Ian Robertson wrote: “ The UN backed Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) mandates two practices for...”

As long as we are talking ethics, let’s try to be more honest in comments. The UN is a non-government political organization. It is a political organization known for taking ethical shortcuts whenever it is politically expedient to do so.

It is also deceptive to use the word “mandates” here. The UN has zero legal or moral authority. It is not a government. It’s member countries, including all G7 countries, have voluntarily abided by or ignored UN opinions as it suited them.

The UN is not a religious organization either, and lacks moral authority. It has placed countries known for torture on its human rights committee.

The UN is a ***POLITICAL*** organization, and Mr Robertson essentially, if unwittingly, strengthens my point that ESG is political.

No amount of virtue signaling or Harvard references can change a simple underlying truth: it is unethical to force your political opinions onto others. Taking advantage of the self guilt many trust fund babies have isn’t very noble either.

The ESG political movement is itself unethical and tyrannical.