“Branding” per se, bears a costly responsibility with respect to brand protection as well as offering a panoply of alternatives for constructing a suitable and effective brand identity. Your essay lead me to drill deeper here than preciously.

Whether or not one goes that route, management of CULTURAL PROPERTIES (as opposed to ownership of commercial and intellectual properties) and protecting them from counterfeiting and dilution.

Look at Capitalism from the point of view of branding. Adam Smith was the benchmark when I was on Grandpa’s knee and few recalled Bernard de Mandeville the dutch theorist whom Hutchenson drafted Smith to rebut.

De Mandeville build on the foundations of the existing mercantilist model and gave us the Moral Neutality that is much associated with modern Capitalism

Smith was recruited from the Field of Moral Philosophy and the author of Moral Sentiments and personally distributed every penny of his earnings before he passed on into his community to foster growth at the fundamental level where he thought best

Today most people whether in support or opposition use a model closer to de Mandeville’s than Smith’s to bolster their arguments, Branding is a new phenomenon and Capitalists has largely lost control over their brands.

Almost all of the oldest institutions have suffered similar redefinition by well intentioned and self-concerned advocates of what most honestly believed that they understood.

Science is already better prepared than most fields to maintain control over language use in the disciplines. Precision is demanded. Sill any field where success may be had includes sycophants, masqueraders and naive believers, even the sciences. Caution and study is advised.