Dark Money - By Jane Mayer
A Critical Review
June 26, 2016
Jane Mayer
Reading Jane Mayer’s book Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires behind the Rise of the Radical Right causes one to feel shock and intimidation. This feeling stems, in part, from their dedication to their goals and the range of their efforts to achieve those goals. Over the last decade or so, pundits have bedazzled us with explanations for the right ward shifts in the U.S. politics. Mayer has supplanted many of those explanations by shining a bright light on the cabal of multi-millionaires and –billionaires who decided to remake the country in their own image.
Many of the oligarchs who have adopted rightwing ideologies inherited their businesses or fortunes, and thus, benefit from low taxes, few regulations, and limited government. Mayer examines the way in which the Koch Brothers, Richard Mellon Scaife, John M. Olin, and the Bradley Brothers have used their fortunes to shape the politics and ideology of the U.S. Among rightwing oligarchs, the Koch Brothers stand out because they are credited with establishing the most influential and effective cabal.
Many of the oligarchs who have adopted rightwing ideologies inherited their businesses or fortunes, and thus, benefit from low taxes, few regulations, and limited government. Mayer examines the way in which the Koch Brothers, Richard Mellon Scaife, John M. Olin, and the Bradley Brothers have used their fortunes to shape the politics and ideology of the U.S. Among rightwing oligarchs, the Koch Brothers stand out because they are credited with establishing the most influential and effective cabal.
David Koch and Charles Koch
Meyer’s examinations of the Koch Brothers’ goals, their methods for achieving their ends, and the zeal with which they have pursued their goals starts with their father, Fred. Fred Koch, the son of an immigrant store keeper, born in Texas in 1900 near the Oklahoma border, obtained a degree in chemical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
By 1927 Koch had invented an improved process for extracting gasoline from crude oil. The major oil companies, however, considered Koch’s invention to be a threat and sued him. Because the oil companies bribed at least one of the judges during the 15 years of litigation, Koch concluded that government and big business collude unfairly.
To escape U.S. litigation, Koch went to Russia to set up oil refineries and train the engineers to run them for what would become the basis of the Soviet oil industry. By 1933, Koch’s Russian business had declined and Koch turned his attention to Germany. Hitler was expanding his military capacity and needed to manufacture aviation fuel. Koch helped to build the third largest refinery in Germany and a “key component of the Nazi war machine.”
By 1927 Koch had invented an improved process for extracting gasoline from crude oil. The major oil companies, however, considered Koch’s invention to be a threat and sued him. Because the oil companies bribed at least one of the judges during the 15 years of litigation, Koch concluded that government and big business collude unfairly.
To escape U.S. litigation, Koch went to Russia to set up oil refineries and train the engineers to run them for what would become the basis of the Soviet oil industry. By 1933, Koch’s Russian business had declined and Koch turned his attention to Germany. Hitler was expanding his military capacity and needed to manufacture aviation fuel. Koch helped to build the third largest refinery in Germany and a “key component of the Nazi war machine.”
Besides a burgeoning petrochemical business and the desire to grow it, Fred Koch seems to have bequeathed three things to his sons. First, Charles and David seem to have inherited Fred’s limitless pursuit of their business goals. Despite his reservations about supporting a communist regime in Russia and the likely consequences of providing war materials to help further Hitler’s widely- acknowledged militaristic goals, Fred Koch put his business interests above those of his country and society. Similarly, Koch Industries, “pleaded guilty to ‘an orchestrated scheme to conceal benzene emissions – a known carcinogen’ from regulators and the community.”
Second, Fred Koch raised his sons in way he seemed to think would lead them to be industrious and hard working. He filled their free time with chores, physically punished any transgressions, and exercised total control over his boys. Mayer quotes one source who said that the Charles, the son who has headed Koch Industries and the family, “harbored a hatred of the government so intense it could only be truly understood as an extension of his childhood conflicts with authority.” Fred Koch’s child rearing practices seemed almost perfectly designed to produce adults with authoritarian personalities, and apparently they worked.
