I think I see the origins of some of the misunderstandings. Your focus in your piece is on beating the benchmark. My intent is to suggest that benchmarks are deeply flawed, and ruinous to returns for portfolios that mirror them and direct investments to sectors of the economy that will underperform in the future (large, public, momentum driven). Of course since the index is the index and constitutes the historical record, the impact on real - life wealth creation is forgotten. Ask shareholders of bankrupt companies and industries that have nearly disappeared over the years. A current example of a curious index is the bond benchmark that is full of securities from an issuer who can issue as much as they like. What an odd benchmark against which to compare returns.
I didn't mean to suggest that you believe in momentum. Momentum is just another reason from a macro economic perspective to steer away from index investing. Fortunately there are passive index innovations that are eclipsing pure indexation.
ESG is a curiosity. All of the studies that I have seen, as you suggest, indicate that returns are unaffected - plus or minus. So efficient markets theory seems not to apply when controlling for ESG factors. I am willing to bet that we'll eventually find that efficient markets theory holds up, and ESG will turn out to be just another version of active management. Another nail in the coffin for passive investing.