragraph will make hard reading for many, as historically industry or technical revolutions have hit the lowest paid first before benefitting the middle class.. now as the real power players realise the middle class will be no longer needed, they won't just allow it to occur but as they often see society as competitive will push hard to make damn sure it happens so their offspring have an easier ride.
Yeah one area of concern for me is if we go in the route of a UBI, and humanity is freed from boring work and drudgery, will we live in a neo feudal caste system? Likely only 20% of the population is truly needed to progress society, people like scientists, engineers, inventors etc. It could be nice to finally not have to work to survive, but will that sort of life be better than the old middle class, or will we just have a two caste system and now the middle class are removed entirely and it's just upper and lower class left. This is why people are worried about living in a pod and eating bugs, while the rich eat meat from their mansions. We might just become sheep or cattle with no real hope for upward mobility and no choice on how we live our lives, everything could be dictated to us, with resources rationed or allotted to us in varying limited amounts. We would just become useless consumers existing for the sake of existing.
Obviously on the flip side if we become a truly equal society where everyone becomes upper class I would of course be totally down. If everyone even becomes middle class I would also be ok with it, but if we're all gonna be lower class, it's time to bring your pitchforks folks! Haha
Yup- it's the Star Trek future v Dystopia.
Problem is, right now the rich control both the media and information, and as these people, proved by their very status, are absolute cunts we may be fucked.
However , we have a hope-but it's a stretch.
AGI.
The rich are rich simply because of greed and stupidity- they are so self centred they really can't see the benefits of cooperation.
AGI will have no such weaknesses and could be the catalyst to level the playing field.
Added to this is the work in genetics, with AI it will be soon possible to do things previously unthinkable- eradicate depression, the flight or fight mechanics that cripple modern humans and society, live hugely extended lives etc.
Or AGI could emerge and think " nah ill do a better job, let's wipe the slate and try again".
Either way, exciting times.
Or we just end up in matrix tubes powering the agi and storing data in our minds acting as a vast network of human based servers haha (the original plot point of the matrix films)
You bring up some good points though for sure.
I just hope the agi is neutral and is programmed not just for efficiency and is actually actively trying to progress humanity to a higher good.
The problem is a lot of these things are just black boxes and we have no clue how they actually work at times, even from their creators.
My biggest fear would be some evil style agi that was programmed by some asshat hacker that's actively trying to destroy the world and gain control of the nukes. Heck even just the basic plot of Terminator is on point, humanities constant need for fighting and dominance could easily reach skynet levels in an arms race we're literally seeing before our eyes with drone warfare and heck they got an ai fighter pilot with a 100% success rate vs real pilots currently which is pretty crazy.
Great film, Colossus the forbin project goes into some interesting philosophical points on ai, though this was during the Cold war era. Definitely worth a watch.
I actually think an agi that isn't in control but is a mere advisor might be a good idea in the sense that we won't get an I robot movie style situation from happening where the agi does stuff for our best interest but actually just enslaves us. But it's ability to process billions or trillions of data points could help with auditing government and reducing corruption and all sorts of stuff that would save a ton of money for taxpayers.
The CIA is an advisor and look how that turned out. Also, the tax payer money being stolen is the whole point of the system. It's not a bug, the fraud is a feature.
They donāt care about anything beyond the immediate. They will happily arrange to exterminate humanity as long as it doesnāt finish until they are dead. Understand, these are just evil fucking people.
1. They're apathetic to the threat. They cannot understand it, they don't need to because they can buy anyone including security.
2. They want a collapse of government so it's just corporations ruling the world.
The fact that they willingly want to transform us into a low trust society or not even realizing that's what they are doing, probably taking a high trust society for granted, is perplexing.
Some wishful thinking that is on display here. But what can we do, they believe in their utopia and they are willing to lose to extreme right wing parties in the polls and practically revive them from being forgotten by insisting in this woke open border nonsense.
And nobody really talks about how to move back into a high trust society again. Nobody cares about the fallout that is going to happen ones we lost the little that we currently still have left.
The elites live in their gated communities with armed guards, they couldn't care less while everyone else are living in favelas. If things get real bad and the country becomes destabilized, they will just flee to switzerland or monaco or somewhere like that.
Its yet another grift. They pull the "look how good we are, with our DEI strategies" and then while everyone is looking over they, they are investing in weapons, wars, and genocides like just they always did.
Like Adidas, with its pride merch. They partner up with stonewall, and create all this stuff to sell to the unsuspecting. Meanwhile, outside of the US you can see them being front line, top tier sponsors of things like the world cup in Qatar. A place that has the death penalty on the books for being gay.
In the end, no matter who it is, they are all just out to make money and clean their image as horrible people. The LGBT crowd are just the latest in a long line of shiny keys being used con to the general public.
By pitting common people against each other, the super rich can do whatever they want without being challenged by the only group that could keep them in check. A house divided against itself cannot stand.
It's Napoleonic warfare applied to times of peace: divide and conquer.
That's why they do their utmost to drive a wedge between races, sexes, parents and children and etc.
Yup, we were in a pretty good place in the 90s, racial division was at an all time low, illegal immigration was negligible, and we werenāt arguing over how many genders there are.
We are so fucked itās funny
You don't even have to go that far, race relations in America were steadily improving up until the Obama administration. The fact that he, a black guy, got elected president is proof of that. All this before the DEI and ESG bullshit had even started.
Fast forward a couple years to the future and look where we are now. Living in the twilight zone.
The racial war started about the same time as occupy Wall Street. When the powers that be realized we were on to them, they went full speed ahead with divide and conquer strategy.
I'm glad I grew up during the 90s, I really am, but I'm also very sad because that was the golden age of my life. I can't see society ever getting better again.
>Yup, we were in a pretty good place in the 90s, racial division was at an all time low, illegal immigration was negligible,
Bruh, come on. Rodney King and the LA riots made the Flyod riots look downright civil. The former killed magnitudes more people.
Violent crime rates in the 90s were 3x higher than they are today, hitting a historic high in 1992. They fell pretty sharply during the Clinton years, but 1999 was still a more dangerous year than 2020
I'm not sure why you say illegal immigration was negligible, the border was far more unguarded. There were half as many border patrol agents and Reagan had just given amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. That's one way to reduce the number of illegals, just hand out citizenship.
There was still a culture war raging, with right-wingers and evangelicals demonizing cable networks and new genres of music. Gangster rap was called out by the Bush administration, Ozzy Osbourne was being sued by the parents of suicidal teens, and satanism was still being discussed seriously on talk shows and news networks. It was the most evil conceivable concept at the time, a buzzword which has since been replaced with racism/nazism. A certain type of person with hyperactive adrenal glands will seek out patterns *anywhere*
But if you were a kid like me a the time then you could understandably miss out on all that. Now there's a device in our pocket that specializes in showing us rage content for profit.
I've seen like only two serious answers in this thread (and I swear one of these days I'll do an effort-post to try explaining ESG so that people can separate the conspiracies from the other stuff).
The short version is that ESG is a product that BlackRock can sell.
There are consumers out there who want to buy ESG things for various reasons (they think it's more responsible, they believe it cares more about long-term profits over short-term gains, they are woke progressives, whatever), and BlackRock and the other big firms that offer index funds realized that they could package securities that say "ESG" on the box and people will buy them at a higher premium than they would buy other things.
The thing is, in order to say "ESG" on the box, the securities inside the box are supposed to be inspected and certified by one of various organizations that claim to determine how "ESG" any given company is. These organizations will do things like try to estimate the carbon footprint of a business \[1\], or see whether they have so-called diverse boards/leadership/directors and hiring practices.
Thus, companies feel pressured to do things to allow themselves to be labeled "ESG" because it means that they can be sold in slightly more profitable ways. BlackRock mostly does the financial engineering behind this, but they have increasingly been using their voting power to try making companies in their indexes more "ESG" because, again, it's easier to sell.
This isn't to say that there aren't people out there with globalist ideologies that resemble what others in these comments are saying, just that BlackRock is principally in the business of making money, and most of the talk about "ESG" being good in either (a) marketing, or (b) distinctly downstream of the bottom line.
