No Good Billionaires: Yvon Chouinard Uses Philanthropy and the Language of Environmental Justice to Secure and Maintain His Hoarded Wealth
There’s nothing eco-friendly about an eco-billionaire.
When you go to Patagonia’s website from a PC or laptop, and read the letter that Yvon Chouinard wrote to proclaim that “Earth is our only shareholder now,” you will see that the tab on your internet browser says “reimagining capitalism.” But truth be told an 83 year old cis white man, who throughout his lifetime has accrued and hoarded excess wealth by way of exploiting low-wage workers and continues to do so, is actually sorely incapable of “reimagining capitalism.”
This kind of wording is safe enough to keep Patagonia’s liberal consumer-base happy, but “edgy” enough to piss off Republicans. This statement and move makes the public think that the company is doing something counter-culture.
This isn’t the first time Chouinard has painted himself as a rabble-rouser of the mainstream. It’s really his whole brand. On the cover of his book for Let My People Go Surfing the sub-heading reads, “Including 10 More Years of Business Unusual,” and “The Education of a Reluctant Businessman.”
How do you reluctantly acquire billions of dollars and scale your business to a global company with offices in the so-called United States, the Netherlands, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Chile and Argentina? Plus, more than 70 Patagonia stores worldwide? And what is so unusual about this?
Yvon Chouinard, who’s net worth is 1.2 billion dollars, is not radical or revolutionary, and neither are his actions.
This past week Chouinard made the announcement that he is giving away the company to “fight climate change,” or so the headlines say in near unanimous celebration.
From the New York Times, “Patagonia Founder Gives Away the Company to Fight Climate Change.”
“Patagonia Founder Just Donated the Entire Company Worth $3 Billion to Fight Climate Change,” announces CNBC.
The Guardian exclaims in toxic masculine, eco-jock, blubbering glee, “Yvon Chouinard the Existential Dirtbag Who Founded and Gifted Patagonia.”
We’ve also got NPR jumping on the Yvon-Chouinard-white-savior-rhetoric bandwagon by offering the headline, “The Founder of Patagonia is Giving His Company Away to Help Fight Climate Change.”
There’s a lot of information to glean about something when you look at who’s getting excited about it. The majority of the people who are applauding this news are fellow white people.
One would think that Yvon Chouinard is giving away his fortune to pay reparations to Black people by the way folks are re-tweeting these headlines and calling him “legend” in the comments on Patagonia’s Instagram post.
However, in reality, Yvon Chouinard created his own, entirely new trust, The Patagonia Purpose Trust, and non-profit, the Holdfast Collective.
In his letter, Chouinard breaks down how this process will work:
“100% of the company’s voting stock transfers to the Patagonia Purpose Trust, created to protect the company’s values; and 100% of the nonvoting stock had been given to the Holdfast Collective, a nonprofit dedicated to fighting the environmental crisis and defending nature. The funding will come from Patagonia: Each year, the money we make after reinvesting in the business will be distributed as a dividend to help fight the crisis.
The Holdfast Collective and the Patagonia Purpose Trust are Patagonia’s new owners. The Holdfast Collective owns 98% of the company and all of the nonvoting stock. The Patagonia Purpose Trust owns 2% of the company and all of the voting stock.”
The Holdfast Collective is a 501(c)(4). Now, what the fuck does that mean? Great question.
According to the California Association of Nonprofits website: “‘C4s’ -- short for 501(c)(4) nonprofits -- ‘are going to play a very large role in electoral politics,’ commented nonprofit attorney Rosemary Fei... There are frequently valid and compelling reasons for 501(c)(3) nonprofits to start their own C4s, but at the same time, C4 organizations are also vulnerable to abuse in elections, so having a C4 affiliate can raise concerns for some. C4s can endorse candidates and they might not have to disclose their donors.”
When it came to making the decision about what to do with the business Chouinard wrote, “...there were no good options available. So, we created our own…Instead of ‘going public’, you could say we’re ‘going purpose.’” But really, he’s just another “philanthropic” billionaire getting creative about how to wield his wealth and influence U.S. elections.
According to Opoyi.com, 501(c)(4) corporations have “...attracted criticism in recent years because it allows nonprofits to spend untaxed donations to influence politics while concealing donors’ names.”
Joe Whitson, a PhD scholar who focuses on environmental justice in outdoor recreation, shared these reflections on Twitter: “This move signals that Patagonia is about to ramp up its political lobbying in a big way, something the Outdoor Industry Association (OIA) has been encouraging its members to do. This will probably focus on both climate change and public land legislation.
