Is there a Co in this space as Bold & Principled as Patagonia?

Brian:

In my opinion, it is always self affirming to see corporations communicate political messages we agree with.

But I do not want to do business or be a consumer or an employee in a world where every company is communicating a political message.

Cheers

+1 to Bruce’s comment.  I want to support companies with products I value and not their political views.

They said

“It refers to politicians from any party who deny or disregard the climate crisis and ignore science, not because they aren’t aware of it, but because their pockets are lined with money from oil and gas interests,” she said.”

are there Patagonia customers that support politicians that deny science because they’re lining their pockets?

In general I agree with you though, corporations are best staying out of politics

“corporations are best staying out of politics”

But “corporations” have ALWAYS been involved in politics…….maybe not in the way Patagonia is doing. Just follow the money…….it flows into the pockets of politicians of all stripes and parties from every major corporation. It’s simply the reality of our political economy (and most others that I’m aware of).

Question: Is it a bug or a feature or both?

Answer: Yes

While it may be based on principle, Patagonia is probably increasing their profits/sales whenever they do things like this. Same thing with REI’s political stands. Long-term, climate change poses a threat to most (or many) businesses. When it makes financial sense, oil companies might even start reorganizing themselves into “energy” companies, advertising their investments in green technologies and renewables or adding electric vehicle charging stations to their gas stations.

In today’s world, everything is political, not much getting around it. I don’t mind companies expressing a political philosophy or making political statements, why shouldn’t they when everyone else does? And I agree that it’s also just part of the marketing scheme. You’ll probably lose some customers, you’ll probably gain some customers. At least Patagonia seems to walk the walk more than most corporations.

“When it makes financial sense, oil companies might even start reorganizing themselves into “energy” companies, advertising their investments in green technologies and renewables or adding electric vehicle charging stations to their gas stations.”

Already happening, and has been for at least a couple of years now, at least the advertising part.

My favorite companies are those which make a good product and sale it at a fair price.

“My favorite companies are those which make a good product and sale it at a fair price.”

But what if I discover the profits are funding things I do not agree with? Or their labor practices violate principles that I profess to uphold?

Fascinating to explore how selective our attention is, how we are often willing to turn a blind eye in one area and not another. Is this hypocritical or simply human? How high (or low) should the bar be set?

How much can we ignore while still telling ourselves we’re good people?

“How much can we ignore while still telling ourselves we’re good people?”

Generations of humans have done an excellent job of telling themselves and their children great lies about their own ways of life and actions. And then there are those that have no qualms at all with their own brutality toward the “other”.

Generations of humans have done an excellent job of telling themselves and their children great lies about their own ways of life and actions. And then there are those that have no qualms at all with their own brutality toward the “other”.

Essentially omission vs. commission.

And perhaps there are those still that have actively lived to escape both to the greatest extent they can. But these are likely far and few between, found in cabins and temples and monasteries…

….In the Patagonia store, probably not so much.

I buy lots of Patagonia because of their commitment to the environment and working conditions, but not all is rosy. They do own property in Hollister Ranch (Yvonne C.) and stay very tight lipped about that and their efforts to keep the public from accessing those beaches. I guess their version of protecting the beaches there, is to keep the public out. The Nature Conservancy is doing this as well on the western portion of Santa Cruz Island and up at Bixby Ranch,  just north of Hollister Ranch. Only the rich who donate have any hope of accessing any of those beaches.

I’m kind of on Adam Smith’s side of the economy with the “make a good product and sell it at a fair price.”  Because I think that’s probably the most “good” for the most people.  I think a  good product sold at a fair price is the most good for rich, poor, and in-between and no matter what your political, religious, moral, activist spectrum.  By purchasing a good product at a fair price then you have the benefit of using the product for its intended purpose (hopefully for a good long time) and you can use your money to support, bless, change whatever your conscience dictates.

I realize that there are several exceptions to this rule.  For example: I pay an exorbitant amount of money for the way below average cookies the children in my neighborhood bake.  But I wish to support their entrepreneurship and what they do with the profits.