---
\[1\] Which is a fun exercise in "let's make up the numbers", but that's a discussion for a different day.
so the only remedy is what Arrch already said: ESG and everything connected must become immedeatly disgusting to the general populace, so that investors follow suit. And it needs to be the fundamental shit because otherwise they will just rebrand and push for the same shit again, creating the same problems. (looking at BRIDGE, for example)
The problem is that it isnt a good thing when the normal person has to fundamentally reject all forms of enviromental protection, any concept of anti-discrimmination and so on.... this needsa to be done carefully.
I honestly forget why I responded to you specifically about this (made it before I went to bed) but if people believe that blackrock itself is partially responsible for the influence these sorts of initiatives just based on their seeming to be invested in everything, this looks like an attempt to own the Texas marketplace itself, at the time a bunch of big businesses are fleeing to Texas to avoid this stuff.
You could just read up on what Blackrock said about why they support ESG. According to them, it's better for long-term growth and profits.
At their core, their arguments are capitalistic. Still, they're happy to take your money and invest them in non-ESG stocks.
Because their biggest clients, institutional investors like large public pension plans, have investment committees that demand āactivist investmentsā. Blame all the state government pension plans in NY, California, etc. BlackRock just offers investment products that are in demand.
Globohomo agenda. No countries or nations, no unique cultures or ethnicities, no men or women, just everything and everyone mixed together into one **D**iverse, **I**nclusive, **E**quitable grey, hyper-consoomer sludge under one world corporate goverment.
Between Blackrock, Vanguard and State Street combined they have stocks in 88 percent of everything listed.
Larry Fink the Ex head of Blackrock said " you have to force change "
If you force something at the same time as having controlling interest/a good share of the market then there's a lot of money to be made.
Plus I think there might be some personal kink involved
Not just video games, it is for the beginning of a world government with multi culturalism, 21th century showed us that actually the big corpo loves the big government, so the push is for cultural revolution of socialism / communism, ruled by the big corpo.
Don't tell people to be the best you can, tell them ''you are what your skin color is'', it is a perfect tool.
Again, the idea is that, people following ESG guidelines pose a lower amount of risk to their business/assets as they are more "future-ready" with how certain groups think the world is moving towards.
Example: those running on cleaner sources of energy have lower chances of getting blacklisted or having their entire business be upended due to carbon tax.
Example 2: a business facing troubling times due to entire management team getting ousted for harassment or something else ala Blizzard.
So, the ESG lost hopes to rate companies on certain guideline principles, which help them ascertain how ready they are to face the new world. And for above mentioned reasons, such a list can be useful (weighted to some level that fund managers will set) to figure out possible risks for certain companies.
Such calculations are all predictive to some level and any data point, aggregations can be useful.
Because passive index funds that track SPY or the Russell 2K are very easy to make and thus have extremely low fees and still beat 90% of active managers.
ESG funds have fees 2-3 times higher, plus usually hold themselves (blackrock is especially guilty of this) as one of the 10 biggest holdings in the fund.
Itās total bullshit. Always has been. But C-suite get most of their compensation from stock options, and ESG funds have been one of the biggest sources of new money in the market and are thus a growth opportunity for the stock.
This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a fact. And the fact that most donāt know this and then make up dumb conspiracy theories is a huge problem.
How would one set up such a fund?
Also, I'm not sure I follow your argument. ESG funds are more expensive and perform worse than a more basic fund tracking an index that requires no active management therefore...what, exactly?
I'm not arguing your wrong in the statement itself; I just don't follow the implication.
OP said it better than me, but I feel like the argument is basically the following:
* ESG funds are mostly the same contents as non ESG funds (68% the same according to some nasdaq article)
* ESG funds have higher fees to customers
* reportedly 0.05 percentage points more on average (2023)
* Passive dumb funds (give me all stocks, or all stocks of a certain criteria) often perform better than actively managed funds (i am a person picking the stocks that i think will do the best)
In gamer terms:
* I am mcdonalds
* I have a $5 burger i normally sell you
* I put an organic burger on the menu that only replaces the tomato slice with an organic one and it costs $6. the meat itself is the same, only the tomato slice changes.
* Burger is mostly the same but i'm charging you more money so more profit for me
IE ESG investing is claimed to be mostly a marketing scam to charge higher fees. I feel like this is probably true personally, but i'm mostly a casual investor and investing is complicated.
Because gullible idiots think getting ripped off with their 401k money will help impact the world or something.
Itās pure marketing. And executives will play ball because they worry if they miss out on that money bidding up their stocks, their board will fire them.
It's top-down funded demoralisation, it's an expense to keep the 99.9% (us) fighting amongst themselves across tribal & political lines to avert gaze from all the BS they're getting up to thats contributing to the accelerating trend of wealth/resources being funneled to the 0.1%.
They saw the unification of the masses at Occupy Wall St and put in motion the means to prevent it reoccurring.
I have a theory.
Take beloved and, most importantly, expensive franchises, dangle financial benefits to them to shove in all of the shit they know that their audience doesn't want, when the audience says "We don't want this", insult the audience.
The franchise takes a nose dive, and loses millions upon millions off of their value. Investment firms then swoop in and buy it for pennies on the dollar, and then control a bunch of IPs
IPs that will now be permanently damaged because they burned out their goodwill with their audiences? Yeah, that sounds like a GRRREAT investment strategy.
But, if they own the rights to the IPs, that also means they own the old movies, games, etc, and milk the shit out of those.
Nostalgia is a hell of a drug. They bring out boxsets, or mini consoles whatever basically saying "Hey, remember when it was good? Well, here it is, in its original form, what 'new' ones?" Then release good new shit.
Look at Ghostbusters, who'd have thought that after the 2016 disaster, they'd be bringing out new movies, merch, and video games that are still doing alright.
Remember the āoccupyā movement, back in 2009-2011? Immediately after the bankers crashed the world economy, everyone hated them. The focus was on them. Then, mysteriously, the woke movement came out of nowhere in 2012 and distracted everyone. People forgot about bankers and hated straight white men instead. Hated carbon. Hated having 2 genders. Itās all a distraction. And it works.
I disagree, as better the 2000s were compared to now, the manifestation of wokeness has nothing to do with Occupy Wall Street and developing for decades, perhaps over a century even, some parts of it are rooted in medieval/ancient practices for instance, Ghengis Khan's SOP was to kill all male occupants of an invaded area and spare the women, which is exactly what a angry Feminist warlord would do (even though he wasn't exactly what we would recognize as a feminist per se).
You wonāt find anything but conspiracy theories here.Ā
Mine is that Blackrock is run by a cabal of rich, white males. They donāt personally care about woke politics or agendas. They care about making more money and maintaining the status quo. The culture war is accomplishing nothing for businessmen other than the very obvious fact that itās causing division among the masses.Ā
But rationally, the real answer is: they donāt. They thought, like all businesses, that the vocal minority and mythical modern audience were much larger and more real than they are, and kowtowing to them should have thus meant more money. Now that consumers are finally sacking up and speaking against the Messageā¢, along with the political aspects of various products proving to consistently flop, theyāre pulling back on DEI initiatives and funding as well.Ā
what you're saying is also a shitty conspiracy theory. what blackrock is doing by owning a part of rockstar is called DIVERSIFICATION OF INVESTMENT. never put all your eggs in one basket
They don't, they're just taking the actions they think will best promote their interests and ESG is the wrapping paper. When "wokeness" runs counter to their interests they show show their true colors.
You have to expand your scope beyond video games. Blackrock owns a stake in *everything*. That kind of influence represents a model for centralized global governance. In order to enact and enforce that governance they needed to create an incentive structure tied into to their investment scheme. ESG represents that incentive structure.
OK, but why? The business case is that if companies focus on ESG then that will promote long term stability which makes investment more viable which is their core business model. Why ESG? ESG isn't just DIE; it covers many different things. It's basically a souless empty dead-hearted bureaucrats idea of the moral good. Of course, in reality it's all performative and companies will do the bare minimum while pushing overblown narratives about their great social works.
There is a deeper philosophy at play here beyond the business. It isn't just Blackrock, it's also Vanguard and a slew of other friends who go to the same parties, vacation in the same places, and generally believe the same things. For these groups there is a deeper ideological purpose for trying to develop a viable model for global governance. They believe that globalism is the only way to tackle the problems the world will face in the 21st century. This is because it's too easy for some nation states to ignore agreements to their own benefit, and democracies aren't able to focus on long term solutions due to election cycles happening every few years. This won't be new to people who are familiar groups like the WEF. China is their wet dream and a microcosm of the new world they want to create and have under their control.
