Dark money is funded conservative students on campus

[RavenSky]

My theory is this: the right has rarely been able to spontaneously mobilize people without a lot of money from rich backers, so they naturally assume that's the only possible explanation for large groups of people mobilizing on the left. It's hard for them to fathom the idea of people independently joining together in solidarity without a top-down infusion of resources and marching orders from an authority figure. They view any kind of organized progressive movement through this lens, which is why Derec still thinks anybody who tweets #BLM is reading from some kind of sinister playbook that gets handed out by Al Sharpton every month, and why whichphilosophy thinks Marxism had anything to do with women not liking the direction of the new administration. These outlandish rationalizations somehow make more sense to them than the existence of a bunch of people with loosely related, overlapping, heterogeneous views making noise for a variety of reasons.

This is actually the best explanation I have heard of the phenomenon.

I agree

 

[whichphilosophy]

Do you really think left-wing groups on campus are not astroturfed by the likes of George Soros?

I could answer but that would violate my confidentiality clause of my contract with the Cuban and Chinese Communist parties.

You missed out North Korea.

I'm sure that the various shades of left centre and right receive funding

 

[whichphilosophy]

What is it with the right, especially the alt right and Soros? I've never understood it.

My theory is this: the right has rarely been able to spontaneously mobilize people without a lot of money from rich backers, so they naturally assume that's the only possible explanation for large groups of people mobilizing on the left. It's hard for them to fathom the idea of people independently joining together in solidarity without a top-down infusion of resources and marching orders from an authority figure. They view any kind of organized progressive movement through this lens, which is why Derec still thinks anybody who tweets #BLM is reading from some kind of sinister playbook that gets handed out by Al Sharpton every month, and why whichphilosophy thinks Marxism had anything to do with women not liking the direction of the new administration. These outlandish rationalizations somehow make more sense to them than the existence of a bunch of people with loosely related, overlapping, heterogeneous views making noise for a variety of reasons.

It's not a matter of thinking Marxism did; they say did in some cases or were quoted lrft wing websites and their own writings.
This is referring to the Women's March thread.

 

[untermensche]

What is it with the right, especially the alt right and Soros? I've never understood it.

My theory is this: the right has rarely been able to spontaneously mobilize people without a lot of money from rich backers, so they naturally assume that's the only possible explanation for large groups of people mobilizing on the left. It's hard for them to fathom the idea of people independently joining together in solidarity without a top-down infusion of resources and marching orders from an authority figure. They view any kind of organized progressive movement through this lens, which is why Derec still thinks anybody who tweets #BLM is reading from some kind of sinister playbook that gets handed out by Al Sharpton every month, and why whichphilosophy thinks Marxism had anything to do with women not liking the direction of the new administration. These outlandish rationalizations somehow make more sense to them than the existence of a bunch of people with loosely related, overlapping, heterogeneous views making noise for a variety of reasons.

The mind of the modern "conservative" is focused on their money. That is the center of their world. The stock ticker is all they watch.

They freely join together with other people who also only care about their money.

And they talk about their money.

And how they hate that they have to pay any taxes.

They are completely oblivious to the society around them that allows them to have any money.

It is really a waste of a life. No art, no philosophy, no wonder, no solidarity around any productive goal.

Except making and keeping more money.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

There is no need for the left to do that, because college student bodies inherently skew left. Contrary to the conspiracy theories of conservative snowflakes, this has nothing to do with commie profs brainwashing innocent minds.
It is because both caring about being educated and actually acquiring valid knowledge are anti-thetical to conservative values and ideas.

Also most college students haven't entered the professional workforce yet.

What is it with the right, especially the alt right and Soros? I've never understood it.

Same as the left and Koch.

 

[untermensche]

Same as the left and Koch.

You mean people who care about the environment and Koch.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

What is it with the right, especially the alt right and Soros? I've never understood it.

You must not be thinking clearly. You see, George Soros is a hedge fund manager who wants a stable, capitalist economy with a pro-corporate government. Therefore, he's taking money out of his profits to fund communist radicals in college across the country. What is so hard to understand about this?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Same as the left and Koch.

You mean people who care about the environment and Koch.

No that's not what I mean, thanks for playing and collect your consolation price.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Same as the left and Koch.

A lot of conservative politicians are secretly in it for Koch. Why shouldn't the "left" point that out?

 

[untermensche]

You mean people who care about the environment and Koch.

