DARK MONEY - the Corrosive Koch Brothers
DARK MONEY The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right by Jane Mayer, 2016. The book is an eye opener, and per William S. Burroughs, "Sometimes paranoia's just having the facts," may leave you feeling queasy and uneasy.
Fred Chase Koch, father of the Koch brothers about whom we hear so much, got his fortune in oil rolling by building oil refineries first for the Soviets, and a bit later for the Nazis. Hitler personally approved the contract for Fred Koch's very large refinery in Hamburg which would deliver high octane fuel for the Luftwaffe. He admired the vigor of the Axis powers as they tooled up for war, and lamented about his own country, "...perhaps this course of idleness, feeding at the public trough, dependence on government, etc. with which we are afflicted is not permanent and can be overcome."
Fred had 4 sons - Freddie, Charles, and a pair of twins David and William (born 1940). He also had a daughter, Mary. Fred Chase Koch was a authoritarian and brutal disciplinarian and visited both his own harsh childhood and his diseased politics upon his children. Freddie, who was early on an outlier escaped much of this. Freddie turned out to be gay and kept his distance from this family once he was in a position to do so.
The Koch family were aggressive capitalists and right wing zealots, all. Charles Koch dominated his brothers from the beginning and dominated the company. They actively sought methods of influencing American politics, and tried various approaches -- all of them involving big money, and covert action. They seem to have perceived that a straight-forward assault would not go over well. Better to obscure what it was they were doing, and intended to do, behind a screen of meaningless names and titles.
The Koch brothers spent big in political philanthropy, partly as a tax maneuver. The Koch children's trusts required philanthropy to avoid taxation -- so they planted a lot of right-wing gardens. They funded think tanks like the Cato Institute, organizations such as the John Birch Society and the Libertarian Party.
Their view of government was simple: protect private property. The rest of it -- medicare, medicaid, social security, the CIA, FBI, SEC, FDA, public education, child labor laws, minimum wage -- just about everything passed since the late 19th century could be flushed down the drain.
So far, great book.
Fred Chase Koch, father of the Koch brothers about whom we hear so much, got his fortune in oil rolling by building oil refineries first for the Soviets, and a bit later for the Nazis. Hitler personally approved the contract for Fred Koch's very large refinery in Hamburg which would deliver high octane fuel for the Luftwaffe. He admired the vigor of the Axis powers as they tooled up for war, and lamented about his own country, "...perhaps this course of idleness, feeding at the public trough, dependence on government, etc. with which we are afflicted is not permanent and can be overcome."
Fred had 4 sons - Freddie, Charles, and a pair of twins David and William (born 1940). He also had a daughter, Mary. Fred Chase Koch was a authoritarian and brutal disciplinarian and visited both his own harsh childhood and his diseased politics upon his children. Freddie, who was early on an outlier escaped much of this. Freddie turned out to be gay and kept his distance from this family once he was in a position to do so.
The Koch family were aggressive capitalists and right wing zealots, all. Charles Koch dominated his brothers from the beginning and dominated the company. They actively sought methods of influencing American politics, and tried various approaches -- all of them involving big money, and covert action. They seem to have perceived that a straight-forward assault would not go over well. Better to obscure what it was they were doing, and intended to do, behind a screen of meaningless names and titles.
The Koch brothers spent big in political philanthropy, partly as a tax maneuver. The Koch children's trusts required philanthropy to avoid taxation -- so they planted a lot of right-wing gardens. They funded think tanks like the Cato Institute, organizations such as the John Birch Society and the Libertarian Party.
Their view of government was simple: protect private property. The rest of it -- medicare, medicaid, social security, the CIA, FBI, SEC, FDA, public education, child labor laws, minimum wage -- just about everything passed since the late 19th century could be flushed down the drain.
So far, great book.
Comments (15)
And Franklin didn't mean exactly what we mean by happiness either. They were looking for a word that would resonate properly on both sides of the Atlantic, in Boston and in London. And property mean more than just land -- it meant at the time the means of making a living -- a plantation with slaves on one end of the continuum, and a tradesman's tools on the other end, maybe a horse and wagon. So, life, liberty and the means to support yourself.
Quoting Agustino
So Agustino, what do you think of the Koch Brothers?
The Koches were multigenerational libertarians, who had (have) sufficient resources to build a libertarian movement. They have preferred to pursue their goals covertly, using deceptively named front organizations under the umbrella of philanthropy. (Nothing illegal about that. It's a sensible strategy in a number of ways.)
I don't know if you are familiar with the John Birch Society. They were most active in the late 1950s, and 1960s. They were fervently anti-communist, and tended towards conspiracy theories which struck conservatives (like William F. Buckley) as outlandish. The Koches were supporters, and funders. While there may be "respectable" anti-communist libertarians organizations, in this country they tend toward the "kooky fringe".
Why "kooky fringe"? Organizations which have very extreme views and attract persons with the same, tend to become a bit unhinged. They exist in an echo chamber. This is true of the extremes at both ends of the political spectrum.
True enough.
Take the Koch funding of climate change deniers. What's their interest? Carbon industries in general are on the defensive with respect to climate change. A large refinery south of Minneapolis was acquired some years back by Koch. Their source of crude oil is tar sand product from Canada. This refinery alone receives a large share of the oil exported from Alberta.
The refinery itself isn't problematic, as far as I know. What is problematic is the extraction of oil from sand. It's a mining process--not a pumping operation. The sand is scooped up and heated to melt out the oil. Its environmentally about as filthy a process as one could imagine.
At the other end of the pipeline and refining, there is a lot of residue that has low value and which is more like hazardous waste. (Quite a bit of it is sold as low grade fuel for ships.)
That's one interest the koches have that needs protecting.
So as you can see - the discussion is more complicated than was initially suggested. (I might as well add that many journalists don't know what they're talking about and just want to make headlines rather than research adequately into such matters).
Yes, your figures for coal (60%), gas (11%) and cement production (8%) match what I can find in the IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. However fuel oil also accounts for 7.3%, while oil refineries account for 6%. So, the total for oil would be 13.3%, which would put it in second place. And then there is the issue of trends in consumption. The demand for oil might be expected to rise faster than the demand for coal in coming decades unless substitutes are found and promoted, I surmise (though I am not very knowledgeable about that).
Refining and consumption of oil also overlap, which must be taken into account. Yes you are right - oil was fourth, even in my view. I've analysed the statistics awhile ago, but cannot find my report. So yes, it is important. Just nowhere near as significant as it's often made out to be. Oil is important - but it's importance is as a strategic political resource MUCH more than as an environmental concern. Coal burning on the other hand is the prime environmental concern that we should be having. China is burning most of the world's coal as well.
Quoting Pierre-Normand
I have not seen much evidence for this. There's quite an opposite effect in fact. Demand for coal is growing faster than demand of oil, since it's a cheaper resource and developing (not developed) countries are more likely to exploit it. Check China out. At least it has been until recently when oil prices have fallen quite a bit.
The amount of CO2 that the Koch brothers are responsible for isn't a critical issue. In any case, they are not responsible for most of it. It's what they do and did with their money POLITICALLY that is significant.
Yes, like this prominent part of your comment:
Quoting Bitter Crank
...which Augustino didn't address, but which ought to be condemned.
Quoting Landru Guide Us
:D