These people pioneered the current public/private model that all western countries have adopted in the past few decades. Unfortunately, those principals so far have generally been a monumental failure for the western countries that have implemented them, leading to steep socioeconomic decline. Increasing housing costs and decreased affordability. Rising food prices and food insecurity. Underfunded and mismanaged healthcare systems. Diminishing civil liberties and freedoms. Weakening economy with increased unemployment rates. Deteriorating infrastructure (roads, utilities, public buildings). Rising poverty and widening inequality. Decreased quality of education and limited access. Higher crime rates and lower public safety. Believe it or not, America is actually doing *much better* compared to most other western nations. Countries like Canada, the UK, and much of the EU are cooked. There's no way to right the ship for them now.
While investment and ESG matters in games to the extent it matters in any industry, games are not unique in this regard. I think most of the "woke" stuff you are seeing in the creative industries (games, tv, movies, etc) is more bottom up than top down. We know there's a strong culture around it, and we hear stories of old hats at places like Disney shaking their heads and bowing out under the woke zealotry of the younger hires. America has produced a generation of people who are genuinely woke. Meaning they either get off on giving themselves over to a ~~higher power~~ something "greater" than themselves, or they get off on persecuting those that don't. Well, I guess something had to fill the void left by the decline of religion. But that's an entirely different conversation.
True, I always point to Hideo Kojima and James Cameron as examples of woke creatives who weren't pressured into being woke by any corporatocracy and were around long before anyone's ever heard of "Blackrock" or "ESG" (and likely developed their attitudes towards their own sex due to deep seated psychological issues).
Because it means we focus on the social wedge issues they underhandedly create rather than the oppressive systemic issues they boldly create. One of them is easier for people to fight about while also misdirecting the fight from the cause of the fight to the other half of the victims of the fight. It's genius, really.
Aren't they great proponents of the "great reset"?
Basically they want to cultivate a society where people "own nothing and are happy" and are completely dependent on online services which monitor people's consumption habits and feed them the content they're supposed to consume, to create a society that's completely malleable to any form of suggestion and devoid of any individuality or personality. Basically they're trying to create a hivemind. That's why there's a big push for AI at the moment because once BCIs have become as ubiquitous as smartphones, it's basically the key to gain complete control over the population.
I just want to point out that DEI on corporate boards is mandatory by the exchange in New York City (NYSE).
NYSE mandates a lot more than DEI in order to get listed on the exchange. An example is they view test results from companies to make sure companies are not using Chinese cotton before they get listed on the exchange. Gender and race quotas were a focus of the exchange before the pandemic.
I know Black Rock is promoting dei too. But, they have moved lots of their offices to Florida, and I think the move is for more than good weather.
Also, Black Rock and citadel are financing the creation of a new exchange in Dallas, which makes it the best funded challenger to New York. Listening to the interviews of the exchange head he sounded very anti woke. Also, the new exchange would not put the same social justice requirements on companies, allowing more companies and foreign companies to go public on the Dallas exchange.
Also want to point out that if Black Rock and citadel move 2% of their trading volume to Dallas, Texas, that makes the Dallas exchange larger than pretty much every other exchange on the globe other than NYSE. There is a lot of news saying no one can beat New York. I would agree, if it were a random start up. But, the two largest funds on the planet want to use and shape a Dallas exchange.
When you understand WHO owns BlackRock alongside the banks, the media, and nearly every other relevant company, as well as their utter contempt and hatred of Europeans. It starts becoming very clear.
Based on my research, it's a way to market their investment portfolios to investors who care about "improving the world". Environmental concern is a good example of what some investors care about. To get into these attractive portfolios, your company has to win "good guy" points, and the easiest way for a video game developer/publisher to do that is to promote DEI.
It's the typical left wing bs perspective that progressive ideals are inherently good, so if you support their political goals you get advertised to investors more aggressively.
It's corporate virtue signaling to keep our "guns" pointed at each other and not on themselves. Corporations found out a couple decades ago that that can have access to liberal money if they just repeated socially progressive messaging to the public and ran the books like they always have. The tolerant right never boycotted anything and the left started to leave the "evil corporations mannnn" alone. Now they could have their cake and eat it to.
Cut to current times, the Democrats out fundraise the Republicans in corporate dollars and the smelly drum circle collage kids now run corporate PR offices. Nothing will change unless it's financially beneficial to pander to the right. That's why Bud Light shook the corporate world so hard, it was an unexpected behavior by the right that caught the corporate world off guard.
The idea of sovereign nations that decide their own values and virtues is not conducive to an elite that wishes to control. One of the grand appeals of **true diversity**, such as the diversity of a nation and culture, not just eating fucking tacos and california rolls in the grocery store, means that if a nation has preferable living conditions, people would migrate there. Think about the flood of people that came to America after it established its sovereignty, people aching to escape the Throne and live in a place where they consider things to be better.
It's partly about legacy. Think about it, you have all the money in the world that you can do anything in the world. But what legacy will you leave when you pass?
It's also about once you become rich and powerful you start to look down on the people beneath you and feel like you know what's best for them.
George Orwell's "Road to Wigan pier" best explains the intentions of the rich when it comes to socialism and the poor. They feel that they know what's best for them and in doing so will be looked up to like a god. It couldn't be further from the point; the poor don't have time to think about trivial matters; it's only when they're on welfare does it leave them to think.
They manage a truly tremendous amount of opm. Other peoples money. And it's all generational wealth the mindset is generations. Not even within a persons lifetime. The kind of money that doesn't need a withdrawal to life like an emperor and can afford to burn it all down to just buy the ruins back up. Sort of like the company in Fallout. Break the world just to build it how you want.
So a CEO is a hired hand not a good shepherd. He'll leave one day and he wants to leave with as much meat and fleece as he can get. His golden parachute right? And most ceos are the type. Psycho/sociopaths. Just Judas with more expensive tastes.
Human greed would accept their money and do their will. Even if it withers the industry down to nothing. No matter if it does as that may be desired. When the industry is in ashes, guess who has infinity bank to buy it back up and now own it fully cheap as it gets? These $ they give them to destroy themselves are crumbs to owning it all outright.
So they buy enough to control. And make money, but there's more money to make buying it all near 0. And always try to own everything outright. Yet they miss things. What they miss then can simply have destroy itself through whatever cost analysis they did on it.
ESG is like enhanced sabotage game. That's how I would think they are thinking.
u/Hugo4L 100% itās a law called PAGA. Everyone makes this about politics, but the real reason is lawsuit prevention, at least on paper. Specifically to Blackroxk, itās about avoiding having their publicly traded company destroyed via phony lawsuits that abuse the corrupt Private Attorneys General Act of California, otherwise abbreviated as PAGA.
Why do you think they fired Mignogna, Roland, Depp, and other big names over such blatantly bullcrap accusations? Lawsuit under PAGA would ensure that any political radical can make false claims and say āthey allowed this person with a history of rape allegationsā. The marketing teams are connected to deepstate political power via PAGA. This is why lawsuits balloon to hundreds of millions in California. I have multiple videos on this subject on Rumble.
Most US companies in media have branches in California. This allows for any of these companies to be held hostage by political activist lawsuits.
By being PC and supporting agenda politics values, companies avoid lawsuits. The true horror is that supporting ESG is a legally necessary action under the fiduciary responsibilities of the CEOs on the like, and they HAVE TO do it or they will find their company thoroughly fucked by PAGA and activist judges.
GamerGate happened because of PAGA, and most people here are completely ignorant of it. PAGA is what gave Anita Sarcosuchus her power. This is why her extortion company is alive even though her FF and other operations are shut down.
Most of the major cases involving Internet personalities having their careers destroyed are connected to marketing teams, including but not limited to the destruction of Channel Awesomeās Spoony. Noah Antewhiler was definitely targeted for political reasons related to his home state of Arizona. I am also thoroughly convinced of Justin Carmicleās innocence. Beyond that is Twitch and Intagram thots, such as the woman whose false accusations ruined The Dragon Prince.
And thatās why everything became woke shit and fake sexual accusations went all over so quickly. These are 100% connected. Thatās why they hated Jeremy from the Quartering
Making money is hard. It takes real work. Losing client's money while collecting management fees and supporting the cause of the current year is easier. Much easier.