No that's not what I mean, thanks for playing and collect your consolation price.

They are the people who are opposed to them.

Destruction of the environment does not lead to liberty.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

unter, perhaps this is hard for you to understand.

Soros is to the Democrats as Koch is to the Republicans: billionaire funding their pet party. Many people who oppose Koch do so because Koch supports the "hated evil other party". I know, you think it is 100% environmentalists, but it isn't. A My significant chunk of Koch haters hate them because they fund the enemy party just like they like Soros because he funds the good party.

It's about party loyalty, starting and ending there. My team good, your team bad, that's their knowledge of party politics. That extends to why they hold their opinion on Soros or Koch.

 

[untermensche]

unter, perhaps this is hard for you to understand.

Soros is to the Democrats as Koch is to the Republicans: billionaire funding their pet party. Many people who oppose Koch do so because Koch supports the "hated evil other party". I know, you think it is 100% environmentalists, but it isn't. A significant chunk of Koch haters hate them because they fund the enemy party just like they like Soros because he funds the good party.

It's about party loyalty, starting and ending there.

The Koch's are doing serious damage. They are not only destroying the environment they are working to degrade what are already third rate social services. They are part of the modern oligarchy like Soros but much more destructive.

It doesn't take any party loyalist to vigorously oppose them.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So that's why you oppose Koch.

You think you are a majority of the public, but you aren't.

 

[untermensche]

So that's why you oppose Koch.

You think you are a majority of the public, but you aren't.

It is why they are despicable and why many people with no party affiliation oppose them.

How many people with no party affiliation think Soros is a significant problem? Sure the system he has used to get rich is despicable and many people oppose it, but what personal action or legislation supported by Soros is a problem?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

The Koch brothers as conservolibertarians (yes, one ran for VP as a Libertarian but they run in conservative circles) are selfish, greedy people who want to control government policy with $'s instead of votes by implementing selfish, greedy policies such as deregulation and that will of course effect the environment like it effects everything else.

 

[braces_for_impact]

As a result of the inherent liberal slant of reality, right wingers would have trouble winning popular vote elections at any respectable educational instution without a manipulative propaganda machine on their side.

I agree, in anything but a business school, and maybe law school. University campuses have always leaned left.

But there is left, and then there is the far out regressive SJW left. The safe space, patriarchy is everything etc left. That is cancer to society and to university. It is no better than the religdiots on the right.

The right has their own version of this too, it's just not seized upon by the left as a talking point. That blond to the right of the Tucker wannabee is Tomi Lahren, who's been dismissed from the blaze for...gasp...not considering abortion murder.

 

[Toni]

I agree, in anything but a business school, and maybe law school. University campuses have always leaned left.

But there is left, and then there is the far out regressive SJW left. The safe space, patriarchy is everything etc left. That is cancer to society and to university. It is no better than the religdiots on the right.

Have you been on a college campus? None of what the right wing says about campuses is actually true. "Safe space" simply means it is a place to discuss ideas and talk openly and respectfully.

The three university campuses where I have spent the most time are certainly not hotbeds of left leaning....anything. One did have a reputation as being very leftist but I never found that to be true. Last time I was on that campus, it had gone full on jock sports mad. I saw nothing much political, except some fliers for Campus Republicans.

Very few of the college professors I know would be considered 'left' of center by anyone other than a real right winger.

 

[PyramidHead]

unter, perhaps this is hard for you to understand.

Soros is to the Democrats as Koch is to the Republicans: billionaire funding their pet party. Many people who oppose Koch do so because Koch supports the "hated evil other party". I know, you think it is 100% environmentalists, but it isn't. A My significant chunk of Koch haters hate them because they fund the enemy party just like they like Soros because he funds the good party.

It's about party loyalty, starting and ending there. My team good, your team bad, that's their knowledge of party politics. That extends to why they hold their opinion on Soros or Koch.

Opinions and their motivation notwithstanding, it doesn't change the fact that the Kochs provided funding for much of the Tea Party in its heyday. The same cannot be said of any of Soros' donations; nothing of that scale and orchestration has ever resulted from his money. My original point was that conservatives look for a rich financial backer behind every liberal protest because they don't know of any other way that protests can happen. This is entirely because populist conservative movements really are funded by big corporations, while populist liberal movements are generally not.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Soros Funded Protests

 

[blastula]

Soros Funded Protests

You should click on your link and see if you can find anything germane.