Well, I work at yet another organization the Kochs give money to, so I expect this will be dismissed as shilling, but the logic of this seems incredibly strained.
The Kochs throw money at a ton of organizations on the right (and several not on the right, for that matter). Any time several of them focus on the same topic, for whatever reason, you can point out they have “Koch ties.” The right loves the same trick with “Soros-funded."
It does not follow that the Kochs have sent out marching orders that all the organizations they donate to must now focus on CRT or whatever the flavor of the week is.
FWIW, I have been mocking this dumb, anti-speech CRT moral panic for months, and have yet to receive any command from our insidious paymasters to shut up. Not that I would.
I’m sure some of these organizations do coordinate on some stuff, but with big donors who fund a lot of organizations, you can sort of build whatever yarn-webbed conspiracy corkboard you want, but that’s not necessarily what’s going on.
Aaalso, the Koch Network publicly condemned the CRT bans, which is sort of a weird thing to do if you secretly support something. apnews.com/article/iowa-p…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Julian Sanchez

Julian Sanchez Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @normative

29 Oct
In virtually every claim like this, you could replace “Facebook” with “connecting people.” Not that FB doesn’t deserve the crap they get, but the intensity of it feels a little like a form of denial—if not for the wicked algorithms, we would’t be doing this.
It is admittedly depressing to think a descent into psychotic and violent conspiracy theories is just a concomitant of widespread, low-friction connectivity, but… it probably is. This stuff spreads on all sorts of platforms, even without algorithmic boosting.
The underlying problem is *this is the type of content that increases engagement*. That means, sort of tautologically, that it’s what people are going to engage with absent aggressive intervention to prevent that from happening.
Read 31 tweets
21 Oct
Maybe there’s more to this than is in the article, but it sounds totally insane. An MIT lecture on climate science gets cancelled because the speaker had elsewhere written critically of affirmative action policies. nytimes.com/2021/10/20/us/…
This seems especially dumb because most proponents of affirmaritive action view it as a kind of corrective measure that, ideally, is successful enough that it can be phased out at some point. So when does it become permissible to suggest that point has arrived?
I don’t even agree wtih Abbot, for what it’s worth—but at some point the balance of equities is going to tilt back in favor of race-neutral admissions, and I don’t know how you can have confidence a policy is justified if academics are penalized for making the negative case.
Read 7 tweets
19 Oct
A good & thoughtful piece that reminds me a little of something I wrote ages ago about what I called the “those assholes” problem… And should probably rechristen something more genteel, like “The Identity Feedback Loop Problem” gawker.com/culture/identi…
The idea was that polarization, and the fear of either being mistaken for or lending support to the outgroup, undermines self-correction mechanisms that help protect groups from veering into extremism or being exploited by grifters.
So if you’re a decent person who recognizes that racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, etc are serious problems to be fought, you have very little incentive to speak up about abuses of those values. You don’t want to bolster (or be mistaken for!) “those assholes”...
Read 9 tweets
18 Oct
You are an agent of the state whose job is to come in close contact with people who have no real choice in the matter. You are a coward unfit to wear a badge, and the only pity here is that the state will pay you a pension you don’t deserve.
I find these guys so maddening because what they’re saying is: “I am so irrationally fearful that I will refuse to accept even the most negligible personal risk to protect the community I serve, who do not get a choice in whether to interact with me.” And that’s dangerous.
It’s dangerous because it’s exactly the same mindset that gets unarmed people shot in traffic stops. “If I perceive even the slightest risk to me, I’m justified in using lethal force. Better to shoot an innocent person than be the one in a million who gets shot.”
Read 4 tweets
18 Oct
So, I’d vote against this, if I had a vote. But “slave owners shouldn’t be honored, however immense their other contributions” is hardly a crazy position, and I can’t summon any particular apocalyptic dudgeon if that’s what they want to do.
What’s great and merits honor in Jefferson’s life is preserved and widely available on the page whether or nor we erect bronze idols to the man.
Somewhat orthogonally, it occurs to me how rare it is to see public arguments along the lines of “Position X is probably wrong, but any harm is minor and some people feel strongly about it, so we should let proponents have this one.” Though it’s probably applicable a fair amount.
Read 6 tweets
15 Oct
Recently binged a few debates on the historicity of the Gospels between New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman & various apologists, and kept thinking how much less plausible so many key apologist arguments sound in the age of QAnon.
It is, incidentally, a meaningless but grimly amusing coincidence that scholars have long referred to a presumed lost source for the synoptics as “Q” (from the German “Quelle” for “source”).
A lot of apologetics on this front boil down to the idea that it’s wildly implausible that people would spread unfounded stories or sheer fabrications with such speed and conviction, often at substantial personal cost. And yet…
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(