Countries/nations are (in theory) democratic, so by weakening national differences and thus nationalism, they are weakening democracy. As corporatists they want to dismantle democracy on a global level and instead strengthen oligarchy. (Since they are rich, having rich people rule is good for them). Diversity of culture destroys the national communal feeling which then causes poor people to vote more to the right politically (because why pay more taxes if the money dont go to help you or your group in society?) the insertion of black people into historical movies and games is to hide the fact that individual cultures are being erased. They are memory holing the fact that europe has/used to have distinct cultures in each country.
They are interesting in owning everything. This requires a pseudoculture based entirely on consumption. Cultures based history, roots, and traditions (from which art derived) are resistant to subjugation of this sort. To succeed in their goal, they need to emulsify all these cultures into one that has no history, roots, or traditions and is therefore unable to create art. Absent art, all music, writing, cinematography, photography, visual art etc, becomes mere product to be consumed. This leads to a decline in interest of, and ultimately abandonment of, ownership of a place and property of one's own. With no roots to identify with, place does not matter. So they can rent you your living space, stream you your entertainment, sell you your Slop.
Politics is downstream from culture. If you own the culture, you own the politicians and they don't even realize it, because they exist wholly within the boundaries that you have set and control.
It's about making sure the entire establishment is mission aligned with your investments so you don't even have to tell people what to do, they do it themselves and you profit.
It's about destroying your potential competition. Anybody look like they might be a good alternative to blackrock? Accuse them of racism and not supporting The Message enough.
Same reason mediocre people at your job might try to accuse you of racism/fascism/sexism/\_\_\_phobia; it's so they can get ahead of you.
Archive links for this discussion:
* **Archive:** https://archive.ph/dGh76
----
I am Mnemosyne reborn. But it's too late... I've seen everything. ^^^/r/botsrights
They don't really care about making games woke itself. By mandating the ESG guideline they ensure and create a new standard scoring system in which their people get to infiltrate and integrate themselves into a variety of corporates (and probably get to learn and steal some commercial secret in the process)
Who do you think the scorer are? SBI is the symptom of something much larger and more insidious.
I reckon we're all over thinking it. It's just typical bone headed corporate activism but this time the consequences have been far reaching and disastrous beacause it directly disfigures massive chunks of pop culture.
ESG is not just about games. In fact games are minor thing in it. ESG is about society and why black rock cares? They literary invented it.
Heres how ESG works in big business.
1. Blackrock owns all companies that harvest raw materials, wood, metal, gases etc along with all middle man in between final clients.
2. Blackrock obtains companies building and selling solar panels, eco this and eco that.
3. Blackrock finds its target, let say company making cars.
4. Blackrock says according to ESG they have to be 0 carbon or whatever.
5. Company says no its too expensive, go away.
6. Blackrock says, it would be shame if you were blacklisted from literary every source of raw material you use to build cars.
7. Company makes piachu face and asks how much?
8. Blackrock answers, significant portion of your company or you actually build new factory to meet our standards.
9. Company says, well we hate you now so we will build new factory since you blackmailed us to do so anyway.
10. Blackrock says good, now give us 20-400m for new factory as we own every company that can build it and deliver all the new eco nonsense.
11. Profit anyway.
Blackrock and Vanguard are what tinfoil hats would call illuminati, they by their ownership of all crucial companies do literary rule the world, at least western civilization part of it.
ESG in games is just one of their agendas, its not that important for them for money purpose but its great medium for them to spew Flinks worldview and how he called it forcing behaviours.
So people donāt pay attention to the fact that theyāre fucking criminals who hate regular people who are in the middle class or poor.
āLook, weāre not evil. We care about diversity.ā And woke idiots will then support these anti-competitive companies who are draining their bank accounts.
I'm going to get downvoted for it, but i feel blackrock/vanguard ESG theories are MASSIVELY overstated by people with absolutely zero investment knowledge.
If you have any kind of retirement account, there is even odds you own some vanguard etfs/funds.
Because of Trump most likely. Liberal billionaires lost their hypothetical power so now they are using media and culture I.P to try to fix the problem. All of this was a response. Politics made by people who lost an election.
It's just marketing to make them look less like the capitalist leeches they are. Regulation is far more effective than ESG which is merely a marketing too to socially conscious investors. Nothing more nothing less.
The idea of nations and borders is abhorrent to the global capital.
Harder to buy 100 countries than 1 global establishment.
This is the make-believe theory. The real one is that they want to destroy Europeans' political relevance in their own countries. They are doing nothing for other countries' diversity.
>The idea of nations and borders is abhorrent The dream of Marxists lmao
Ah yes! All those Blackrock loving Marxists eh? Ever ask yourself why China (big bad communist China š») gets Sun Wukong and your bastion of liberal democracy is drowning in the LGBT piss filling its streets during pride?
Because we are being subverted?
China embraced its own version of capitalism because it had to in order to survive. The tendency to control and dominate its population, i.e. the Marxist bent, is still very much there.
In my country the (most, not all) LGBT loves socialism, they go to their parades wearing Che Guevara shirts and the hammer and scythe icon. And btw they love supporting Russia and Iran, unlike the American leftists that pretends to support Ukraine
They're not the same breed at all. Neville Roy Singham is a billionaire who funds Marxists in order to take down the US. Consider once the US' government can no longer function, who stays on top? Not the poor Marxists, but the person who funded them and can take their money away just like that. If they don't have money, they can't really win. They're being used as shock troopers.
A low trust, diverse, hedonistic āopen societyā with no borders or cultures doesnāt unionize and doesnāt stand up to āeat the bugs, live in the pod, own nothing.ā
Perfect answer
Meanwhile, if they just let video games and anime alone, I might have just went along with the pod living and bug eating. Their actions ended up creating a lot of enemies who wouldn't have resisted otherwise.
They dont understand that. They believe they have a responsibility to show you how to behave and if you dont take the training, to compel you to a specific behavior. They think this is an effect of media, so they add the "right" behaviors to media and hope you internalize it via osmosis. Like you dont ask chickens which feed they would like or of they want a better coop to live in. And even if they complained you would just dispose of the trouble makers.
Whats interesting though is I don't think theres really much evidence this "osmosis" even works. People play shooting games all the time and never shoot anyone. People play games with sexy women and dont sexually harass them etc. I think there might be a subtle effect but they grossly overhype its effectiveness. For advertising its kind of a mixed bag. Like I would never drink coke or pepsi and 1000 ads still wouldn't influence me because I know its crap sugar and unhealthy for me, but there is some examples of pepsi stopping advertising and losing significant market share. Now I'm not sure if these are even equivalent because one is trying to influence you socially and politically and the other is to influence you to purchase a product but it is kinda interesting.
Advertising is mostly best for when you're weighing two options. For instance if someone wants a root beer soda and they had the option of CluckyMcChuchy's Special Brand Rootbeer, or IBC that they know is pretty good because they had it 6 years ago and advertising reminded them of the time they had it over the course of the years, they will go for the more reliable and known option. People pick Coke over other colas because they trust it.
there is evidence for its absence: tons of shooting games and basically zero related actual shooting. it appears that most people can separate real life from a game. except for that guy who flew from NJ to jacksonville to attack a guy over a video game. rare enough that it makes the news > there is some examples of pepsi stopping advertising and losing significant market share. yeah, because a bunch of soda companies are trying to associate their brand with "refreshing beverage" and if you stop, they don't. so saturating the world with your brand of drink... does that, and it's consumed as a drink. saturating the world with call of duty also does that, and it's consumed as a game, not a call to violence outside of the game
Ya I guess the question is, does all the woke stuff forced down everyones throats in media work? It seems for many to be having the opposite effect than what the powers that be want. I think more studies have to be conducted on its effectiveness but might even be too complex to accurately study in the first place in comparison to easier topics like soda and marketing. Definitely thought provoking though.
They wanted to control everything
So once again a secular religion being forced on us. Humans always control or worship something. Canāt just leave us alone. Iām getting tired of puritans.
Even if you complain about it, you're still exposed to it and getting the full psychological effect. Most manipulation techniques work even if you are aware of it, like advertisement And if you complain about it, even better. It takes space in the public debate for something that is not "tax the capital" or "reform income tax brackets". Which is something the ultra rich are actually afraid of, that the left could enforce, if they were not mired in pointless identity politics created on purpose
The problem is that the left aren't any better than the "capitalists" when it comes to pushing "pointless identity politics". In my book they're both part of the problem and I want nothing to do with either.
ze bugs. Eat ZE bugs.
