The Billionaire Right-Winger
For decades,
the Koch brothers, billionaire heirs of one of the largest privately held
companies in the United States, have covertly sought to promote their
hard-right ideology through third parties, think tanks, foundations and front
groups. Their late father, Fred, having earned a fortune assisting the nascent
Soviet oil industry, eventually became a right-wing extremist and member of the
John Birch Society. His sons, especially David Koch, have not only expanded the
family business, but also infiltrated their father's political views into the
mainstream.
Happily for
them, the expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars on nonprofit and
"educational" ventures has served their corporate priorities
perfectly. While Mayer cites many examples of self-serving Koch philanthropy
that matches their more direct program of buying politicians and policies, the
enterprise that is currently most pertinent is the tea party movement.
Although the
Kochs cannot be said to directly control the tea party outfits, they have
succeeded in infusing their priorities, strategies and ideas into the movement
through an organization called Americans for Prosperity [which has a Wisconsin
chapter]. Typically, a Koch Industries spokeswoman sought to deny that David
Koch, his brother Charles, their company or their foundations have funded the
tea parties—and technically that may be true. David Koch says he has never
attended a tea party event and that nobody representing the tea party "has
ever even approached me."
Tea
Party’s Corporate Interests
It certainly
seems unlikely that David Koch has ever encountered any of the folks who turn
up at a typical tea party event or that he has ever showed up at a congressional
town hall meeting to scream about health care reform. He lives on Park Avenue
in a 9,000-square-foot duplex apartment and spends his time cultivating elitist
Manhattan society with donations to New York cultural institutions, notably the
ballet. He used to divide his time between a yacht in the south of France and a
palatial home in the Hamptons, where he hosted "an East Coast version of
Hugh Hefner's soirees" in the clothes-optional Playboy mansion.
In short,
Mr. Koch is not exactly a pitchfork populist and has no interest in mingling
with such unfashionable types. He also doesn't care much what they think. A
former Koch adviser told The New Yorker
that the Kochs back the tea party movement for the most cynical reasons.
"This right-wing, redneck stuff works for them. They see this as a way to
get things done without getting dirty themselves."
The kind of
things that the Kochs want to "get done"—aside from advancing their
social profile in places like the Upper East Side—mostly involve reducing taxes
and regulations on themselves and their companies.
If they had
their way, Social Security and Medicare would disappear tomorrow, and so would
any other program that benefits families without a billion dollars at their
disposal. So would the Environmental Protection Agency, the Clean Air Act and
every other obstacle to corporations’ massive effusions of deadly filth.
Lately, they have been trying to prevent stricter regulation of formaldehyde, a
known carcinogen, because their company produces enormous amounts of the stuff
for commercial use.
Bruce
Bartlett, a conservative economist and historian who worked at one of the many
right-wing think tanks funded by Koch money, believes that the Koch brothers
are "trying to shape and control and channel the populist uprising into
their own policies." Perhaps the tea party activists should take a harder
look at those policies—and try to figure out whether the national interest
truly coincides with the avaricious, destructive attitude of these
"libertarians."
© 2010 Creators.com



You neglect to mention that Jane Mayer wrote an article in 2004, also published in the New Yorker, titled "The Money Man- Can George Soros' Millions insure the defeat of President Bush?" In that case, Mayer seemed just fine with the injection of money from the ultra-wealthy into American politics. Also, this article skips over the fact that the Kochs donate billions (literally, billions) to cancer research, museums, the ACLU, and a myriad of other causes, many of them seemingly left-wing. Your bias is truly disgusting and only serves to empower and invigorate those of us who want to see a press that serves the public, a fourth estate in the true sense of the phrase. And by the way- the Koch brothers spend their money in some cases to benefit themselves and their companies. Who doesn't? And who donates as much as the Koch brothers to medical research and the arts? Certainly not George Soros...
I agree with Political Pygmalion completely. Not to mention how much money the Kenedy's have poured into american politics. What we need is strict term limits and bring this government back to "Of the people, By the people and For the people! All politicians better wake up to the fact that we have had enough and arent going to take it anymore. I gould go on but you get my piont.
The Koch Brothers have also contributed $1 million to back Prop 23 in California, a ballot initiative that would repeal clean air standards in the state.
The Koch Brothers represent what a happens when wealth becomes concentrated in the hands of a few. Money is power, and allows those who decide to wield their weath to hi-jack democracy.
In California, former E-Bay CEO Meg Whitman has spent well over $100 million thus far to buy her way into the Governor's office.
In Wisconsin, Ron Johnson's self-financed campaign against Russ Feingold also reflects this twisted notion that "money = free speech".
We need strict (and radical) campaign finance reform in this country, and apparently it needs to come via constitutional ammendment, considering Supreme Court decisions about the issue.
Perhaps not realistic any time soon, but until the working class wakes up and realizes that it can not afford to allow the great disparities of wealth that exist in this country to continue, we are going to see our thin facade of democracy fade into absolute plutocracy.
How ironic that you begin your article lamenting the lack of honest political journalism and then proceed to engage in the most superficial of political journalism. Â "If they had their way, Social Security and Medicare would disappear tomorrow, and so would any other program that benefits families without a billion dollars at their disposal." Â Really? Â You thought that was worthy of the ink and pixels it took to convey it to others? Â How slanted can you possibly be? Â You add no clarity to the discussion of politics in our country, choosing instead to color them further.
Â
First off, a libertarian is not some far-right conservative as you and other liberals seek to portray them to protect your political power. Â Instead, a libertarian is a person who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Â A libertarian supports individual freedom and self-governance; the principles of our country's founding. Â A libertarian would support gay marriage, lower taxes, civil liberties and less government regulation. Â No wonder you have trouble understanding their position. Â Plus, you really don't want to.
Â
Second, the Kochs support truly free markets. Â Nothing is more difficult and more damaging to the profits of a company like theirs than real competition. Â It drives prices and profits lower, providing higher quality goods and services to customers at lower and lower prices. Â The Kochs support free markets because they understand that no other system of social coordination in human history has ever permanently lifted as many people out of poverty as free market capitalism. Â That's what you claim to want, but are unwilling to look at the facts of what actually achieves the goals you claim to hold dear.
Â
You are a contributor to the problem, not part of the solution you claim to want. Â Yours is a truly destructive form is intellectual dishonesty. Â Try harder, do better.
Another piece of crap, written by a moron. You should get a real job.