The hyperbole isn't helping the case. It is true that companies are not required to "pursue profit at the expense of everything else". But it is also true tha

The hyperbole isn't helping the case. It is true that companies are not required to "pursue profit at the expense of everything else". But it is also true that companies are held to legal standards that "include acting to promote the value of the corporation for the benefit of its stockholders" (Ebay v Newmark). This was famously weaponized against Craigslist several years ago, who were successfully sued over their refusal to let shareholders change corporate culture.