This post has been read 229 times!

March 29, 2026- by Steven Greer

Larry Fink, the CEO of BlackRock, likely sees his window of opportunity to take over the world is shrinking. In desperation, he is delivering comments through propaganda outlets he controls, such as Fox News.

Fink has a surprisingly poor ability to speak publicly. He has a noticeable lisp and delivers halting sentences that sound awkward for someone running the world’s largest asset managing company. Combined with his smug demeanor, he projects the image of an arrogant, unlikeable, elitist freak whose tone drips with self-importance while rewriting his own record.

In this Fox News interview, Larry Fink appears to be revising history. He frames BlackRock’s earlier heavy push into ESG as merely responding to client demands, while downplaying the firm’s aggressive leadership. He portrays the “woke era” as something that went too far externally, without acknowledging BlackRock’s central role in amplifying it.

Direct quotes from the transcript highlight his pivot:

– On the “woke era”: “Do I believe five years ago was too far? Yes.”

– On fiduciary duty: “I’ve got to be a fiduciary to everybody who gives us money… It is their money.”

– On pragmatism: “Today, because of AI… it cannot just be hydrocarbons.”

What “Fiduciary” Means:

As a fiduciary, Fink and BlackRock must manage clients’ money solely in the clients’ best financial interests, with a duty of loyalty and prudence. They cannot put the firm’s agendas or third-party causes first. This is required by ERISA Section 404(a), which demands fiduciaries act “solely in the interest of the participants and beneficiaries,” and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, Section 206.

Promoting ESG Was the Opposite of Fiduciary Duty

Promoting ESG, pressuring companies on DEI, climate activism, and non-financial goals directly contradicted fiduciary duty. BlackRock used its voting power to force social agendas over shareholder returns. This harmed the bottom line and led to the phrase “go woke, go broke.” BlackRock violated its obligations for years by prioritizing ideology over client returns.

How BlackRock Promoted ESG:

BlackRock did not invent ESG (traced to a 2004 UN report), but became its most powerful amplifier in the late 2010s. Fink’s 2020 letter declared climate change “a fundamental reshaping of finance” and pushed stakeholder capitalism: “A company cannot achieve long-term profits without embracing purpose.” BlackRock launched ESG products and used its scale to influence corporations until backlash forced a retreat.

BlackRock is the Biggest Threat to the Free World:

Larry Fink correctly notes that BlackRock invests money “for everybody”, literally. Together with State Street and Vanguard, the “Big Three” manage over $25–30 trillion. Through index funds and ETFs, they hold large stakes in nearly every major U.S. and global public company. Their proxy voting power gives them enormous control over boards and policies.

From his tone, Fink speaks as if he controls the private sector. He is an unelected social misfit who became the de facto leader of the free world.

Most Americans work for companies either directly of indirectly controlled by Larry Fink. They face CRT and DEI brainwashing that labels whites as racists from birth. Expressing private opinions on social media can get them fired.

Fink is now openly showing his agenda by running the WEF. It is no longer a conspiracy that he pursues James Bond Blofeld-villain global plans. He is not just managing money, he is driving a New World Order and Agenda 2030.

Grandiose Fink thinks he steers the planet. His insincere shift to “pragmatism” looks like a crafted PR pivot to address the “go woke, go broke” negative image.

While the world focuses on Epstein files and the Iran war, the Democrat party surges in polls and will likely take control after the midterm elections this Fall. Fink, et al are winning.

Their color revolution tactics surge. The goal is to enclave the masses by controlling food supplies, stealing private land, and making everyone else poor.

Along with the agenda to make us all eat bugs, they have:

– In December 2024, a color revolution event killed much of the chicken supply and egg prices skyrocketed to hurt Trump as he took office.

– BlackRock policies reduce cow numbers, driving beef prices higher. BlackRock owns meat processing monopolies to exert its plan.

– The Federal Reserve prints money and keeps inflation high.

– Data centers seize rural land and destroy middle America.

– The First Amendment is eroded. Like fallen Great Britain and Canada, now USA police in communist cities are knocking on doors in Michigan and Miami over social media memes.

– The subversion of Christian culture using Islam is well underway. In New York, the openly communist Mayor Mamdani is blasting Muslim prayers five times daily in Brooklyn. Many parts of Minneapolis, Detroit, and elsewhere have “no go zones” where Sharia law is the rule of the land.

All of this is being fueled by puppet masters at BlackRock, also known as WEFrock. These well-organized subversive efforts take money. We now know that the money is coming from hundreds of billions of dollars of Medicare and Medicaid fraud. WEFrock NGOs are behind that.

WEFrock must be dissolved. If we do not stop egomaniacs like Larry Fink, we will become slaves living in concentration camps like the Chinese have already constructed. COVID 2020 lockdowns were a test run.

The good news is that Larry Fink himself exposes a mechanism to bring him down in this interview. WEFrock violates fiduciary duty. Therefore, every red Republican state AG should sue to break up BlackRock. They have violated their fiduciary duty.

