Sponsored left, the planet is falling apart. While Trump spins the dollar hen on subversive activity, large business drops the yoke of political and ideological correctness. It is no wonder that “non-governmental” organisations ask the erstwhile celebrated question: Prime Minister, how to live?
Rafał Ziemkiewicz in the "Strolled Revolution" convinced how large business, sponsoring the extremist madness of the left, actually bought himself a social revolt. Billions of dollars to advance genderism, Inclusion, etc. were to pacify the environments known for their opposition to monopoly and exploitation. For a while, this strategy was working. The place of alterglobalists was taken by "julkas" with rainbow hair, whose interest was more than the labour rights of abortion and transaction at the employer's expense.
But what seemed like a clever play began to reflect with hiccups. Allegedly appeased activists, this time already well paid and entering supervisory boards, turned into terrorists parasitising the company's healthy (that's profit-oriented) body.
Suffice to say that the DEI policy marketplace (diversity, equality, inclusion) was valued at $7.5 billion in 2020, with a outlook of US$15 billion by 2026. In Poland, it is visible mainly due to Western companies, which extensively sponsored the advancement of the moral revolution over the Vistula River. Their commitment was peculiarly evident during the period of gay pride, erstwhile the rainbow logos proudly presented representatives of CitiBanku, IBM, Netflix, Ben&Jerry, Google, Microsoft, Discovery TVN Polska, Avivy, Goldman Sachs, Procter & Gamble, Nielsena or BNP Paribas.
In Poland, however, ideological corporations never went to what they did in the US. erstwhile the companies began to tell the Americans how to live, to service sneaky propaganda to children, and to blackmail them into more "inclusive" states, so far calm, average consumers were furious. The anger of the people, expressed at the beginning in the form of a consumer boycott, and yet at the ballot box, led to a powerful overturning of interior company policies.
Harley Davidson, Ford Motors, Boeing Aircraft, Lowe’s Home Improvement, John Deere, Brown-Fordman Distilleries, Molson Coors, McDonald’s, Walmart, Target, and The Smithsonian Institution have withdrawn from their progressive practices. But the actual wind of change came from Silicon Valley. DEI policy was abandoned by specified giants as Amazon, Meta, Google or of course X (Twitter). Koryto was dried, and along with it disappeared parasitic eldorado.
It is no wonder that any censoric ointment (or “content verifiers”), educators-delawers or professional activists began to rise larum. All the more so, Musk and the boys at DOGE besides turned off a hen with billions sucked in from the pocket of an American payer under the American global improvement Agency (USAID).
Nuts
In January, the guru of left-wing journalism, Fareed Zakaria shared a bitter relation with this year's Davos. What was his surprise erstwhile he saw there "a large global business, very positive" towards Donald Trump. No wonder. The competitions had had adequate moral blackmail and dense burdens. They have paid besides long for the effects of the spells of left-wing propaganda, convincing that hiring on grounds of skin color, gender, or sexual orientation would bring any incredible benefits. It shortly turned out that investments in ideology were almost exclusively loss-making.
This process is best seen on the example of the ESG rating phenomenon (environment, social responsibility, corporate governance). We are talking about a marketplace valued at $30-40 Billion dollars, where the cost of DEI policy is cheap, or, as the Americans say, peanuts. However, despite the immense engagement of financial institutions, banks and administrative mechanisms, the political and correct device has never jumped adequate turnover.
The main reason is that the strategy forcing purchases exclusively from "ethical" suppliers charged with ESG costs has never been closed. No drastic regulation has helped, no appeals have helped, nor have "conscious" consumers helped. The critical mass in the form of a common sense, resistant to the eco-propaganda of society, has not been exceeded.
No wonder Tim Buckely, Vanguard's boss, 1 of the world's 4 largest investment funds, stated that "ESG gives no advantage over conventional investment." The outflow of ESG funds in the US has been recorded in the last 8 quarters, and only in April 2024 stock exchange funds dealing with "environmental protection, society and corporate governance" recorded the largest net outflows of $4.6 billion.
It wasn't long before ecologistic politicians began to retreat themselves; last year's chief advocate for ESG, Black stone has left a number of initiatives, including a leading group Net Zero Coalition 2050. At the same time, the U.S. Attorney's Office began to prosecute the largest investment funds in the world, accusing them of collusion in order to "reduce coal production and artificial price inflate to make tremendous profits".
From sponsor to sponsor
As in specified cases, the effects of an earthquake across the ocean can besides be felt in us. While the aid of the large business over Vistula was more occasional, the halting of the USAID grants caused a real disaster. American funds were, if you believe activists, from a fewer to even 70% of the organization's budget. However, it is hard to calculate the full cost of support, as USID funds were distributed by another global organisations specified as the UN, UNHCR or WHO.
However, it is known that the Polish Migration Forum was peculiarly badly hit, and in the media the most public was the representatives of the run Against Homophobia, who, according to Mr Jerzy Kwaśniewski, were shortly to devote American money to undermining the constitutional protection of matrimony as a union between women and men.
Now activists surviving with “hard-earned abroad grants” look into the request to find a fresh sponsor. To this end, the government, in explanation looking at politicians' hands, is prepared to ask for help... the government. But Donald Tusk is not Uncle Sam. Professional activists may experience akin treatment as another citizens of “smiling Poland”. Although an additional 70 million were included in the budget for 2025, erstwhile quoting Bulat Okudżawa, “the sugars are not adequate for all”. The Hopes were besides dispelled by Marshal Holovnia, who – although he wholeheartedly advocated the improvement of civilian society – openly acknowledged that money for this intent would be very difficult.
Fareed Zakaria argued that Trump's second word was not an accident, but a real paradigm shift. The changes being made are so profound and structural that liberal lefts look into the eyes of years, even decades of "right-wing populism".
Very good.
Peter Relich
