Apologies if I'm missing the mark on your question. If the first step is "apoliticism or we'll help you find the door" then isn't a potential next step "amoral

Apologies if I'm missing the mark on your question. If the first step is "apoliticism or we'll help you find the door" then isn't a potential next step "amorality or we'll help you..."? Again not arguing that any CEO should nurture activism (though I personally might like it), but healthy dissent is important for solving hard problems, and not every hard problem is purely logical. If my company's mission is to create an open financial system for the world, how can we possibly do that without holding space for the multitude of values, beliefs, and political opinions across the world about financial systems? Seems one way would be to take an amoral stance on the multitudes and stick to a tightly held definition of what an open financial system means.