Sep 28, 2022·edited Sep 28, 2022Liked by Seth Jordan

I have mixed feelings about Patagonia 'going purpose'. How does this model really change what Chouinard and patagonia have been doing all along? There are some things they do I appreciate and are really bringing forward social ideas in business, and also some I have questions about such as the heavy use of synthetic fibers, even if they are recycled. Likewise with what they think 'saving the planet' means' I'm sure there are some things that I am on board with and some I might find atrocious. Chouinard is still the one primarily deciding this, no?

What happens when the purpose is not one we are on board with? I appreciate the examples you gave, and then there is a very similar model that Barre Seid has used to 'fund climate denialism and right wing causes', forming a similarly structured organization after growing a business for a different 'purpose' https://www.propublica.org/article/barre-seid-heartland-institute-hillsdale-college-gmu

How does this differ, and if there is not a big difference, how can we Really change how this wealth is accumulated and disbursed? What is a more full, healthy imagination of this 'restructuring'?

Expand full comment