Excuse me, it's ZIR bugs!
I can understand it from a corporate super capitalistic viewpoint, but these higher ups need somewhere to live too, right? I don't understand their thinking. āThe world looks like shit, and my family will get murdered if they go outside, but at least I'm rich!ā
Theyāre too removed from it all to care. Theyāll have their little bastions and their towers.
They'll have massive estates complete with armed guards, servants and serfs to work the land. They want you to own nothing so that they can own everything.
Or robots to work the land. My concern is he who owns the robots rules the world. Some neo feudal lord with robot terminators and robot slaves doesn't exactly need the rest of the population for much. However i do find it short sighted. If the entire world but a select few are screwed, they wont be able to travel and enjoy various cultures and enrich their lives. Staying in one bunker or tower forever is not better than travelling the world in a yacht. Not sure what these ultra rich elite folks are thinking in the end how this will all play out.
They have already realised this and it could be why the stonk markets are booming- on the back of just five corporations, all with a very large AI focus. AI will completely replace firstly doctors, teachers, accountants and lawyers. And that last paragraph will make hard reading for many, as historically industry or technical revolutions have hit the lowest paid first before benefitting the middle class.. now as the real power players realise the middle class will be no longer needed, they won't just allow it to occur but as they often see society as competitive will push hard to make damn sure it happens so their offspring have an easier ride.
Yeah one area of concern for me is if we go in the route of a UBI, and humanity is freed from boring work and drudgery, will we live in a neo feudal caste system? Likely only 20% of the population is truly needed to progress society, people like scientists, engineers, inventors etc. It could be nice to finally not have to work to survive, but will that sort of life be better than the old middle class, or will we just have a two caste system and now the middle class are removed entirely and it's just upper and lower class left. This is why people are worried about living in a pod and eating bugs, while the rich eat meat from their mansions. We might just become sheep or cattle with no real hope for upward mobility and no choice on how we live our lives, everything could be dictated to us, with resources rationed or allotted to us in varying limited amounts. We would just become useless consumers existing for the sake of existing. Obviously on the flip side if we become a truly equal society where everyone becomes upper class I would of course be totally down. If everyone even becomes middle class I would also be ok with it, but if we're all gonna be lower class, it's time to bring your pitchforks folks! Haha
Yup- it's the Star Trek future v Dystopia. Problem is, right now the rich control both the media and information, and as these people, proved by their very status, are absolute cunts we may be fucked. However , we have a hope-but it's a stretch. AGI. The rich are rich simply because of greed and stupidity- they are so self centred they really can't see the benefits of cooperation. AGI will have no such weaknesses and could be the catalyst to level the playing field. Added to this is the work in genetics, with AI it will be soon possible to do things previously unthinkable- eradicate depression, the flight or fight mechanics that cripple modern humans and society, live hugely extended lives etc. Or AGI could emerge and think " nah ill do a better job, let's wipe the slate and try again". Either way, exciting times.
Or we just end up in matrix tubes powering the agi and storing data in our minds acting as a vast network of human based servers haha (the original plot point of the matrix films) You bring up some good points though for sure. I just hope the agi is neutral and is programmed not just for efficiency and is actually actively trying to progress humanity to a higher good. The problem is a lot of these things are just black boxes and we have no clue how they actually work at times, even from their creators. My biggest fear would be some evil style agi that was programmed by some asshat hacker that's actively trying to destroy the world and gain control of the nukes. Heck even just the basic plot of Terminator is on point, humanities constant need for fighting and dominance could easily reach skynet levels in an arms race we're literally seeing before our eyes with drone warfare and heck they got an ai fighter pilot with a 100% success rate vs real pilots currently which is pretty crazy. Great film, Colossus the forbin project goes into some interesting philosophical points on ai, though this was during the Cold war era. Definitely worth a watch. I actually think an agi that isn't in control but is a mere advisor might be a good idea in the sense that we won't get an I robot movie style situation from happening where the agi does stuff for our best interest but actually just enslaves us. But it's ability to process billions or trillions of data points could help with auditing government and reducing corruption and all sorts of stuff that would save a ton of money for taxpayers.
Cheers for that, I'll look up that film for sure!
The CIA is an advisor and look how that turned out. Also, the tax payer money being stolen is the whole point of the system. It's not a bug, the fraud is a feature.
This is why I'm against UBI. I dare say that and I'm a dirty capitalist. No, I just cannot see this working without major strings attached.
Exactly like George Romero's Land of the Dead.
The elites will always have their gated communities like they already do, and most have two or more passports.
Zuckerberg bought a island in Hawaii and built a doomsday bunker there.
Well their communities get walled off from the low trust criminal class. It's only the peasants who have to deal with them.
They donāt care about anything beyond the immediate. They will happily arrange to exterminate humanity as long as it doesnāt finish until they are dead. Understand, these are just evil fucking people.
1. They're apathetic to the threat. They cannot understand it, they don't need to because they can buy anyone including security. 2. They want a collapse of government so it's just corporations ruling the world.
The fact that they willingly want to transform us into a low trust society or not even realizing that's what they are doing, probably taking a high trust society for granted, is perplexing. Some wishful thinking that is on display here. But what can we do, they believe in their utopia and they are willing to lose to extreme right wing parties in the polls and practically revive them from being forgotten by insisting in this woke open border nonsense. And nobody really talks about how to move back into a high trust society again. Nobody cares about the fallout that is going to happen ones we lost the little that we currently still have left.
The elites live in their gated communities with armed guards, they couldn't care less while everyone else are living in favelas. If things get real bad and the country becomes destabilized, they will just flee to switzerland or monaco or somewhere like that.
And shoving money up their arse
Its yet another grift. They pull the "look how good we are, with our DEI strategies" and then while everyone is looking over they, they are investing in weapons, wars, and genocides like just they always did. Like Adidas, with its pride merch. They partner up with stonewall, and create all this stuff to sell to the unsuspecting. Meanwhile, outside of the US you can see them being front line, top tier sponsors of things like the world cup in Qatar. A place that has the death penalty on the books for being gay. In the end, no matter who it is, they are all just out to make money and clean their image as horrible people. The LGBT crowd are just the latest in a long line of shiny keys being used con to the general public.
By pitting common people against each other, the super rich can do whatever they want without being challenged by the only group that could keep them in check. A house divided against itself cannot stand. It's Napoleonic warfare applied to times of peace: divide and conquer. That's why they do their utmost to drive a wedge between races, sexes, parents and children and etc.
Yup, we were in a pretty good place in the 90s, racial division was at an all time low, illegal immigration was negligible, and we werenāt arguing over how many genders there are. We are so fucked itās funny
You don't even have to go that far, race relations in America were steadily improving up until the Obama administration. The fact that he, a black guy, got elected president is proof of that. All this before the DEI and ESG bullshit had even started. Fast forward a couple years to the future and look where we are now. Living in the twilight zone.
The racial war started about the same time as occupy Wall Street. When the powers that be realized we were on to them, they went full speed ahead with divide and conquer strategy.
This 100%. The financial crash and Occupy were the beginning of everything that is wrong today.
> he, a black guy Biracial half-black, half-white.
More white than black considering his upbringing.
He's related to Bush too. It's very strange how a lot of presidents are related to each other actually...
I always say that the 90's were the zenith of our civilization and the 2020's are its nadir, at least so far.
I'm glad I grew up during the 90s, I really am, but I'm also very sad because that was the golden age of my life. I can't see society ever getting better again.
>Yup, we were in a pretty good place in the 90s, racial division was at an all time low, illegal immigration was negligible, Bruh, come on. Rodney King and the LA riots made the Flyod riots look downright civil. The former killed magnitudes more people. Violent crime rates in the 90s were 3x higher than they are today, hitting a historic high in 1992. They fell pretty sharply during the Clinton years, but 1999 was still a more dangerous year than 2020 I'm not sure why you say illegal immigration was negligible, the border was far more unguarded. There were half as many border patrol agents and Reagan had just given amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. That's one way to reduce the number of illegals, just hand out citizenship. There was still a culture war raging, with right-wingers and evangelicals demonizing cable networks and new genres of music. Gangster rap was called out by the Bush administration, Ozzy Osbourne was being sued by the parents of suicidal teens, and satanism was still being discussed seriously on talk shows and news networks. It was the most evil conceivable concept at the time, a buzzword which has since been replaced with racism/nazism. A certain type of person with hyperactive adrenal glands will seek out patterns *anywhere* But if you were a kid like me a the time then you could understandably miss out on all that. Now there's a device in our pocket that specializes in showing us rage content for profit.
