A Battle of Ideas Satellite Event with Nikos Sotirakopoulos, Elena Louisa Lange, Timandra Harkness & Marko Kovic
Nestlé, the food and beverage giant, vigorously promotes sustainable practices, but it has also been linked to environmental degradation and resource overexploitation. Meanwhile, distinguished investment bank and financial services firm UBS promotes gender diversity and inclusivity, but has also been criticised for its own ethical practices. Some claim that one reason for Credit Suisse going bankrupt was because it prioritised ‘diversity and inclusion’ instead of bookkeeping. When the beer company Bud Light partnered with trans TikTok influencer Dylan Mulvaney, the company’s sales plummeted in what will quite possibly go down as the most self-destructive advertising campaign in history. A similar collapse in sales beset the razor-blade manufacturer Gillette when it ran an ad decrying ‘toxic masculinity.’
Some people embrace the wokery of companies because they see it as a progressive step towards awakening to social injustice. These new policies, they claim, help to root out prejudiced, regressive attitudes and hate crimes in the workforce and general population. Indeed, they argue that corporations ought to adopt a venerable purpose, in the form of ESG (environmental, social and corporate governance), and combat climate change, sport pride flags and display the ‘LGBTQ’ initialism. This is supposed to create a better, more inclusive world. In their view, capitalism ought to adopt clearly definable moral values that they live by and move away from being purely money-making machines – even at the expense of profits.
The risk is, though, that once diversity, equity and inclusion workshops are instituted, workers who dissent from the implication that they need anti-racism or anti-sexism training are in danger of being fired. Failure to adopt gender-neutral or inclusive language, or to accept the woke worldview, can cause a storm on social media. Hence, a spiral of self-censorship has taken hold of the public where people are afraid to speak their minds.
What should we make of the ‘woke capitalism’ phenomenon? Is it an endeavour to be cheered or a manifestation of an elite ideology that tends to subdue criticism of those in power? Or is a free market at odds with subjecting companies to motives that transcend profits? Are profits a bad thing to aim at exclusively? Are we seeing a better side of capitalism than ever before as it tries to build a better tomorrow?
Many businesses now incorporate social justice goals into their core business strategies and marketing campaigns. These values often embody a push for diversity, equity and inclusion, and a commitment to demonstrating environmentally conscious practices. But with critics labelling this phenomenon Woke Capitalism, such measures have proved controversial – and, some would argue, counterproductive.
Nestlé, the food and beverage giant, vigorously promotes sustainable practices, but it has also been linked to environmental degradation and resource overexploitation. Meanwhile, distinguished investment bank and financial services firm UBS promotes gender diversity and inclusivity, but has also been criticised for its own ethical practices. Some claim that one reason for Credit Suisse going bankrupt was because it prioritised ‘diversity and inclusion’ instead of bookkeeping. When the beer company Bud Light partnered with trans TikTok influencer Dylan Mulvaney, the company’s sales plummeted in what will quite possibly go down as the most self-destructive advertising campaign in history. A similar collapse in sales beset the razor-blade manufacturer Gillette when it ran an ad decrying ‘toxic masculinity.’
Some people embrace the wokery of companies because they see it as a progressive step towards awakening to social injustice. These new policies, they claim, help to root out prejudiced, regressive attitudes and hate crimes in the workforce and general population. Indeed, they argue that corporations ought to adopt a venerable purpose, in the form of ESG (environmental, social and corporate governance), and combat climate change, sport pride flags and display the ‘LGBTQ’ initialism. This is supposed to create a better, more inclusive world. In their view, capitalism ought to adopt clearly definable moral values that they live by and move away from being purely money-making machines – even at the expense of profits.
The risk is, though, that once diversity, equity and inclusion workshops are instituted, workers who dissent from the implication that they need anti-racism or anti-sexism training are in danger of being fired. Failure to adopt gender-neutral or inclusive language, or to accept the woke worldview, can cause a storm on social media. Hence, a spiral of self-censorship has taken hold of the public where people are afraid to speak their minds.
What should we make of the ‘woke capitalism’ phenomenon? Is it an endeavour to be cheered or a manifestation of an elite ideology that tends to subdue criticism of those in power? Or is a free market at odds with subjecting companies to motives that transcend profits? Are profits a bad thing to aim at exclusively? Are we seeing a better side of capitalism than ever before as it tries to build a better tomorrow?
