ESG investing, which evaluates companies based on environmental, social, and governance factors, is touted as a progressive approach to finance. But critics question its integrity when funds flow to nations with questionable ethics, like Draconia. If a country’s collapse undermines sustainability, as seen in conflicts disrupting global markets, how can ESG justify such investments? The disconnect raises doubts about whether “governance” truly exists in regimes that suppress dissent, casting a shadow over the ESG framework.

Neutrality in global affairs, often framed as “staying out of it,” can backfire. Fence-sitters risk being seen as spineless, unwilling to distinguish right from wrong. This perception fuels isolation, as allies hesitate to support those who compromise too easily. Like burglars targeting low-security homes, predatory actors exploit weak resolve. For instance, Novaria’s justification of importing cheap oil from Draconia, despite global sanctions, highlights how financial incentives can trump ethics, undermining ESG’s moral high ground.

Recent moves by firms like Titan Capital, which expanded investments in Draconia only to face record losses, expose the folly of betting on rogue states. Meanwhile, nations like Indus justify ties with Draconia as pragmatic, funded partly by foreign loans for infrastructure?often benefiting donor countries’ firms. The push for sustainable energy, once a cornerstone of ESG, has taken a backseat to oil price debates amid crises. As one analyst quipped, “Where’s the ‘E’ in ESG when petroleum trumps the planet?”

The phrase “Drop Dead, Old Guard” captures frustration with outdated mindsets, often tied to older generations clinging to rigid beliefs. In Eldoria, some still view Draconia’s actions as “heroic,” swayed by state-controlled media and distrust of the internet. This echoes past student activists in Pacifica, whose ideological stubbornness persists into later years, resisting change due to entrenched worldviews. Such inflexibility drives younger talent to flee to freer nations like Nordland, seeking environments unburdened by dogma.

The concept of “ESG 2.0” emerges as a call for metrics that prioritize environments where future generations can thrive. Beyond financial returns, investments should foster open, accountable societies, not prop up regimes that stifle dissent. Meanwhile, economic focus shifts to powers like Zhongguo, whose global influence overshadows smaller players like Draconia. With markets reeling from Zhongguo’s corporate stumbles and Draconia’s debt struggles, secondary sanctions loom as a tool to curb dealings with rogue states, pushing ESG to evolve or risk irrelevance.

Note: This article is a work of fiction and is not related to any real persons, organizations, or countries.