Dow knowingly spreads poison, pays a fine, withdraws a product from household use, and that product continues to be used in farming? I had to stop reading.
...And greenwash them away by grandiose ad campaigns such as "human element" where they portray themselves as a part of the (humanitarian) solution to potable water.
If they really cared a tiddly bit about devastating human costs caused by their wholly owned subsidiaries, they would have at least spent a miniscule fraction of what they spend on such ad campaigns to actually clean up their mess.
The particular example I have in mind is the Bhopal disaster, and contamination of Bhopal's groundwater caused by the same company but prior to the disaster. Notably they dont shy away from claiming any of the assets of their wholly owned subsidiary Union Carbide, but none of their liabilities. 20,000 have died because of these causes, more have been disabled beyond the capacity to earn livelihood wages, but they do zilch about it. Well, not quite correct, they spend billions in ad campaigns, sponsor olympics and get a free pass. While Chernobyl rules the roost in western media as a prominent example of an industrial disaster (fits the narrative of "look how bad Russian technology is" very nicely) few if at all recall Bhopal although it is a tragedy of as epic proportions, I would argue that its (official) human cost was more.
According to the Wikipedia article you linked to, 3787 deaths are confirmed as resulting from the incident and 16000 deaths are claimed in total. The page does not support the assertion that the disaster was responsible for 20000 deaths.
From the same page: "In 1994, UCC sold its stake in UCIL to Eveready Industries India Limited... Eveready Industries India, Limited, ended cleanup on the site in 1998, when it terminated its 99-year lease and turned over control of the site to the state government of Madhya Pradesh. Dow Chemical Company Purchased UCC in 2001, seventeen years after the disaster."
Dow Chemical did not own Union Carbide at the time of the incident. Additionally, EIIL had assumed, and shed, liability for the cleanup prior to Dow Chemical's acquisition of UCC. Dow Chemical is absolutely responsible for damaging the environment in various ways; however, constructing narratives to implicate the company in the Bhopal Disaster is disingenuous.
The death toll numbers vary with which source you cite. I was being conservative with 20,000. The ~4K number is of course those who dies immediately after the leak, many have perished due to long term effects and still continue to do so. It hasnt stopped.
It is irrelevant that Dow did not own UCC then, it owns it now, and not in part, wholly, that comes with liabilities too. Liability does not disappear in the thin air just because some other company buys it out. To vindicate this point, Dow has paid millions for UCC liabilities in US. Dow did not own UCC at that time either.
UCC has ceased to exist and Dow owns all of the assets, and I argue that includes UC all its liabilities liabilities. The gold standard has been that the polluter pays, the polluter was UCC, which is now owned by Dow (which means all property physical and intellectual). EIIL never assumed liabilities, it obtained the lease of the land that had been lent out to UCC by the govt, it did not buy UCC.
If you want to know the facts I would say dig around, if you want to push an predetermined opinion, continue what you are doing. As the owner of UCC, Dow has been summoned by the Indian courts which it has refused to do, so as per Indian law its a fugitive from justice.
> constructing narratives to implicate the company in the Bhopal Disaster is disingenuous.
Thats really cute, what name would you give to profiteering from human disaster by using US sovereignty to shield it from criminal and tort proceedings.
> "withdraws a product from household use, and that product continues to be used in farming?"
There are lots of things that would be potentially dangerous inside of my house that are at home on my cousin's farm. Those use cases are considerably different.
If they really cared a tiddly bit about devastating human costs caused by their wholly owned subsidiaries, they would have at least spent a miniscule fraction of what they spend on such ad campaigns to actually clean up their mess.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster
The particular example I have in mind is the Bhopal disaster, and contamination of Bhopal's groundwater caused by the same company but prior to the disaster. Notably they dont shy away from claiming any of the assets of their wholly owned subsidiary Union Carbide, but none of their liabilities. 20,000 have died because of these causes, more have been disabled beyond the capacity to earn livelihood wages, but they do zilch about it. Well, not quite correct, they spend billions in ad campaigns, sponsor olympics and get a free pass. While Chernobyl rules the roost in western media as a prominent example of an industrial disaster (fits the narrative of "look how bad Russian technology is" very nicely) few if at all recall Bhopal although it is a tragedy of as epic proportions, I would argue that its (official) human cost was more.
I have not started on Nemagon or dioxins.