Hacker News Reader

Comment by conception | Hacker News Reader

I'll just note that social/environmental funds like this generally only go for the REALLY REALLY bad folks out there that aren't supergiants.

Some of the top holdings of that fund are - Nestle Exxon Johnson & Johnson Facebook etc etc

It's a good step but you're not actually divesting yourself from fucks like Nestle.

View on HN

I would say the bigger problem is that everyone has different ethics and what makes a company evil.

When you get to the level of those companies, surely they're going to do something evil. I'm not even sure what you're referring to with Nestle (baby milk?).

Id prefer to have it based on something more solid like carbon intensity or no oil or something actually measurable by us and the offending companies, rather than nebulous 'ethics'.

Nestle kind of goes above and beyond in this regard... Messing with access to potable water is certainly relevant to climate change

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9#Controversy_and_cr...

It's not causing climate change, though. That's saying nothing of their ethics, or how the impact their activities are having particularly with the accelerating climate emergency, but it's a matter of critical focus that we stop CO2 emissions, not divest companies that are unethical (admirable, but entirely separate).

For what it's worth, that is precisely how this effort will be gaslit. Divide and conquer.

Gaslighting is where an abuser says and does unexpected things that make the abused doubt their perceptions and sanity. I learned about it in film class in college. Suddenly people are using the term to describe all sorts of actions that don’t seem to fit that mold (but that involve some sort of ill intent). What gives?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com