The tyranny of green might have gone too far.
The announcement last week that investment giants JPMorgan Chase and State Street have pulled out of the world’s largest coalition of groups waging financial war on fossil fuels is a sign that even spineless bankers can find a backbone if they’re pushed too hard.
And it’s going to cost the climate activists dearly.
According to Reuters, JPMorgan and State Street made the move to quit the group Climate Action 100+ on Thursday. At the same time, BlackRock, the world’s largest investment manager, transferred its membership in Climate Action 100+ to its international arm.
According to The New York Times, the decisions total a hit worth $14 trillion (with a “tr”) to Climate Action 100+, a coalition that aims to use its “environmental, social and corporate governance” metrics — “ESG” in corporate-woke shorthand — to decide what money goes where in the investment world.
Now, there’s no argument that — even amid the spiraling inflation of President Joe Biden’s America — $14 trillion (with a “tr”) is a hefty chunk of change. But the implications of the moves might be even bigger, since they show not only fractures in the climate-nuts coalition, they also show that the major monetary institutions haven’t turned themselves solely into subsidiaries of Green Inc. (though they’re still on the hook for hypocrisy).
According to The Washington Times, JPMorgan and State Street cited a demand announced by Climate Action 100+ last year that it wanted members to “disclose more details about their investment decisions.”
In other words, it was tightening the reins on some of the wealthiest, most powerful corporations in the world to try to force them into ever greater compliance with the green agenda.
That was apparently too much for the masters of the universe, who claimed such disclosures would threaten “fiduciary duties,” according to The Washington Times.
Does the green agenda hurt everyday people more than the wealthy who push it?
Yes: 99% (1236 Votes)
No: 1% (7 Votes)
“Fiduciary duty” means an asset management firm must make its top priority the best interests of its investors. Letting the radicals from Climate Action 100+ pore over the books and analyze decisions in light of their supposed harm to the environment would essentially be surrendering crucial independence.
So, a financial world that has found it convenient to surrender to the hysteria of climate change has suddenly found the courage to push back.
This doesn’t make for any heroes in this story. The global finance industry is willing to jump into bed with the government the way a prostitute is willing to do it with a john — and for the same reason: It might be distasteful, it might even be dangerous. But money is money.
Those same financial institutions also aren’t big on individual liberties if they get in the way of the agenda. JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimond, for instance, has made public statements indicating he is more than happy for the government to roughshod over the rights of the little people in the name of battling “climate change.”
In pulling out of Climate Action 100+, JPMorgan claims it has established its own in-house staff now to evaluate its investments vis a vis their environmental costs, according to Reuters. (“Thanks, we’ll monitor our own books,” in other words.)
The wretched BlackRock has been so public about its commitment to ESG priorities that it’s gotten the attention of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who wants the company to remember that it exists to make money for its investors, not advance leftist political goals.
BlackRock’s transfer of its membership to its international arm alone is costing Climate Action 100+ about $6.6 trillion (with a “tr”), according to Reuters.
But what these companies are at least recognizing is that the radical climate lobby is like a python squeezing its prey. Every squeeze pushes further, the breathing room lost doesn’t come back, and eventually death from suffocation is the result.
According to The Washington Times, Climate Action 100+ was founded in 2017. Its stated goal is to “ensure the world’s largest corporate greenhouse gas emitters take necessary action on climate change.” (It’s similar to the context in which a loan shark suggests a borrower “take necessary action” on paying this week’s vig. The consequences of not doing it are likely to be painful, if not crippling.)
Climate Action 100+ billed its new demands for information last year as a “natural and logical evolution” to meet the investment group’s goals, according to The Washington Times.
There’s no doubt it’s “logical” from the view of a climate extremist to put all investment funds in the world in the hands of climate extremists. That doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. (There are no doubt conservative commentary writers who might think it would be logical to put all that money into the hands of conservative commentary writers. It’s doubtful any sane human being would agree.)
And, seeing clearly where that “natural and logical evolution” was going, those ace minds at JPMorgan, State Street and BlackRock decided that it might be a good time to head for the exits.
It’s noteworthy here that in doing so, they’re giving the Climate Action 100+ freaks a taste of their own medicine. The Davos-style elite would like nothing better than to starve any dissenters out of the marketplace by depriving them of funding.
Depriving them of $14 trillion is a step in the right direction, even if it’s being taken by those who’ve been complicit for so long.
