Usted no se lo cree

Página referida: Randolph Foundation

Randolph Foundation – Wikipedia, 10/09/2017 – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randolph_Foundation
“The Randolph Foundation (TRF) is a New York-based charitable foundation that first operated in 1972 as the H. Smith Richardson Charitable Trust. It transitioned to independence from the Smith Richardson Foundation, assuming the name of The Randolph Foundation from 1991–1993, and was reconstituted as a NY non-profit corporation in 2002. The foundation provides funding primarily for public policy related projects. Heather Higgins (née Richardson) is its President.”

Smith Richardson Foundation – Sourcewatch, 06/09/2009 – http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Smith_Richardson_Foundation
“The Foundation became active in supporting conservative causes in 1973 when R. Richardson Randolph became its president. Forbes estimates the Richardsons to have a net worth of $870 million, which makes it one of the U.S.’s richest families. The Foundation gave approximately $99,686,911 to a total of 266 grantees.”

Smith Richardson Foundation – Power Base, 02/08/2010 – http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/Smith_Richardson_Foundation
“In 1975, on Kristol’s recommendation, Richardson appointed Leslie Lenkowsky as chief program officer.[3] Lenkowsky oversaw the funding of a number of books on supply-side economics, notably the ‘trilogy’ of Jude Wanniski’s The Way the World Works, George Gilder’s Wealth and Poverty, and Michael Novak’s The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism.”

National Endowment for Democracy – Wikipedia, 11/01/2018 – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democracy
“The NED receives an annual appropriation from the U.S. budget (it is included in the chapter of the Department of State budget destined for the U.S. Agency for International Development-USAID) and is subject to congressional oversight even as a non-governmental organization. In the financial year to the end of September 2009 NED had an income of $135.5 million, nearly all of which came from U.S Government agencies.[4] From 1984 to 1990 the NED received $15–18m of congressional funding annually, and $25–$30m from 1991 to 1993. At the time the funding came via the United States Information Agency. In 1993 the NED nearly lost its congressional funding, after the House of Representatives initially voted to abolish its funding. The funding (of $35m, a rise from $30m the year before) was only retained after a vigorous campaign by NED supporters.[5] The NED has received funding from foundations, such as the Smith Richardson Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, and others. The Bradley Foundation supported the Journal of Democracy with $1.5 million during 1990–2008.[6] ”

Sara Diamond (1991) – Endowing the Right-wing Academic Agenda – Covert Action Information Bulletin, 21/12/1991 – http://www.nathannewman.org/EDIN/.educ/.youth/cco/ucpinfo/swnm/guide1/diamon1.html “In late 1984, following some of the Coalition’s initial meetings, Roderic R. Richardson of the Smith-Richardson Foundation19 circulated a confidential memo, «The Report on the Universities.» It proposed to distinguish between two possible anti-left strategies at the university level: «deterrence activism» versus «high-ground articulation,» also termed «idea marketing.» Deterrence activism, wrote Richardson, «exists purely in response to the left-wing agenda. It is not very interesting … and it is the kind of activism sponsored heretofore. At best it is a form of cheerleading that can focus some attention on stirring media events.» Instead, Richardson advocated «high ground activism» or the attempt to steal one or another high ground away from the left, by … doing things like insisting on rigorous discussion and debates, setting up political unions, ” battling divestiture and other causes, not by calling their goals wrong … but by proposing better ways of solving the problem. Student journalism is a highground approach. It is … an approach geared to long run success.20.”

“About the same time that Richardson and company were trying to figure out the best strategy for academic activists, a more militant faction than the IEA neocons launched Accuracy in Academia. A spin-off of Reed Irvine’s Accuracy in Media,21 AIA recruited classroom spies and began compiling a database on professors AIA labeled «left-wing propagandists.» AIA’s first executive director, Les Csorba, was a 22-year-old activist fresh from the University of California at Davis, where he had organized a harassment campaign against visiting lecturer Saul Landau in 1985.22 AIA’s president John LeBoutillier, a former member of Congress, was then a leader of the World Anti-Communist League (WACL), as were three other members of AIA’s initial advisory board. Irvine had at one time been prominent within WACL and served on its «Psychological Warfare Committee.» At the time of AIA’s ” founding in 1985, WACL was one of the most important coordinating bodies for death squad activities in Central America and elsewhere.23 While AIA was busy collecting field data on campus «subversives,» the group’s Latin American Counterparts were among those blowing up schools in Nicaragua, and systematically assassinating progressive students and professors in El Salvador and Guatemala. Battling the Red, the Browns, and the Blacks… In 1987, the National Association of Scholars (NAS) was started as the first concerted effort to organize right-wing faculty against «politically correct» multicultural education.24 NAS is bankrolled by the Olin and Smith- Richardson foundations, among others.”