And Patagonia is deeply invested in a specific vision for public lands, one that obviously favors recreation and conservation (kind of), but is also complicit in ongoing settler colonialism, keeping land under the frankly precarious stewardship of the state. Decolonial and Indigenized visions for public land and American environmentalism abound, but they are already muffled by the social and political power of companies like Patagonia, and the Holdfast Collective will only increase this disparity.”
Whitney McGuire, co-founder of Sustainable Brooklyn, professor, attorney, writer, and public speaker, also expressed skepticism and valid critique about the immediate celebration of Patagonia’s announcement. In a post on Instagram, McGuire wrote, “...it’s just wild to me how quick so many are to celebrate the moving of funds from a family to a family-managed trust/501(c)(4).”
McGuire then asked a series of important and burning questions that many of us have been wondering, “What is the Holdfast Collective? Who are its members/board members? What projects have they financed/donated for climate justice? How is the money being distributed?”
These questions have yet to be answered, and only time will tell who will make up the Holdfast Collective.
It seems excessively clear that this was an on-brand scheme for Yvon Chouinard and family to avoid huge federal estate and gift taxes in order to make unlimited political donations. Creating 501(c)(4)s are an increasingly popular tactic that billionaires from both sides of the political spectrum (right or left) partake in. Read more about this from the New York Times in their recent article, “Philanthropy, the Billionaire’s Way.”
Julieta Caldas points out in her essay “Philanthropy is a Scam,” published in Tribune Mag, that “charitable giving among the super-rich has one goal, and it isn't to change the world – it's to keep it exactly the way it is.”
“This self-fulfilling cycle—capitalism creates wealth, and thereby inequality, and thereby the conditions for the rich to spend surplus money on helping the poor, without ever alleviating poverty—dates back (Bishop points out) to the Renaissance, when both capitalism and philanthropy were born,” writes Caldas. Billionaire philanthropy is “...a new window-dressing for the creation of extreme wealth and the expansion of corporate influence over politics and private life.”
Although the message they want the public to hear is that they’re giving up their wealth and power to take an “unprecedented” stand for the vague goal of fighting the climate crisis, the Chouinard family will still control the company. According to the questions answered on their website, “The family will guide the Patagonia Purpose Trust, electing and overseeing its leadership. Family members will continue to sit on Patagonia’s board, along with Kris Tompkins, Dan Emmett, Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson, Charles Conn (chair of the board), and Ryan Gellert, our CEO. The family will also guide the philanthropic work performed by the Holdfast Collective.”
Yvon Chouinard, (along with his power, influence, and concentrated wealth), isn’t going anywhere. He’s not going to just give up his authority, go live in a smaller house, and start paying his employees an actual thriving wage (when he very well could). All of the excess profit from the business will go to the Holdfast Collective. The website reads: “Funding for the Collective will come from Patagonia: Each year, excess profits—money we make after reinvesting in the business (including money we want to save for unforeseen events, like a pandemic)—will be distributed as a dividend to the Collective to be used for its work.”
But where were those excess profits going before? In all of the years that Patagonia has been in business, and in all of the years that Chouinard has been making himself a comfy, cushy billionaire, where have those excess profits gone? To his second home in Jackson Hole, Wyoming?
Many Patagonia employees are still having to work multiple jobs and live with several housemates in some of the most expensive cities in the country in order to make ends meet. This is pretty much the norm for any outdoor retail job, as well as in climbing gyms, but just because it’s the “norm” doesn’t make it okay.
Chouinard has yet to make the link between the housing crisis and the climate crisis, but maybe if he did see the connection he would be able to address the root cause of climate change: white supremacy — a truth that Black feminists, activists, and scholars have been laying bare for centuries.
The fact that the majority of Patagonia employees are white is no mistake or coincidence. Patagonia has had a history of “white bro culture,” and exclusivity, not only because of it’s expensive price tag, but because Chouinard has done very little if anything to combat his, or the company’s, collusion with white, cisheteropatriarchy and gentrification. With stores in places like Portland, Oregon, San Francisco, California, Chicago, Illinois, Atlanta, Georgia, and Honolulu, Hawaii, Patagonia actively contributes to gentrification and the displacement of Black and Indigenous residents.
Young, white people are less likely to need a higher wage because they have help from their families, intergenerational wealth, or they haven’t been victims of predatory lending/credit cards. Even more, people employed in the outdoor industry are so distracted by the discounts on gear, and the marketing of an “inclusive” company culture, that they don’t quite understand the scale of their exploitation, so they’re quicker to take these lower-paying jobs without questioning their pay. How is it okay that Chouinard has two homes while many of his employees are barely able to afford rent, bills, and save for an emergency?