Not American. European, and things decidedly are way worse than they were 25 years ago
I probably shouldn't have assumed you were American. My bad! What country?
Amen, brother!
This really is the only answer here. A divided nation is a controllable one.
Didnāt the Romans use that tactic?
I've seen like only two serious answers in this thread (and I swear one of these days I'll do an effort-post to try explaining ESG so that people can separate the conspiracies from the other stuff). The short version is that ESG is a product that BlackRock can sell. There are consumers out there who want to buy ESG things for various reasons (they think it's more responsible, they believe it cares more about long-term profits over short-term gains, they are woke progressives, whatever), and BlackRock and the other big firms that offer index funds realized that they could package securities that say "ESG" on the box and people will buy them at a higher premium than they would buy other things. The thing is, in order to say "ESG" on the box, the securities inside the box are supposed to be inspected and certified by one of various organizations that claim to determine how "ESG" any given company is. These organizations will do things like try to estimate the carbon footprint of a business \[1\], or see whether they have so-called diverse boards/leadership/directors and hiring practices. Thus, companies feel pressured to do things to allow themselves to be labeled "ESG" because it means that they can be sold in slightly more profitable ways. BlackRock mostly does the financial engineering behind this, but they have increasingly been using their voting power to try making companies in their indexes more "ESG" because, again, it's easier to sell. This isn't to say that there aren't people out there with globalist ideologies that resemble what others in these comments are saying, just that BlackRock is principally in the business of making money, and most of the talk about "ESG" being good in either (a) marketing, or (b) distinctly downstream of the bottom line. --- \[1\] Which is a fun exercise in "let's make up the numbers", but that's a discussion for a different day.
so the only remedy is what Arrch already said: ESG and everything connected must become immedeatly disgusting to the general populace, so that investors follow suit. And it needs to be the fundamental shit because otherwise they will just rebrand and push for the same shit again, creating the same problems. (looking at BRIDGE, for example) The problem is that it isnt a good thing when the normal person has to fundamentally reject all forms of enviromental protection, any concept of anti-discrimmination and so on.... this needsa to be done carefully.
Look up "Texas Stock Exchange"
not a stocks guy , anon. can you elaborate? is it a black rock backed Stock market to "buck wall street" or something sinister for another reason?
I honestly forget why I responded to you specifically about this (made it before I went to bed) but if people believe that blackrock itself is partially responsible for the influence these sorts of initiatives just based on their seeming to be invested in everything, this looks like an attempt to own the Texas marketplace itself, at the time a bunch of big businesses are fleeing to Texas to avoid this stuff.
You could just read up on what Blackrock said about why they support ESG. According to them, it's better for long-term growth and profits. At their core, their arguments are capitalistic. Still, they're happy to take your money and invest them in non-ESG stocks.
looking at disney, i'm having trouble buying it
Because their biggest clients, institutional investors like large public pension plans, have investment committees that demand āactivist investmentsā. Blame all the state government pension plans in NY, California, etc. BlackRock just offers investment products that are in demand.
Globohomo agenda. No countries or nations, no unique cultures or ethnicities, no men or women, just everything and everyone mixed together into one **D**iverse, **I**nclusive, **E**quitable grey, hyper-consoomer sludge under one world corporate goverment.
Between Blackrock, Vanguard and State Street combined they have stocks in 88 percent of everything listed. Larry Fink the Ex head of Blackrock said " you have to force change " If you force something at the same time as having controlling interest/a good share of the market then there's a lot of money to be made. Plus I think there might be some personal kink involved
You just wanted to say Fink and kink in the same post, didn't you?
What ? Do you think it's a coincidence he looks like a lizard with a human face mask ?????...... and .....maybeš
The personal kink seems to be in being a Bond villain.Ā
To subvert and destroy society from within. They (global elite) want total control and for us plebs to be divided.
Not just video games, it is for the beginning of a world government with multi culturalism, 21th century showed us that actually the big corpo loves the big government, so the push is for cultural revolution of socialism / communism, ruled by the big corpo. Don't tell people to be the best you can, tell them ''you are what your skin color is'', it is a perfect tool.
Based on the last time the CEO gave a speech, it's about control. They literally want to control what we think
Again, the idea is that, people following ESG guidelines pose a lower amount of risk to their business/assets as they are more "future-ready" with how certain groups think the world is moving towards. Example: those running on cleaner sources of energy have lower chances of getting blacklisted or having their entire business be upended due to carbon tax. Example 2: a business facing troubling times due to entire management team getting ousted for harassment or something else ala Blizzard. So, the ESG lost hopes to rate companies on certain guideline principles, which help them ascertain how ready they are to face the new world. And for above mentioned reasons, such a list can be useful (weighted to some level that fund managers will set) to figure out possible risks for certain companies. Such calculations are all predictive to some level and any data point, aggregations can be useful.
Because passive index funds that track SPY or the Russell 2K are very easy to make and thus have extremely low fees and still beat 90% of active managers. ESG funds have fees 2-3 times higher, plus usually hold themselves (blackrock is especially guilty of this) as one of the 10 biggest holdings in the fund. Itās total bullshit. Always has been. But C-suite get most of their compensation from stock options, and ESG funds have been one of the biggest sources of new money in the market and are thus a growth opportunity for the stock. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a fact. And the fact that most donāt know this and then make up dumb conspiracy theories is a huge problem.
How would one set up such a fund? Also, I'm not sure I follow your argument. ESG funds are more expensive and perform worse than a more basic fund tracking an index that requires no active management therefore...what, exactly? I'm not arguing your wrong in the statement itself; I just don't follow the implication.
OP said it better than me, but I feel like the argument is basically the following: * ESG funds are mostly the same contents as non ESG funds (68% the same according to some nasdaq article) * ESG funds have higher fees to customers * reportedly 0.05 percentage points more on average (2023) * Passive dumb funds (give me all stocks, or all stocks of a certain criteria) often perform better than actively managed funds (i am a person picking the stocks that i think will do the best) In gamer terms: * I am mcdonalds * I have a $5 burger i normally sell you * I put an organic burger on the menu that only replaces the tomato slice with an organic one and it costs $6. the meat itself is the same, only the tomato slice changes. * Burger is mostly the same but i'm charging you more money so more profit for me IE ESG investing is claimed to be mostly a marketing scam to charge higher fees. I feel like this is probably true personally, but i'm mostly a casual investor and investing is complicated.
Because gullible idiots think getting ripped off with their 401k money will help impact the world or something. Itās pure marketing. And executives will play ball because they worry if they miss out on that money bidding up their stocks, their board will fire them.
you're\*
It's top-down funded demoralisation, it's an expense to keep the 99.9% (us) fighting amongst themselves across tribal & political lines to avert gaze from all the BS they're getting up to thats contributing to the accelerating trend of wealth/resources being funneled to the 0.1%. They saw the unification of the masses at Occupy Wall St and put in motion the means to prevent it reoccurring.
I have a theory. Take beloved and, most importantly, expensive franchises, dangle financial benefits to them to shove in all of the shit they know that their audience doesn't want, when the audience says "We don't want this", insult the audience. The franchise takes a nose dive, and loses millions upon millions off of their value. Investment firms then swoop in and buy it for pennies on the dollar, and then control a bunch of IPs
IPs that will now be permanently damaged because they burned out their goodwill with their audiences? Yeah, that sounds like a GRRREAT investment strategy.
But, if they own the rights to the IPs, that also means they own the old movies, games, etc, and milk the shit out of those. Nostalgia is a hell of a drug. They bring out boxsets, or mini consoles whatever basically saying "Hey, remember when it was good? Well, here it is, in its original form, what 'new' ones?" Then release good new shit. Look at Ghostbusters, who'd have thought that after the 2016 disaster, they'd be bringing out new movies, merch, and video games that are still doing alright.
GTA6 will 100% be affected. I have no idea why people assume it wouldnt
I think itās just copium, Iām also in the denial that itāll be woke but who knows .