Chris A. Moore (1996) – Buying a movement: Right-Wing Foundations and American Politics – People For the American Way Foundation – http://www.pfaw.org/media-center/publications/buying-movement
“One journalist notes that while “there is nothing illegal or immoral” about media organizations sharing a small funding base, the “reliance of various organizations on the same funding sources does suggest, however, that some of the prominent actors in the culture wars may be more closely related than observers would otherwise assume.” Another states that “[e]very leading neoconservative publication or think tank over the past decade has come to depend on money from…Olin, Smith Richardson, Bradley, Scaife,” creating an atmosphere in which “editors tend to print ‘what they believe will confirm the prejudices of the [foundation’s] program officers.’.”

Sally Covington (1998) – How Conservative Philanthropy and Think Tanks Transform US Policy – Covert Action Quarterly, 21/12/1998 – http://mediafilter.org/CAQ/caq63/caq63thinktank.html
“Proclaiming their movement a war of ideas, conservatives began to mobilize resources for battle in the 1960s. They built new institutional bastions; recruited, trained, and equipped their intellectual warriors; forged new weapons as cable television, the Internet, and other communications technologies evolved; and threw their resources into policy and political battles. By 1984, moderate Republican John Saloma warned of a «major new presence in American politics.» If left unchecked, he accurately predicted, «the new conservative labyrinth» would pull the nation’s political center sharply to the right. Today, that labyrinth is larger, more sophisticated, and increasingly able to influence what gets on and what stays off the public policy agenda. From the decision to abandon the federal guarantee of cash assistance to the poor, to changes in the federal tax structure, to interest in medical savings accounts and the privatization of Social Security, conservative policy ideas and rhetoric have come to dominate the nation’s political conversation, reflecting what political scientist Walter Dean Burnham has called a «hegemony of market theology.» Spearheading the assault has been a core group of 12 conservative foundations: the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Carthage Foundation, the Earhart Foundation, the Charles G. Koch, David H. Koch and Claude R. Lambe charitable foundations, the Phillip M. McKenna Foundation, the JM Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, the Henry Salvatori Foundation, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, and the Smith Richardson Foundation. In 1994, they controlled more than $1.1 billion in assets; from 1992-94, they awarded $300 million in grants, and targeted $210 million to support a wide array of projects and institutions. Over the last two decades, the 12 have mounted an impressively coherent and concerted effort to shape public policy by undermining and ultimately redirecting what they regard as the institutional.”

Jill Junnola – Perspective: Who funds whom? – Campus Watch, 04/10/2002 – http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/243
“Part of the answer lies in the core group of conservative foundations that have been funding organizations like AEI, Heritage, Hudson, Hoover, and Cato. These include, among others, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Smith Richardson Foundation, the Sarah Scaife Foundation (and the Scaife-affiliated Carthage and Allegheny Foundations), the Earhart Foundation, the Castle Rock Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, and the Koch Industries-affiliated Charles G. Koch Foundation, David H. Koch Foundation, and Claude R. Lambe Foundation. Between them, they have assets of about $1.2 billion, with only two of them, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation and the Smith Richardson Foundation, managing to make it on the US-based Foundation Center’s list of the top 100 charitable foundations by asset size. The former ranks 86th with nearly $580 million in assets in 2001, and the latter 96th, with around $540 million in assets in 2000 … Koch Industries—the family-owned energy conglomerate whose assets are estimated at $20 billion-$25 billion—is behind three foundations that back a range of institutes churning out policy papers, including the Cato Institute, which caused ripples in the libertarian movement when its director, Ted Galen Carpenter, backed Bush’s war plans on Iraq. The David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch Foundations, along with the Claude R. Lambe Foundation, dole out grants to Heritage and the Hudson Institute, carrying on the tradition of their benefactor, Fred Koch, who has stellar right-wing credentials: in 1958 he co-founded the John Birch Society, which is currently running a «Get US out!» (of the UN) campaign.”

Andrew Rich (2005) – War of Ideas: Why mainstream and liberal foundations and the think tanks they support are losing in the war of ideas in American politics – Stanford Social Innovation Review 18-25 – https://ssir.org/pdf/2005SP_feature_rich.pdf
“The dramatic growth of conservative think tanks in the 1970s, ’80s, and ’90s was made possible principally with support from a small corps of newer conservative foundations, such as the Bradley, Smith Richardson, and Sarah Scaife foundations. Before the 1970s, many conservative foundations and their patrons reviled government so much that they refused to support efforts related to what was going on in Washington. But with the advent of increased government regulation in the late 1960s, the leaders of these foundations wanted to stop the tide of government activism. Funding organizations to fight the war of ideas became their way of doing it. During this same period, mainline and liberal foundations scaled back their support of a number of efforts that engaged politics and government in Washington. Many of the older, more progressive foundations were disappointed by what they” perceived as the failures of Great Society programs in which they had invested. Perhaps more important, many of the older, non-conservative foundations were operating with less.