Weshoyot Alvitre, a Tongva (Los Angeles Basin) and Scottish comic book artist and illustrator, also expressed concern when it came to the question of where Patagonia’s excess funds were going to be funneled. Alvitre wrote a comment in response to the Slow Factory’s Instagram post about the Patagonia announcement:
“So when are they going to support the Indigenous people whose land they encourage people to partake in outdoor ‘lifestyles and adventure’ on? Curious what the thoughts are on the fact that the majority of their product is manufactured from petroleum based materials as well, regardless if recycled. It still produces micro-pollution, is being absorbed into buyers’ bodies, and is non-biodegradable, so still contributes to a rather large footprint of environmental damage…”
No company can be perfectly sustainable inside of capitalism, but no company is as good as painting themselves as “one of the good guys” as Patagonia. Patagonia’s consistent and cheesy effort to build a brand around being rebellious, ethical, and just, when it has failed so miserably to connect the dots between social, racial, and climate justice, invites loud criticism. Many Black and Indigenous activists and leaders have asked, where was Patagonia during Standing Rock? Where was Patagonia during Ferguson or Flint?
Chouinard became overtly political when as white people we started noticing that our interests and human rights were being threatened by the Trump administration — when we realized that the U.S. government in general isn’t, and was never, here to truly protect any of us. But still, Chouinard believes the current order of the United States government is the way to end the climate crisis, which is why he created a 501(c)(4) to influence politicians. This couldn’t be further from the solution because politicians will not save us. Abolition is the answer.
Jolie Varela, founder of Indigenous Women Hike, has always been unapolegtically outspoken about the hypocrisy of the outdoor industry. She often offers her community a behind-the-scenes look at the communications she’s had with many outdoor brands. Varela is Nüümü and Yokuts, a hiker, water protector, and land defender who’s homeland is Payahüünadü, the place of flowing water, also known as Owens Valley, or Bishop, California. She recently spoke about the Patagonia news on her Instagram stories and shared a personal anecdote about her relationship with the company:
“Full transparency–our first Indigenous Women’s Fly Fishing Retreat happened largely because we received a grant from Patagonia. IWH was approached/invited to apply for a grant. Did I put a shit ton of thought into IWH receiving this money? ABSOLUTELY. It is beyond important to me to make sure that where our funding is coming from feels right. My first thought was Patagonia is a corporation. Myself and many people I know cannot afford or fit their clothing.
…I was very upfront with how I was feeling about the potential of receiving the grant and about their clothing being inaccessible in different ways. I was told later that my fiscal sponsor who is the Owens Valley Indian Water Commission didn’t show up as a National non-profit because they’re a tribal non-profit. They asked if I would be able to find a different sponsor. I said, ‘Absolutely not. I appreciate your consideration, but will not consider a new fiscal sponsor.’ I was actually appalled at the ask.
They called and asked again. My answer didn’t change. Then they asked for a meeting. We had a Zoom meeting where they said they realized that this was a spot where they needed to do better and that they would set a precedent with IWH. That felt right to me and I applied for and was awarded the grant.”
In her next post, Varela expressed skepticism and hesitancy to give Patagonia “pats on the back for what people should already be doing…I want to see MORE support for Indigenous peoples/communities who are on the frontlines, who put their lives on the line to protect this Earth. I want to see LANDBACK to Native people and not just donated to expand or create more National Parks.”
Varela went on to explain that she had spoken with a handful of Native people who have felt supported by Patagonia, but that this doesn’t mean that all Native organizations or people have felt the same.
Another important and crucial message Varela shared is that: “FAT PEOPLE RECREATE TOO. Even if I could afford a jacket I wouldn’t be able to fit one. So this just makes me think who are these clothes being made for? Are they the standard of who belongs in the outdoors? Not just for Patagonia, but any outdoor brand that isn’t making plus size clothing yet.”
How can Patagonia be considered ethical, just, and inclusive at all when they don’t even provide sizing for fat people? If only Patagonia gave money directly to Indigenous Women Hike and other organizations that are engaging in grassroots endeavors to dismantle white supremacy and ongoing colonization in the outdoor industry, but instead Yvon Chouinard…donated to himself.
For all of the resources and education that Patagonia has access to, one would think these gaps between their spoken values and actual actions would be addressed, especially after the global uprisings of the Black Lives Matter movement in 2020. It appears “business unusual” isn’t really living up to its promise. It is an asinine distraction from the real movements and leaders of climate justice like Varela, to believe that a corporation like Patagonia can be anti-oppressive, ethical, justice-oriented, or sustainable.
Creating the trust and the collective doesn’t mean that Chouinard won’t stop making money from the business. He’s going to continue to live and die in extreme wealth, and so will his lineage.
