Corporate engagement with society takes multiple political forms that differ in visibility and partisanship. CSR is generally nonpartisan, ranging from routine, low-visibility practices to highly publicized cause initiatives. Corporate Political Activity (CPA) is partisan but low in publicity, encompassing lobbying and political contributions, while Corporate Sociopolitical Activism (CSA) is both partisan and public—yet typically punished by investors who view it as a diversion from profit-oriented objectives. Political ideology also shapes firms’ adoption of stakeholder capitalism: research shows that more liberal executives and Democratic-leaning corporate environments are associated with stronger CSR and ESG performance, whereas conservative top teams are less likely to endorse progressive causes. Inequality within firms further illustrates the political dimensions of corporate behavior. CEO-to-worker pay ratios have surged—from 20:1 in the 1970s to an average of 268:1 today—yet liberal CEOs are more inclined to reduce pay disparities, especially when empowered by supportive, ideologically aligned boards. CSR Backtracking is a very recent phenomenon which appears to be affected by political ideology as well. According to my recent research on this novel topic (research still in progress), we find (with Adam A. Kay at USF, Muma School of Business) that CSR backtracking is penalized, and this effect is driven by liberals—interestingly, social conservatives appear indifferent—we attribute this indifference to expectations-violation theory; their expectations are confirmed, in that they expect firms to backtrack, which makes them largely indifferent.