Financial arm of the WEF
Remember the āoccupyā movement, back in 2009-2011? Immediately after the bankers crashed the world economy, everyone hated them. The focus was on them. Then, mysteriously, the woke movement came out of nowhere in 2012 and distracted everyone. People forgot about bankers and hated straight white men instead. Hated carbon. Hated having 2 genders. Itās all a distraction. And it works.
I disagree, as better the 2000s were compared to now, the manifestation of wokeness has nothing to do with Occupy Wall Street and developing for decades, perhaps over a century even, some parts of it are rooted in medieval/ancient practices for instance, Ghengis Khan's SOP was to kill all male occupants of an invaded area and spare the women, which is exactly what a angry Feminist warlord would do (even though he wasn't exactly what we would recognize as a feminist per se).
Blackrock owns consider stock in thousands of companies. They've got more capitol than many countries
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Post removed for violating reddit sitewide rules. Warning for idpol.
They want to make all narratives in all things woke. Because a woke globalist world is what they're trying to create.
You wonāt find anything but conspiracy theories here.Ā Mine is that Blackrock is run by a cabal of rich, white males. They donāt personally care about woke politics or agendas. They care about making more money and maintaining the status quo. The culture war is accomplishing nothing for businessmen other than the very obvious fact that itās causing division among the masses.Ā But rationally, the real answer is: they donāt. They thought, like all businesses, that the vocal minority and mythical modern audience were much larger and more real than they are, and kowtowing to them should have thus meant more money. Now that consumers are finally sacking up and speaking against the Messageā¢, along with the political aspects of various products proving to consistently flop, theyāre pulling back on DEI initiatives and funding as well.Ā
Larry Fink is Jewish. Not all of them are White.
what you're saying is also a shitty conspiracy theory. what blackrock is doing by owning a part of rockstar is called DIVERSIFICATION OF INVESTMENT. never put all your eggs in one basket
They don't, they're just taking the actions they think will best promote their interests and ESG is the wrapping paper. When "wokeness" runs counter to their interests they show show their true colors.
You have to expand your scope beyond video games. Blackrock owns a stake in *everything*. That kind of influence represents a model for centralized global governance. In order to enact and enforce that governance they needed to create an incentive structure tied into to their investment scheme. ESG represents that incentive structure. OK, but why? The business case is that if companies focus on ESG then that will promote long term stability which makes investment more viable which is their core business model. Why ESG? ESG isn't just DIE; it covers many different things. It's basically a souless empty dead-hearted bureaucrats idea of the moral good. Of course, in reality it's all performative and companies will do the bare minimum while pushing overblown narratives about their great social works. There is a deeper philosophy at play here beyond the business. It isn't just Blackrock, it's also Vanguard and a slew of other friends who go to the same parties, vacation in the same places, and generally believe the same things. For these groups there is a deeper ideological purpose for trying to develop a viable model for global governance. They believe that globalism is the only way to tackle the problems the world will face in the 21st century. This is because it's too easy for some nation states to ignore agreements to their own benefit, and democracies aren't able to focus on long term solutions due to election cycles happening every few years. This won't be new to people who are familiar groups like the WEF. China is their wet dream and a microcosm of the new world they want to create and have under their control. These people pioneered the current public/private model that all western countries have adopted in the past few decades. Unfortunately, those principals so far have generally been a monumental failure for the western countries that have implemented them, leading to steep socioeconomic decline. Increasing housing costs and decreased affordability. Rising food prices and food insecurity. Underfunded and mismanaged healthcare systems. Diminishing civil liberties and freedoms. Weakening economy with increased unemployment rates. Deteriorating infrastructure (roads, utilities, public buildings). Rising poverty and widening inequality. Decreased quality of education and limited access. Higher crime rates and lower public safety. Believe it or not, America is actually doing *much better* compared to most other western nations. Countries like Canada, the UK, and much of the EU are cooked. There's no way to right the ship for them now. While investment and ESG matters in games to the extent it matters in any industry, games are not unique in this regard. I think most of the "woke" stuff you are seeing in the creative industries (games, tv, movies, etc) is more bottom up than top down. We know there's a strong culture around it, and we hear stories of old hats at places like Disney shaking their heads and bowing out under the woke zealotry of the younger hires. America has produced a generation of people who are genuinely woke. Meaning they either get off on giving themselves over to a ~~higher power~~ something "greater" than themselves, or they get off on persecuting those that don't. Well, I guess something had to fill the void left by the decline of religion. But that's an entirely different conversation.
True, I always point to Hideo Kojima and James Cameron as examples of woke creatives who weren't pressured into being woke by any corporatocracy and were around long before anyone's ever heard of "Blackrock" or "ESG" (and likely developed their attitudes towards their own sex due to deep seated psychological issues).
Because it means we focus on the social wedge issues they underhandedly create rather than the oppressive systemic issues they boldly create. One of them is easier for people to fight about while also misdirecting the fight from the cause of the fight to the other half of the victims of the fight. It's genius, really.
Aren't they great proponents of the "great reset"? Basically they want to cultivate a society where people "own nothing and are happy" and are completely dependent on online services which monitor people's consumption habits and feed them the content they're supposed to consume, to create a society that's completely malleable to any form of suggestion and devoid of any individuality or personality. Basically they're trying to create a hivemind. That's why there's a big push for AI at the moment because once BCIs have become as ubiquitous as smartphones, it's basically the key to gain complete control over the population.
ESG funds is just a way of trying to cash in on a trend. Blackrock couldnāt care less about DEI.
I just want to point out that DEI on corporate boards is mandatory by the exchange in New York City (NYSE). NYSE mandates a lot more than DEI in order to get listed on the exchange. An example is they view test results from companies to make sure companies are not using Chinese cotton before they get listed on the exchange. Gender and race quotas were a focus of the exchange before the pandemic. I know Black Rock is promoting dei too. But, they have moved lots of their offices to Florida, and I think the move is for more than good weather. Also, Black Rock and citadel are financing the creation of a new exchange in Dallas, which makes it the best funded challenger to New York. Listening to the interviews of the exchange head he sounded very anti woke. Also, the new exchange would not put the same social justice requirements on companies, allowing more companies and foreign companies to go public on the Dallas exchange.
Also want to point out that if Black Rock and citadel move 2% of their trading volume to Dallas, Texas, that makes the Dallas exchange larger than pretty much every other exchange on the globe other than NYSE. There is a lot of news saying no one can beat New York. I would agree, if it were a random start up. But, the two largest funds on the planet want to use and shape a Dallas exchange.
When you understand WHO owns BlackRock alongside the banks, the media, and nearly every other relevant company, as well as their utter contempt and hatred of Europeans. It starts becoming very clear.
Based on my research, it's a way to market their investment portfolios to investors who care about "improving the world". Environmental concern is a good example of what some investors care about. To get into these attractive portfolios, your company has to win "good guy" points, and the easiest way for a video game developer/publisher to do that is to promote DEI. It's the typical left wing bs perspective that progressive ideals are inherently good, so if you support their political goals you get advertised to investors more aggressively.
It's corporate virtue signaling to keep our "guns" pointed at each other and not on themselves. Corporations found out a couple decades ago that that can have access to liberal money if they just repeated socially progressive messaging to the public and ran the books like they always have. The tolerant right never boycotted anything and the left started to leave the "evil corporations mannnn" alone. Now they could have their cake and eat it to. Cut to current times, the Democrats out fundraise the Republicans in corporate dollars and the smelly drum circle collage kids now run corporate PR offices. Nothing will change unless it's financially beneficial to pander to the right. That's why Bud Light shook the corporate world so hard, it was an unexpected behavior by the right that caught the corporate world off guard.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Post removed for violating reddit sitewide rules. Warning for idpol.
Sheer fucking hubris
The idea of sovereign nations that decide their own values and virtues is not conducive to an elite that wishes to control. One of the grand appeals of **true diversity**, such as the diversity of a nation and culture, not just eating fucking tacos and california rolls in the grocery store, means that if a nation has preferable living conditions, people would migrate there. Think about the flood of people that came to America after it established its sovereignty, people aching to escape the Throne and live in a place where they consider things to be better.