Third, Fred Koch instilled in his sons an affinity for rightwing fringe political groups, like the John Birch Society. Fred Koch was one of the founding 12 members of the John Birch Society, organized by candy manufacturer, Robert Welch. Welch believed that the U.S. was being infiltrated by Communists and wanted to alert likeminded individuals about the threat posed by the Communist agents they had uncovered such as President Dwight Eisenhower and Chief Justice Earl Warren. Despite the Birch Society commerce in outrageous conspiracy theories, Birch Society tactics allowed it to attract as many as 100,000 members and influence the political landscape.
After failing to successfully move public opinion to their libertarian principles through reason, the Koch brothers came to the conclusion that simply building a better mouse trap was not enough. The better mouse trap must had to be sold or as Charles Koch put it “ideas do not spread by themselves; they spread only through people.” The Koch brothers dared to propose moving the political ideology of the U.S. from the center left ideology of the New Deal to a right wing ideology. To effect this change, the Kochs adapted techniques that Mayer traced to the John Birch Society, such as using a multiplicity of groups with innocuous names and hiding the true purposes and agendas of their groups.
Herein lies another part of what causes tremors and sense of foreboding when reading about the efforts of the Kochs to force the U.S. to conform to their worldview. Many of the techniques used by the Birch Society and copied by the Kochs were, in fact, used by the Communists (see The Organizational Weapon: A Study of Bolshevik Strategy and Tactics by Philip Selznick). (How and why the Birch Society came to imitate the Communists is another question; suffice it here to say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.) Like Communists, the Kochs seek to spread their ideas through people who are members of various groups that may not initially be sympathetic to libertarianism. To convert these people the groups to which they belong are secretly targeted, subverted, and used to further the Kochs’ brand of libertarianism.
In particular, the Kochs identified three institutions that they believed they had to infiltrate to achieve their goals: academia, media, and the arts. Charles “cautioned his fellow radicals that to win, they would need to cultivate credible leaders… [and] work with, rather than combat, the people in the media and arts.” To influence academia, the Kochs funded institutes, some affiliated with or located at universities, so that they could control faculty appointments and research. To cultivate the media, the Kochs sponsored some personalities and subsidized the appearance of academics affiliated with their institutes on public service shows. David Koch nurtured the arts with lavish gifts to Metropolitan Museum of Art and the New York City Ballet.
The Birch Society/Communist techniques adapted by the Kochs relies on organizing their adherents within the institutions they have targeted so that they can exponentially spread their influence. While the methods used by the Koch brothers are underhanded and spooky, the legality of their methods have generally not been questioned. Nonetheless, many of their financial contributions made under the guise of philanthropy were clearly for other purposes. Moreover, as the Kochs have begun to turn toward influencing politics in the last decade or so, some of their political contributions have come under more scrutiny by journalists.
Despite the apparent effectiveness of the Kochs’ efforts in reengineer the U.S. political ideology their efforts have generally not been recognized by the Main Stream Media, the Democratic Party, or Progressive groups until recently. Instead, it seems that these liberal groups have been operating in fog, assigning disparate causes to shifts in public opinion instead of identifying the money provided by the Kochs and their network of rightwing millionaires and billionaires as the source. Without recognizing the Kochs’ methods, they have also failed to replicate those that could be valuable. They have allowed the party and movement to play on an uneven field
Ms. Mayer’s book is an important contribution because of the illumination it sheds on public affairs for the last 40 years or so. It is required reading for anyone who wants to understand the underpinnings of the political world of today. The reader does not find any “gotcha” revelations of criminal behavior, but instead finds how their worlds are skillfully manipulated by self-serving masters.