The United States is home to 735 billionaires, with a combined worth of $4.7 trillion according to Forbes. A billion is one-thousand millions. It’s extremely hard to fathom or imagine this, right?
This past April, The Daily put out a podcast episode titled, “How Many Billionaire’s Are There Anyway?” In the episode Willy Staley, a New York Times editor, talked about their Money Issue, and how they took a closer look at the billionaire class.
“One million seconds is 12 days,” says Staley. “A billion seconds is 31 years.” In an effort to demystify this egregious amount of money, Mona Chalabi, illustrator and journalist for the New York Times, came up with creative ways to imagine what Jeff Bezos’ net worth is. Some of her brilliant parallels include:
If Bezos gave away just 1.9% of his wealth, he could pay for Pre-K for every child in America for a year.
The average full-time Amazon worker making $37,930 would have had to have started working in the Pliocene Epoch, 4.5 million years ago, in order to make as much as Bezos.
Bezos’s wealth is to the median American’s as a 5’7 man is to a .00017 cm speck of fingernail dust.
It takes 4.5 hours to make a bagel from scratch. In this time, Bezos makes enough money to afford every person in Brooklyn and Queens a bagel.
Yvon Chouinard might not have as high of a net worth as Jeff Bezos who clocks in at $151.9 billion, but this illustrates the impact that Chouinard could have if he just gave his money directly to the people who need it most. But you can’t make any immediate return on investment by doing that, so he won’t.
We all deserve to live in comfort and have a high quality of life, but billionaires make their wealth by exploiting low-wage workers and extracting from the Earth. To glorify and applaud Chouinard as some kind of environmentalist hero, or “philosopher-king,” is delusional.
Has Patagonia given grants to a handful of amazing Black and Indigenous orgs and non-profits?
Yes.
Are they no longer centering whiteness on their blog and media?
Not really.
Do they possibly have less cis white dudes working in their stores?
Does it really matter? Like The Comrade Closet on Instagram has pointed out:
“In any workplace where white people retain most of the leadership positions, control the decision making (especially over who gets hired and fired), and are overall receiving the largest share of pay, “diversification” efforts are really just tokenization.”
To further drive home the point of Patagonia’s hypocrisy when it comes to their spoken values, during the pandemic I was told by an anonymous and trusted source that one of Patagonia’s retail stores were exploitative and neglectful of the needs of women of color and disabled employees.
It would be hard to believe that this was an isolated instance.
When I called several stores across the U.S. and asked about the company culture and if any instances of white supremacy or toxic masculinity have come up, and if so, how were they addressed, many employees were incredibly vague and unsure of how, or if they were even allowed, to respond. This kind of haziness is embedded in our society and is used not only to protect a corporation like Patagonia, but all places of work. In capitalism you are indoctrinated into a sense of loyalty to your employer. And if you happen to be someone who is attuned to this brainwashing you know that you could risk your job, face harassment, or worse, experience violence, if you were to speak out against them. For Black and Brown women the consequences of speaking your truth at work, or about your place of work, are exponential.
One Patagonia employee who I spoke with on the phone gave me this defensive, but revealing response:
“I think you need to go to our website and do some more research because we’re really at the forefront of that sort of thing. We’re an incredibly inclusive place to work. We try to make it feel really welcome here.
That being said, have there been instances in the past? Absolutely. But it was addressed swiftly and seriously…It’s a pretty positive place to work.”
It didn’t seem swift or serious when I spoke with the aforementioned two employees about their experiences who wish to remain anonymous. It’s a bit unsettling when you ask a few simple and understandable questions about a corporation and receive such unyielding, prickly adoration in response.
Patagonia’s promise, “to fight the climate crisis,” is extremely vague. If the money isn’t going to Black and Indigenous grassroots organizations and movements who have been, and are, on the ground for Climate Justice then this money will go to waste.
Do not applaud cis white men for doing nothing. Chouinard is not making any sacrifices. This decision doesn’t harm him or his family’s wealth. It’s not revolutionary or even generous. It’s really not even the bare minimum. It’s a PR move.
Just like in 2011 when Patagonia ran a full-page ad in The New York Times with the message, “Don’t Buy This Jacket,” paired with an image of a classic Patagonia fleece, sales are now going to sky-rocket for this business. Chouinard is going to continue to reap the benefits of this, plus he gets to look like a “good white person” and an “ally.” We already know from anti-racist educators like Ericka Hart that “good white people” don’t exist, and that being an ally is an action not an identity.
Yvon Chouinard’s legacy is not one of “do-gooding,” it is one of capitalist, exploitative entrepreneurship.