Carl Davidson (2005) – Globalization, Theocracy and the New Fascism: Taking the Right’s Rise to Power Seriously – 4th Annual GSA meeting in Knoxville TN – 15/05/2005 – http://net4dem.org/cyrev/archive/editorials/Carl/GlobalizationTheocracyandtheNewFascism.pdf
“To fund it, Weyrich and Viguerie, and dozens of others who learned from them, raised millions from the super-rich of the right: Mellon’s Scaife Foundations, Coors’ Castle Rock Foundations, the Bradley Foundation, the Smith Richardson Foundation and the Olin Foundation, just to name the top five with combined assets of nearly $2 billion. They helped to deploy the money to build dozens of think tanks and hundreds of policy groups and coalitions, such as the Heritage Foundation, the Free Congress Foundation, and the Rockford Institute, just to name a few.”

Global Warming Skeptic Organizations: Science and Environmental Policy Project – Union of Concerned Scientists, 20/10/2005 – http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/global_warming_contrarians/global-warming-skeptic.html
“Spin: Moreover, climate change won’t be bad for us anyway. Action on climate change is not warranted because of shaky science and flawed policy approaches. Funding: Conservative foundations including Bradley, Smith Richardson, and Forbes. SEPP has also been directly tied to ultra right-wing mogul Reverend Sung Myung Moon’s Unification Church, including receipt of a year s free office space from a Moon-funded group and the participation of SEPP s director in church-sponsored conferences and on the board of a Moon-funded magazine.”

John J. Miller – The Very Foundation of Conservatism – The New York Times, 28/11/2005 – http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/28/opinion/28miller.html
“According to the New York Times: «The Olin Foundation and other right-leaning philanthropies – particularly the Bradley, Scaife and Smith Richardson Foundations – provided a pool of venture capital that helped build a network of research institutions, academic fellowships and highbrow journals for the conservative movement. If it is something of a cliché these days to suggest that conservatives are winning the war of ideas, much of the credit belongs to these grant makers.”

Brian Angliss – We Berate, You Deride – A look at Steven J. Milloy’s current affiliates and backers – Scholar & Rogues, 28/11/2007 – http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2007/11/28/we-berate-you-deride-a-look-at-steven-j-milloys-current-affiliates-and-backers/
“It’s important to understand that Mr. Milloy’s connections with the AEI, CEI, Cato Institute, Reason Foundation, and through them to the Randolph Foundation, Philanthropy Roundtable, Donors Capital Fund and Trust, the Phillips Foundation, PERC, et al doesn’t mean that Mr. Milloy is the guiding force behind these connections. He is a single thread, albeit an important one, in an intricate tapestry of denial and misrepresentation of science in the service of conservative ideology. Through the deep pockets of his various corporate and conservative supporters over the years, he’s become a very effective conservative soldier in the war for the minds, and votes, of the people.”

Curtis A. Moore (2008) – Milking the Cash Cow – Basel Action Network – Former counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works from 1978 to 1989 – http://curtismoore.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/milking-the-cash-cow.pdf
“The core foundations include the following: 1) Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, money originally from Allen-Bradley Company, a major manufacturer of electronic and radio components; 2) Smith Richardson Foundation, money from the Vicks Vaporrub fortune; 3) Sarah Scaife Foundation and Carthage Foundation. (Other Scaife foundations include Allegheny and Scaife Family foundations, whose funds came originally from the Mellon family fortune, whose holdings included Gulf Oil, Alcoa and Mellon Bank.); 4) Philip McKenna Foundation, money from Kennametal, a leading global supplier of tooling, engineered components and advanced materials; 5) John M. Olin Foundation, money from Olin Industries chemical and munitions manufacturing; 6) Henry Salvatori Foundation, money from Western Geophysical, now the oil exploration arm of Litton industries; 7) Charles G. Koch, David H. Koch, Claude R. Lambe Foundations; Earhart Foundation, money from White Star Oil; 8) J.M. Foundation, money from Borden Milk.”