And I realize that there is more than one school of economic practice!

And with my contributions, this thread should probably get moved to chaff.

I surf the Ranch, accessed by boat. Armed, private security will not hesitate to let you know you can’t access those beaches. Guns and gates don’t strike me as the most enlightened environmental policy but hey…Must be nice for the owners.

Good point pedestrian, corporations own the government

+1 Pedestrian.

Neither corporation on either political side has your best interest at heart. Business is business. Businesses use politics as a marketing tool that has proven time and time again to be highly effective and successful.

@ Pedestrian: “But “corporations” have ALWAYS been involved in politics…….maybe not in the way Patagonia is doing. Just follow the money…….it flows into the pockets of politicians of all stripes and parties from every major corporation. It’s simply the reality of our political economy (and most others that I’m aware of).”

Yup. And even John McCain was not able to move campaign finance reform forward.

But corporations contributing the PACs and superPACs is one thing. And we need stronger laws so we can follow the money.  But while I might like and agree with the green messages Patagonia’s puts  on its products, the next storefront down the block (real or virtual) will start having messaging I don’t agree with. So I would prefer no overt politcal messaging on my products.

“So I would prefer no overt politcal messaging on my products.”

That’s why we have a free market (OK close enough to a free market…..); companies choose what they do (within the framework of our system of laws, regulations and social norms) and consumers are free to exercise their preferences.

I personally can’t conceive of considering one corporation more “virtuous” than another…..even Patagonia with all their messaging. They are geniuses at marketing like Apple is (in a different context).

I do own a couple of Patagonia products and I bought each item on its own merits.

Cynicism about corporate marketing and motives aside, I would much rather support a company that is making an effort; I think it’s important not to lose sight of this and let perfect become the enemy of good (or trying to be better…).

Great discussion here. Let us all remember that we ‘vote’ with our money spent, err day. And those ‘votes’ matter in the marketplace.

It’s ok with me to have a conscience, be you a person or a corporation.

Yvon Chouinard and Patagonia are treasures at many levels.

“But “corporations” have ALWAYS been involved in politics”

True. But Citizens United really opened the flood gates. Corporations are NOT people.

Down the rabbit hole…Wheee!

Citizens United is a disaster. And I say that not just as a human being, but as a lawyer with an undergraduate degree in political history who cares what kind of world his children and grandchildren will live in.

Corporations per se do not feel pain, sadness, fear etc. and cannot vote. 99% of the time they don’t “care” about the environment or anything else except as it affects their bottom line. But they have a lot of the only thing they “care” about – money – which they have used to buy politicians, pack courts across the country, pass laws and tax breaks in their favor, roll back environmental and all other kinds of regulation, and fund massive campaigns to shape and influence public opinion.

For instance, back in the 70’s the oil and plastic corporations were getting a lot of environmentalist push back. They studied and tried their own recycling efforts, and concluded that recycling would never be economically competitive because it is so much cheaper and easier to make plastic from oil. But what they did was fund a few recycling places for a few years and spend $10+ million per year and advertise how plastic could be recycled instead of eliminated. And billions of tons *per year* of plastic now contaminate our world. It never truly gets biodegraded, the pieces just get smaller and smaller and become nanoparticles, too small for any kind of filter. It’s in the oceans, it’s in our water and food, it’s in the rain *everywhere in the world*. And there’s no way to get rid of it.

A world controlled by corporations will always be a miserable place for human beings.

Corporations owned and/or run by people who do care about the world are rare and precious, and have a unique opportunity to counterbalance the other 99%. We should support them as much as possible, and avoid the others as much as possible.

I read that there is a guy testing the ruling by driving in a carpool lane with just him and a set of corporate papers and records as a “person,” and if cited will fight it on the basis of Citizens United.

Too bad Yvon chooses to make most of his products overseas. Manufacturing jobs lost. Carbon costs to ship. Microplastics blowing in the wind. He does make some nice clothing for the Armed Forces.