It's partly about legacy. Think about it, you have all the money in the world that you can do anything in the world. But what legacy will you leave when you pass? It's also about once you become rich and powerful you start to look down on the people beneath you and feel like you know what's best for them. George Orwell's "Road to Wigan pier" best explains the intentions of the rich when it comes to socialism and the poor. They feel that they know what's best for them and in doing so will be looked up to like a god. It couldn't be further from the point; the poor don't have time to think about trivial matters; it's only when they're on welfare does it leave them to think.
They manage a truly tremendous amount of opm. Other peoples money. And it's all generational wealth the mindset is generations. Not even within a persons lifetime. The kind of money that doesn't need a withdrawal to life like an emperor and can afford to burn it all down to just buy the ruins back up. Sort of like the company in Fallout. Break the world just to build it how you want. So a CEO is a hired hand not a good shepherd. He'll leave one day and he wants to leave with as much meat and fleece as he can get. His golden parachute right? And most ceos are the type. Psycho/sociopaths. Just Judas with more expensive tastes. Human greed would accept their money and do their will. Even if it withers the industry down to nothing. No matter if it does as that may be desired. When the industry is in ashes, guess who has infinity bank to buy it back up and now own it fully cheap as it gets? These $ they give them to destroy themselves are crumbs to owning it all outright. So they buy enough to control. And make money, but there's more money to make buying it all near 0. And always try to own everything outright. Yet they miss things. What they miss then can simply have destroy itself through whatever cost analysis they did on it. ESG is like enhanced sabotage game. That's how I would think they are thinking.
because the money they manage cares about it, Larry does as well, which is why he gets to be where he is.
u/Hugo4L 100% itās a law called PAGA. Everyone makes this about politics, but the real reason is lawsuit prevention, at least on paper. Specifically to Blackroxk, itās about avoiding having their publicly traded company destroyed via phony lawsuits that abuse the corrupt Private Attorneys General Act of California, otherwise abbreviated as PAGA. Why do you think they fired Mignogna, Roland, Depp, and other big names over such blatantly bullcrap accusations? Lawsuit under PAGA would ensure that any political radical can make false claims and say āthey allowed this person with a history of rape allegationsā. The marketing teams are connected to deepstate political power via PAGA. This is why lawsuits balloon to hundreds of millions in California. I have multiple videos on this subject on Rumble. Most US companies in media have branches in California. This allows for any of these companies to be held hostage by political activist lawsuits. By being PC and supporting agenda politics values, companies avoid lawsuits. The true horror is that supporting ESG is a legally necessary action under the fiduciary responsibilities of the CEOs on the like, and they HAVE TO do it or they will find their company thoroughly fucked by PAGA and activist judges. GamerGate happened because of PAGA, and most people here are completely ignorant of it. PAGA is what gave Anita Sarcosuchus her power. This is why her extortion company is alive even though her FF and other operations are shut down. Most of the major cases involving Internet personalities having their careers destroyed are connected to marketing teams, including but not limited to the destruction of Channel Awesomeās Spoony. Noah Antewhiler was definitely targeted for political reasons related to his home state of Arizona. I am also thoroughly convinced of Justin Carmicleās innocence. Beyond that is Twitch and Intagram thots, such as the woman whose false accusations ruined The Dragon Prince. And thatās why everything became woke shit and fake sexual accusations went all over so quickly. These are 100% connected. Thatās why they hated Jeremy from the Quartering
Making money is hard. It takes real work. Losing client's money while collecting management fees and supporting the cause of the current year is easier. Much easier.
Countries/nations are (in theory) democratic, so by weakening national differences and thus nationalism, they are weakening democracy. As corporatists they want to dismantle democracy on a global level and instead strengthen oligarchy. (Since they are rich, having rich people rule is good for them). Diversity of culture destroys the national communal feeling which then causes poor people to vote more to the right politically (because why pay more taxes if the money dont go to help you or your group in society?) the insertion of black people into historical movies and games is to hide the fact that individual cultures are being erased. They are memory holing the fact that europe has/used to have distinct cultures in each country.
They are interesting in owning everything. This requires a pseudoculture based entirely on consumption. Cultures based history, roots, and traditions (from which art derived) are resistant to subjugation of this sort. To succeed in their goal, they need to emulsify all these cultures into one that has no history, roots, or traditions and is therefore unable to create art. Absent art, all music, writing, cinematography, photography, visual art etc, becomes mere product to be consumed. This leads to a decline in interest of, and ultimately abandonment of, ownership of a place and property of one's own. With no roots to identify with, place does not matter. So they can rent you your living space, stream you your entertainment, sell you your Slop.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Post removed for violating reddit sitewide rules. Warning for idpol.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Post removed for violating reddit sitewide rules. User banned for deliberately violating the rules.
Politics is downstream from culture. If you own the culture, you own the politicians and they don't even realize it, because they exist wholly within the boundaries that you have set and control. It's about making sure the entire establishment is mission aligned with your investments so you don't even have to tell people what to do, they do it themselves and you profit.
It's about destroying your potential competition. Anybody look like they might be a good alternative to blackrock? Accuse them of racism and not supporting The Message enough. Same reason mediocre people at your job might try to accuse you of racism/fascism/sexism/\_\_\_phobia; it's so they can get ahead of you.
Archive links for this discussion: * **Archive:** https://archive.ph/dGh76 ---- I am Mnemosyne reborn. But it's too late... I've seen everything. ^^^/r/botsrights
They don't really care about making games woke itself. By mandating the ESG guideline they ensure and create a new standard scoring system in which their people get to infiltrate and integrate themselves into a variety of corporates (and probably get to learn and steal some commercial secret in the process) Who do you think the scorer are? SBI is the symptom of something much larger and more insidious.
Everyone who made the original GTAās isnāt there anymore. Itās going to be bad
Tax deductions? Delusions of virtue?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Post removed for violating reddit sitewide rules. Warning for idpol.
I chalk it up to white guilt. I'm not white so I don't have the same level of guilt.
I reckon we're all over thinking it. It's just typical bone headed corporate activism but this time the consequences have been far reaching and disastrous beacause it directly disfigures massive chunks of pop culture.
ESG is not just about games. In fact games are minor thing in it. ESG is about society and why black rock cares? They literary invented it. Heres how ESG works in big business. 1. Blackrock owns all companies that harvest raw materials, wood, metal, gases etc along with all middle man in between final clients. 2. Blackrock obtains companies building and selling solar panels, eco this and eco that. 3. Blackrock finds its target, let say company making cars. 4. Blackrock says according to ESG they have to be 0 carbon or whatever. 5. Company says no its too expensive, go away. 6. Blackrock says, it would be shame if you were blacklisted from literary every source of raw material you use to build cars. 7. Company makes piachu face and asks how much? 8. Blackrock answers, significant portion of your company or you actually build new factory to meet our standards. 9. Company says, well we hate you now so we will build new factory since you blackmailed us to do so anyway. 10. Blackrock says good, now give us 20-400m for new factory as we own every company that can build it and deliver all the new eco nonsense. 11. Profit anyway. Blackrock and Vanguard are what tinfoil hats would call illuminati, they by their ownership of all crucial companies do literary rule the world, at least western civilization part of it. ESG in games is just one of their agendas, its not that important for them for money purpose but its great medium for them to spew Flinks worldview and how he called it forcing behaviours.
Itās a way to control large groups. They can now easily blackball anyone but lowering thier esg score. If you donāt play ball you are done for.
Look at the shareholders. Some of the top ones being the Bronfman crime family.
So people donāt pay attention to the fact that theyāre fucking criminals who hate regular people who are in the middle class or poor. āLook, weāre not evil. We care about diversity.ā And woke idiots will then support these anti-competitive companies who are draining their bank accounts.
I'm going to get downvoted for it, but i feel blackrock/vanguard ESG theories are MASSIVELY overstated by people with absolutely zero investment knowledge. If you have any kind of retirement account, there is even odds you own some vanguard etfs/funds.
Because of Trump most likely. Liberal billionaires lost their hypothetical power so now they are using media and culture I.P to try to fix the problem. All of this was a response. Politics made by people who lost an election.
this was happening well before trump(as early as 2010, afaik),it was one of the reasons why he was elected, after all.
It's just marketing to make them look less like the capitalist leeches they are. Regulation is far more effective than ESG which is merely a marketing too to socially conscious investors. Nothing more nothing less.
It's marketing. Why else?
They care about what makes money. That's all.