Second, Fred Koch raised his sons in way he seemed to think would lead them to be industrious and hard working. He filled their free time with chores, physically punished any transgressions, and exercised total control over his boys. Mayer quotes one source who said that the Charles, the son who has headed Koch Industries and the family, “harbored a hatred of the government so intense it could only be truly understood as an extension of his childhood conflicts with authority.” Fred Koch’s child rearing practices seemed almost perfectly designed to produce adults with authoritarian personalities, and apparently they worked.
Third, Fred Koch instilled in his sons an affinity for rightwing fringe political groups, like the John Birch Society. Fred Koch was one of the founding 12 members of the John Birch Society, organized by candy manufacturer, Robert Welch. Welch believed that the U.S. was being infiltrated by Communists and wanted to alert likeminded individuals about the threat posed by the Communist agents they had uncovered such as President Dwight Eisenhower and Chief Justice Earl Warren. Despite the Birch Society commerce in outrageous conspiracy theories, Birch Society tactics allowed it to attract as many as 100,000 members and influence the political landscape.
After failing to successfully move public opinion to their libertarian principles through reason, the Koch brothers came to the conclusion that simply building a better mouse trap was not enough. The better mouse trap must had to be sold or as Charles Koch put it “ideas do not spread by themselves; they spread only through people.” The Koch brothers dared to propose moving the political ideology of the U.S. from the center left ideology of the New Deal to a right wing ideology. To effect this change, the Kochs adapted techniques that Mayer traced to the John Birch Society, such as using a multiplicity of groups with innocuous names and hiding the true purposes and agendas of their groups.
Herein lies another part of what causes tremors and sense of foreboding when reading about the efforts of the Kochs to force the U.S. to conform to their worldview. Many of the techniques used by the Birch Society and copied by the Kochs were, in fact, used by the Communists (see The Organizational Weapon: A Study of Bolshevik Strategy and Tactics by Philip Selznick). (How and why the Birch Society came to imitate the Communists is another question; suffice it here to say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.) Like Communists, the Kochs seek to spread their ideas through people who are members of various groups that may not initially be sympathetic to libertarianism. To convert these people the groups to which they belong are secretly targeted, subverted, and used to further the Kochs’ brand of libertarianism.
In particular, the Kochs identified three institutions that they believed they had to infiltrate to achieve their goals: academia, media, and the arts. Charles “cautioned his fellow radicals that to win, they would need to cultivate credible leaders… [and] work with, rather than combat, the people in the media and arts.” To influence academia, the Kochs funded institutes, some affiliated with or located at universities, so that they could control faculty appointments and research. To cultivate the media, the Kochs sponsored some personalities and subsidized the appearance of academics affiliated with their institutes on public service shows. David Koch nurtured the arts with lavish gifts to Metropolitan Museum of Art and the New York City Ballet.
The Birch Society/Communist techniques adapted by the Kochs relies on organizing their adherents within the institutions they have targeted so that they can exponentially spread their influence. While the methods used by the Koch brothers are underhanded and spooky, the legality of their methods have generally not been questioned. Nonetheless, many of their financial contributions made under the guise of philanthropy were clearly for other purposes. Moreover, as the Kochs have begun to turn toward influencing politics in the last decade or so, some of their political contributions have come under more scrutiny by journalists.
Despite the apparent effectiveness of the Kochs’ efforts in reengineer the U.S. political ideology their efforts have generally not been recognized by the Main Stream Media, the Democratic Party, or Progressive groups until recently. Instead, it seems that these liberal groups have been operating in fog, assigning disparate causes to shifts in public opinion instead of identifying the money provided by the Kochs and their network of rightwing millionaires and billionaires as the source. Without recognizing the Kochs’ methods, they have also failed to replicate those that could be valuable. They have allowed the party and movement to play on an uneven field
Ms. Mayer’s book is an important contribution because of the illumination it sheds on public affairs for the last 40 years or so. It is required reading for anyone who wants to understand the underpinnings of the political world of today. The reader does not find any “gotcha” revelations of criminal behavior, but instead finds how their worlds are skillfully manipulated by self-serving masters.