Bank of America and Goldman Sachs have both been lauded for their LGBTIQ-friendly workplaces. But tax filings uncovered by openDemocracy show nonprofit foundations linked to the banks have also funded ultraconservative groups fighting to roll back civil rights for the queer community worldwide.
From 2017 to 2020, the Bank of America Charitable Foundation handed out more than $390,000 to eight such organisations who between them have resisted same-sex marriage laws and anti-discrimination protections for LGBTIQ people, challenged contraception and abortion access, and sought to ban gender-affirming healthcare for trans people. …
The point isn’t to either support or oppose LGBTIQ interests - the point is to fund two sides who will then fight, and distract attention from their ongoing economic rape of all of us.
Rich people openly pretending to support minorities but secretly trying to destroy their lives? gasp Well I never!
Right? Who could have thought that the same rich people who have been continuously denying climate change while increasing their carbon footprint and pretending to move to “green” energy would also pretend to care about minorities? Truly unexpected, I say!
For some perspective:
- Funding given by BofA to the groups listed in the source: $390,000
- Funding given by BofA to fossil fuel companies: $232,000,000,000
(Granted, this is not a perfect apples-to-apples comparison, as the fossil fuel numbers are for 2016-2021, not 2017-2020, but regardless…)
What I don’t get is why tho? It’s literally cheaper for them not to do anything. Why do they bother?
In the end it’s certainly because at least some of the executives making donation decisions are bigots, but here’s my attempt to come up with an explanation for why the corporation as a whole would view these donations as strategic:
They perceive that electing Republicans is beneficial for their business, and the Republican party uses bigotry to motivate their base. Hate against queer people is the R’s cause du jour. Funding hate groups means those groups produce more bigot propaganda, which makes the Republican electoral strategy more effective, which makes it more likely that Republican candidates will be elected who are perceived to be more amenable to deregulation that would allow banks to increase profits at everyone else’s expense.
So from this perspective, banks see queer people as a group they can extract value from, both through rainbow washing initiatives to attract them as customers and talent and (as seen here) as a target they can attack in pursuit of political power, which is equivalent to profit.
That makes a surprising amount of sense, thanks
Because they hate queer people. It isn’t logical. It’s probably religious
They fund all the political campaigns, so that no matter who gets elected, he owes them a favor.
Funding domestic terrorists? That deserves a tax rebate!
Feeding the homeless? Right this way to your cell.
Obligatory reminder: get your money away from these parasites and into a convenient small regional bank or credit union near you.
Stop using their services…
Removed by mod
Can you explain why that matters if the story is legitimate?
https://www.opendemocracy.net/ is generally a very trustworthy source so are you implying the story is also false?
Removed by mod
We already know that the west is corrupt, just as is the east.
It’s not like it’s news to anyone that politicians are corrupt, if anyone doubts that I can look to my own country the UK and see all the things the Tory party have done in power the last 13 years.
Removed by mod
I really don’t care about the content of the article, I’m calling out the user specifically based on all his contributions.
Which is arguably worse if I’m honest, at least debate or discuss the content of the article and whether it’s genuine or not. Trying to discredit the article simply because you don’t like the source is just crap.
Whether or not the poster is garbage and yes i’m fully aware of their post history it doesn’t change the content of the article.
I can appreciate what you are doing and I can also appreciate the news story in and of itself. If you want to do something equal, post a new story that is also legitimate news about how China sucks and I will gladly upvote that as well.
In fact I just did look at OPs posts and a handful of comment which causes me to say,
Knee-jerk rightwingers like you are so predictable, with your comments in lock-step with the GOP; “china” a convenient boogie man. I’m surprised you didn’t blame trans folk.
Why do you even bother?
And an honest question: why are you so angry all the time?
Reporting this user. Don’t reply to them.
Brand new account posts zero or can’t see, and he posts literally this same “op is a china shill” to many other posts.
Who cares? What a bank does isn’t going to deter me from supporting or opposing what I choose. Every major product or service that you use employs the same level choice across the board, whether you like it or not.
I care.
But you can avoid doing business with banks that are more egregiously shitty in this regard. Use a local credit union instead.
That’s true, but that’s not going to stop someone who believes in this to stop going to Starbucks when they try to stop their workers from unionizing, or stop shopping at Amazon even though they underpay and over work their employees. Like if your going to draw a line, either cross it or stay behind it but don’t act like you have a hill to die on because some bank chooses to do something really shitty. Let’s get real here.
