The environmental goals of ESG largely align with the progressive’s green agenda driven by misguided strategies to combat climate change and reduce carbon emissions.

Under the disguise of ESG, environmental activists are leveraging big financial firms like BlackRock to dismantle America’s energy industries. The kinds of investments deemed “environmentally conscious” leave out fossil fuels altogether, despite the fact that the world’s energy needs will be dependent on fossil fuels for decades to come.

These investment protocols also disadvantage nuclear energy even though it produces no greenhouse gas emissions and could feasibly help meet growing energy demand while helping the world reach desired emissions reduction goals.

The failures of the ESG strategy have become more evident since the war between Russia and Ukraine began. Gas prices are soaring and countries are desperate to purchase oil, but because of ESG the US is unable to meet demand and keep prices in check, nor can it capitalize on the opportunity to sell fuel to our allies, which would benefit America’s economy and make them less dependent on Russia.

The farming and cattle industries are also under attack from climate activists convinced that cows will ruin our planet. They push ESG standards that force farmers to use certain fertilizers, even though they are less effective and more expensive. Even developing nations, countries whose populations often hover near starvation, have bought into ESG and adopted so-called climate friendly policies, to their detriment. Sri Lanka, whose domestic agricultural production plummeted because of ESG, is open revolt against the government that took.

In the United States companies are being overburdened with climate-related reporting requirements. Instead of being allowed to focus on their core business, they’re having to log things like how many employees drive to work, what type of vehicles they drive, and how the company is reducing the carbon footprint of its workers as part of their ESG assessment.