[LB232323]

The problem here in this discussion is looking at yourselves and your corporations as solutions to the world's problems.

Same goes with the recent ESG investment trend. A corporation exists to make a profit, period. Suggesting otherwise is just emotional manipulation, albeit very profitable manipulation.

The corporation causes all these problems, and it does it for profit. The phrase "business ethics" makes zero sense, but it serves a PR purpose. Even the term "national defense" in this magazine is doublespeak for imperialism, looting and pillaging other nations for profit.

I have no interest in the neoliberal fantasy world of corporations solving our problems, because I am a pragmatist. Yet people continue to send billions into ESG companies to ease their guilt, while these companies actually profit from and exacerbate the very issues they promise to solve.

[merpnderp]

You realize when you say the word "corporation", you mean "people". Like a group of people coordinating together for a common cause. As much as people might confuse a specific Supreme Court ruling, corporations are not actually sentient entities, but just a group of human beings like any others.

And I have no interest in this neoreactionary fantasy that governments are less corrupt than corporations. The data is overwhelming that free markets are less corrupt, less polluting, and less harmful.

[jhgb]

> As much as people might confuse a specific Supreme Court ruling, corporations are not actually sentient entities, but just a group of human beings like any others.

What? Corporations as non-human legal entities was actually a monumental legal invention in medieval Europe.

[fnordprefect]

> A corporation exists to make a profit, period. Suggesting otherwise is just emotional manipulation, albeit very profitable manipulation.

This is wrong. A corporation is just an artificial person. Like a person, it can seek a profit or not - eg charitable not-for-profits. There is no legal obligation either way.