A foundation's mission is, let's say, to promote democracy, prosperity and freedom around the globe. Which, if any, of the following investments contradict that social purpose? Which if any support that mission?
Can't tell, or I can't, because none of us know how to best spread democracy around the globe. Maybe you do have to impose it by lies, perception management, treachery and violence. The investment committee of the foundation may have an opinion. Isn't it their call how to invest the funds, with what balance of financial and social purposes, however malignant in the eyes of third party critics? Isn't this part of having an open civil society, that some foundations will support missions we disagree with and invest in companies who do things we don't personally like? I say this as a good Marxist-Leninist. When it comes to the contradictions of capitalism, you can't just wring your hands and complain about foundation investments. You have to organize the Proletariat and throw a wrench into the whole machine, wrecking the failed capitalist project in toto. Only then, Lucy, when there are no stocks and bonds, but everything is owned by the State, will we have true Freedom.