_________________________

Update

I was right with this essay. BlackRock has been guilty of violating his fiduciary duties by pressuring other companies to adopt E.S.G.. The lawsuits are starting to mount up this year. That’s why Larry Fink was on Fox News trying to lie and revise history.

Grok

Yes, lawsuits have been filed that directly engage with arguments like those in your essay—specifically, that BlackRock (and sometimes other large asset managers) has used its influence, including proxy voting and shareholder activism, to advance ESG goals in ways that prioritize non-financial or socio-political outcomes over the purely financial best interests of investors or plan participants, potentially breaching fiduciary duties.

The most directly on-point case is the 2025 ERISA class-action ruling in Spence v. American Airlines, Inc. (N.D. Tex., opinion issued January 10, 2025). A former pilot sued American Airlines and its Employee Benefits Committee on behalf of ~100,000 plan participants, alleging breaches of the fiduciary duties of loyalty and prudence under ERISA. The core claim was that the plan fiduciaries allowed BlackRock Institutional Trust Company (as the investment manager for the plans’ passively managed index funds, holding billions in assets) to pursue a “pervasive ESG agenda” through proxy voting and shareholder activism. This allegedly “covertly convert[ed] the [retirement] [p]lan’s core index portfolios to ESG funds,” harming participants by focusing on socio-political outcomes (e.g., climate goals, board diversity, net-zero commitments) rather than exclusively maximizing financial returns.

After a four-day bench trial, the court ruled that American Airlines breached its fiduciary duty of loyalty (but not prudence). It found that the plan fiduciaries failed to act “solely in the retirement plan’s best financial interests” by allowing their own corporate ESG interests and BlackRock’s ESG activism to influence plan management. The opinion explicitly details BlackRock’s ESG-driven proxy votes (e.g., supporting dissident directors at Exxon in 2021 over climate demands, voting against energy company directors for insufficient climate progress) and notes that BlackRock’s stewardship guidelines and public statements (including CEO Larry Fink’s letters) revealed non-pecuniary priorities, such as companies needing to “benefit all of their stakeholders” beyond profits. The court emphasized that “ESG investing is a strategy that considers or pursues a non-pecuniary interest as an end itself rather than as a means to some financial end,” and that BlackRock’s approach created conflicts (e.g., BlackRock’s significant ownership in American Airlines stock and debt). Defendants “turned a blind eye” to this, including ignoring missing proxy-voting attestations.

This ruling closely tracks the fiduciary-duty violation concerns in your essay (e.g., BlackRock using scale and proxy power to force ESG/DEI/climate agendas on portfolio companies at the expense of shareholder value). It didn’t sue BlackRock directly (the defendants were the plan sponsor), but the court’s findings heavily criticize BlackRock’s practices as the root cause.

A more recent direct challenge to BlackRock itself came in Crognale v. Fink (E.D. Tex., filed February 9, 2026). This stockholder derivative suit (on behalf of BlackRock, Inc.) accuses CEO Laurence Fink and other directors/executives of breaching their fiduciary duties to BlackRock’s shareholders. The claims center on authorizing and overseeing an alleged coordinated ESG-driven campaign (including proxy voting and participation in initiatives like Climate Action 100+ and Net Zero Asset Managers) to pressure coal producers to cut output. This allegedly prioritized environmental goals over maximizing financial returns, exposed BlackRock to massive antitrust and reputational harm, and involved misleading investors about the non-ESG nature of some funds. It ties explicitly to the ongoing multistate antitrust litigation (see below) and seeks damages, governance reforms, and other relief.

Separately, a high-profile multistate antitrust and consumer-protection lawsuit filed in late 2024 by Texas AG Ken Paxton and other Republican-led states (Texas et al. v. BlackRock, Inc. et al., E.D. Tex.) targets BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street. It alleges they conspired via ESG commitments (e.g., net-zero initiatives) to use their collective shareholdings in coal companies to reduce production and raise energy prices—conduct framed as anticompetitive market manipulation rather than pure fiduciary stewardship. While primarily antitrust-based, it echoes fiduciary-duty concerns raised in earlier AG letters (threatening breaches of duties of care/loyalty for prioritizing non-financial ESG over client returns). Vanguard settled in February 2026 (paying $29.5 million and agreeing to stronger “passivity” commitments on ESG and investor proxy voting); claims against BlackRock and State Street remain pending as of early 2026.

Earlier actions, such as Tennessee’s 2023 consumer-protection suit against BlackRock, alleged misleading statements about the role (or lack thereof) of ESG in its strategies, with indirect ties to fiduciary implications for investors.

These cases show that courts, plaintiffs, and state AGs have indeed “figured it out” and pursued claims aligning with your essay’s core thesis on ESG-driven fiduciary breaches via proxy voting and activism. No lawsuit has yet resulted in BlackRock’s dissolution or criminal prosecution by state/federal authorities (your essay’s stronger call), but the Spence ruling and Crognale suit represent significant judicial and shareholder pushback. Outcomes are still evolving—e.g., remedies in Spence and the antitrust case’s status could have broader ripple effects on asset managers. If you’d like links to the full opinions/complaints or updates on any specific case, let me know!