I don't know why we would have debates on whether we should "laud" things or not. How about regulating things, rather than having debates about who or what should be praised? Companies aren't dogs or children. I personally get very little from either the praise or condemnation of anonymous strangers.
Not really directed at you, I'm just sick of the idea that if we all get together and declare things good or bad, that's some sort of accomplishment. People who do well do well through ignoring the irrelevant and immaterial comments of busybodies and bikeshedders.
Moral exists and you can aim for a virtuous life in an Aristotelian way and are free to think people who strive for that should be admired. I am at this point in my life of an opinion opposite to yours. What people do is not neutral and people who abuse system or knowingly profit from harmful systems have a negative impact on our society as a whole and it is legitimate to see their actions as bad.
I'm struggling with this personally as I decide whether or not to work for unethical companies in exchange for life-changing compensation.
Overall I think my suffering-footprint is tiny compared to most so maybe I'm okay with being a bit more unethical in some areas of my life. But I'm unsure.
Agree - ideally it would be better if everyone just did their own thing and was valued by society for their contribution.
The comment is much more as a counterpoint to the existing dogma of valuing an individual's contribution to society primarily based on ability to amass capital (i.e. splashy magazine covers based on net worth - which often translates to percentage ownership of a company valued on the price paid by the last marginal buyer).
Not really directed at you, I'm just sick of the idea that if we all get together and declare things good or bad, that's some sort of accomplishment. People who do well do well through ignoring the irrelevant and immaterial comments of busybodies and bikeshedders.