In recent years, the tension between environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles and political-economic power structures has escalated in the United States, especially within certain state governments. New research from Griffith University highlights how influential fossil fuel companies have actively contributed to policy developments that restrict investments aligned with ESG criteria, particularly within Florida. This phenomenon underscores a broader national movement where multiple US states have adopted legislative measures to curtail public sector investments in ESG-focused enterprises, inaugurating a complex interplay between financial markets, political ideology, and corporate influence.
Associate Professor Erin O’Brien’s meta-analysis delves deeply into Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ political strategies, revealing that efforts to inhibit public investments in companies prioritizing ESG standards are not isolated but part of a nationwide backlash. This resistance corresponds with an ideological campaign against what has been pejoratively labeled “woke capitalism.” O’Brien’s findings elaborate on how ESG integration into core business and investment decision-making processes triggered a powerful counter-reaction among conservative political actors and vested industrial interests, particularly those linked to fossil fuels.
The resistance to ESG frameworks, notably framed as opposition to “virtue signaling” or “greenwashing,” is in many ways a rhetorical tactic. While political figures like DeSantis claim to be protecting financial returns from ideological contamination, O’Brien’s research exposes this discourse as a veil for a deeper power struggle. The real conflict centers on control over the ideological direction and governance of capitalist markets, with particular attention on who possesses the authority to define market values and dictate corporate priorities.
This backlash has significant ramifications beyond the US, influencing global corporate behavior. The research points to instances such as BHP’s recent abandonment of plans to reduce carbon-intensive projects, a decision aligned with retreating ESG commitments under pressure from a legitimizing environment created by political and corporate actors opposed to values-based capitalism. Such developments signify a broader rollback in corporate social responsibility initiatives, intensifying the challenge of addressing climate change and social inequities through investment strategies.
DeSantis’ campaign against ESG investment has employed militarized and antagonistic language, framing the discourse as a “war on woke capitalism.” This rhetoric elevates ESG from a technical investment concept to a politically charged conflict, justifying state interference in financial markets. Within this framework, the term “woke capitalism” is constructed as a threat directed against “everyday people,” with anti-ESG narratives deliberately creating a schism between ordinary citizens and “corporate elites.” Ordinary investors and taxpayers are positioned as victims of socially responsible investing, despite such frameworks aiming to promote transparency and long-term sustainability.
The politicization of responsible investment has further intensified with prominent figures like Governor DeSantis and former President Donald Trump recasting ESG-focused corporate governance as a democratic threat. Their arguments assert that corporate elites, derisively termed “martini millionaires,” impose their socio-political values without democratic consent, undermining voter agency and sovereignty. This narrative effectively weaponizes ESG debates, leveraging populist sentiments to delegitimize the growing trend of integrating ethical considerations into business practices.
A significant dimension of this anti-ESG movement is the strategic involvement of fossil fuel companies and their political allies, which seek to derail financial institutions from incorporating issues such as climate change and human rights abuses—like modern slavery—into investment calculus. According to O’Brien’s research, organizations such as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), heavily influenced and funded by fossil fuel interests, have been instrumental in drafting and promoting model legislation. These laws aim to prevent banks and pension funds from utilizing ESG principles, thereby preserving the status quo of environmentally harmful and socially irresponsible business models.
The interplay between state legislatures and corporate lobbying is critical in understanding this backlash. DeSantis’ own paradoxical stance involves denouncing ESG investments as radical political ideology while actively using state mechanisms to enforce a different ideological agenda. This duality exemplifies how discursive power is deployed within political economies to shape market regulation and investment strategies to align with particular ideological preferences, underscoring the instrumental use of state power in ideological conflicts over capitalism’s future.
O’Brien’s study sheds light on how the escalation of the “war on woke capitalism” represents a broader contest over normative economic frameworks. By challenging ESG integration, political actors seek to reclaim market governance from an emergent paradigm that extends beyond traditional financial metrics to include social and environmental accountability. This reclamation effort echoes throughout multiple US states’ legislative activities, signaling an entrenched resistance to the expanding scope of corporate responsibility and sustainable finance.
The research also emphasizes the long-term implications of this discourse shift in responsible investment. By fostering skepticism and instituting legal barriers against ESG-driven investment decisions, political and corporate actors risk undermining the progress toward addressing global challenges such as climate change and social justice. The institutional pushback disrupts the alignment of financial markets with sustainability goals, with potential amplifying effects on environmental degradation and social inequalities worldwide.
Despite attempts to frame the debate as a straightforward clash between economic pragmatism and ideological excess, the findings reveal that the dynamics are far more intricate. The heightened political attention to ESG investment reflects broader anxieties about cultural power and economic influence wielded by corporate actors who champion social and environmental priorities. This anxiety manifests as a concerted campaign that redefines responsible investment as cultural imposition, thus legitimizing policy interventions that restrict investor discretion.
In this context, the research presents a cautionary narrative on the fragility of values-based capitalism, especially in politically conservative regions where fossil fuel dependence and anti-ESG sentiment intersect. The phenomenon is not limited to rhetorical opposition but translates into concrete political actions with tangible consequences for investment governance. The strategic deployment of discursive power by state actors like DeSantis exemplifies how political framing can reshape financial market logics and priorities, fundamentally challenging the integration of ESG considerations in public investment portfolios.
In sum, the findings from Griffith University provide a nuanced understanding of the “war on woke capitalism” as emblematic of broader contests over capitalist ideology, market governance, and social power. The backlash against ESG, driven and structured by fossil fuel interests and amplified through state politics, marks a critical juncture in the evolution of responsible investment. This juncture will shape the trajectory of capitalist markets and their capacity to address pressing environmental and societal issues in the decades ahead.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: The war on woke capitalism: State deployment of discursive power in the backlash to responsible investment
News Publication Date: 23-Mar-2026
Web References: DOI: 10.1017/bap.2026.10022
Keywords: ESG investment, woke capitalism, fossil fuel companies, political backlash, state legislation, public investment, financial markets, corporate governance, climate change, social responsibility, American Legislative Exchange Council, Ron DeSantis
