Read on Twitter
The extent to which activists are, in effect, contract employees of grant-making institutions rather than representatives of grassroots constituencies is underrated and journalists tend to be too credulous about it.
I don't think anyone really covers the "foundation beat." https://twitter.com/davidshor/status/1345801301918154752
I don't think anyone really covers the "foundation beat." https://twitter.com/davidshor/status/1345801301918154752
For example, if philanthropists choose to create Climate Justice groups who are skeptical of CCS technology on racial equity grounds they can (and in fact have) done that.
But they could have chosen to create CJ groups with the opposite view. https://twitter.com/ersatzverite/status/1345837482995294215?s=20
But they could have chosen to create CJ groups with the opposite view. https://twitter.com/ersatzverite/status/1345837482995294215?s=20
Basically the funders decide how they think issue positions should relate to one another (perhaps covertly influences by take-slingers, per @ProfHansNoel's work) and then they conjure up groups that reflect that alignment.
Journalists then report that "activists say..."
Journalists then report that "activists say..."
Obviously when funders "on the other side" do it, then it's easy to see what's going on.
To be clear:
I don't think individual people just change their minds to be in line with donor priorities. It's just that some things get funded and other things don't, and there tend to be fads and herding in the funder community. https://twitter.com/aneeman/status/1345839989536522243?s=20
I don't think individual people just change their minds to be in line with donor priorities. It's just that some things get funded and other things don't, and there tend to be fads and herding in the funder community. https://twitter.com/aneeman/status/1345839989536522243?s=20
I don't even think there's necessarily anything wrong with this dynamic.
My main point is that ideas of the form "activists should do X" should more plausibly be understood as "someone should fund X [or people should stop funding Y]."
My main point is that ideas of the form "activists should do X" should more plausibly be understood as "someone should fund X [or people should stop funding Y]."