Faiz Shakir, Benjamin Armbruster, George Zornick, Zaid Jilani, Alex Seitz-Wald, and Tanya Somanader – Right Wing Violence – Think Progress, 28/10/2010 – http://pr.thinkprogress.org/2010/10/pr20101028/index.html – 6 autores
“In July, 45-year-old parolee Byron Williams opened fire on Highway Patrol officers in Oakland, California. After a brief shootout, police wounded Williams, who is now sitting in a California jail. Police caught Williams on his way to San Fransisco, where he hoped to «start a revolution» by killing workers at the American Civil Liberties Union and the Tides Foundation. According to a recent Media Matters report, Williams said that he was inspired by the fiery rhetoric of Fox News’ self-described «Progressive Hunter» Glenn Beck. «I would have never started watching Fox News if it wasn’t for the fact that Beck was on there. And it was the things that he did, it was the things he exposed that blew my mind,» Williams said in an interview from jail. «I do enjoy Glenn Beck,» Williams also says, «and the reason why I enjoy that is because…no other channell will speak about the same things that he’s talking about, and if you go and investigate those things you’ll find out that they’re true.» «Beck is going to deny everything about violent approach, deny everything about conspiracies,» Williams said, adding,» But he’ll give you every reason to believe it. He’s protecting himself, and you can’t blame him for that. So, but I understand what he’s doing.» Yet at the same time, Beck continues to demonize the Tides Foundation and ramp up the violent rhetoric. Just yesterday, the Fox News host connected Obama and progressive financier George Soros to a «violent revolution» coming to «our shores.» Citing former Alaska governor Sarah Palin as having influence over Beck, Media Matters’ founder and CEO David Brock said recently, «we’re going to make a personal plea to her to stop this insanity.».”

Ian L. Pepper et al (2012) – International Science in the National Interest at the U.S. Geological Survey – National Academy of Sciences, 24/07/2012 – University of Arizona – http://download.nap.edu/cart/download.cgi?&record_id=13302&free=1
“The USGS should play an expanded, proactive role in international Earth science, consistent with, and building upon, its present strengths and science directions. In developing this expanded role, the USGS should assess how it can serve as a collaborative international leader in strategically addressing a range of urgent worldwide problems that affect U.S. interests. These include, but are not limited to natural-resource shortfalls, escalating human and economic losses from natural disasters, a degraded biosphere, biodiversity loss, the increasing threat of pandemics, and accelerating global environmental change. ”

Graham Readfearn – The Millions Behind Bjorn Lomborg’s Copenhagen Consensus Center US Think Tank – Desmogblog, 24/06/2014 – https://www.desmogblog.com/2014/06/25/millions-behind-bjorn-lomborg-copenhagen-consensus-center
“The main trustee at Randolph is Heather Higgins, the president and CEO of Independent Women’s Voice and the chairman of its sister organization Independent Women’s Forum. Higgins is the daughter of R. Randolph Richardson, a member of the family that sold Vick Chemical Company to Procter & Gamble for $1.2 billion.  Staff writers of both organisations regularly express scepticism about the science of human-caused climate change and cite Lomborg’s views approvingly. A recent article from IWF senior fellow Vicki Alger claimed “a majority of scientists believe that global warming is largely nature-made” — ignoring several studies that show the vast majority of research from scientists studying climate change believe exactly the opposite. IWF funders include the Charles R. Lambe Foundation, controlled by Charles Koch, and Donors Trust, a fund for conservative philanthropists that has pushed millions into organisations promoting climate science denial and fighting laws to cut greenhouse gas emissions.”

Graham Readfearn – The Millions Behind Bjorn Lomborg’s Copenhagen Consensus Center US Think Tank – Desmogblog, 24/06/2014 – https://www.desmogblog.com/2014/06/25/millions-behind-bjorn-lomborg-copenhagen-consensus-center
“Also on the board of trustees at Randolph is Polly Freiss, the daughter-in-law of conservative Christian businessman Foster Freiss. Foster Freiss put more than $2 million into Republican Senator Rick Santorum’s 2012 run for his party’s nomination for the presidency. Freiss also bankrolled conservative news outlet The Daily Caller, which regularly publishes articles supporting the views of climate science denialists. On his personal web page, Freiss promotes climate science denial sources, including Climate Depot and The Heartland Institute. Friess’s website has also promoted Lomborg’s views. Foster Freiss and his daughter Polly attended the Koch brother’s secretive 2010 strategy meeting in Aspen, along with Heather Higgins and a host of other conservative activists.”

Jane Mayer (2016) – Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right – ISBN-13: 978-0385535595 – 464 págs.
“Reflecting on this period, James Piereson, a scholar at the Manhattan Institute who became a crucial figure in several conservative foundations, said, «We didn’t have anything when we started in the late 1970s. We had no institutions at all in the mainstream of American political life.» He debunked what he called the liberal misconception that corporations directly funded most of the far-right movement, arguing, «What we did was way too controversial for corporations.» Instead, he said, in the beginning «there were only a small number of foundations,» including the Earhart Foundation, based on an oil fortune, the Smith Richardson Foundation, derived from the cough and cold medicine dynasty, and, most importantly, the various Scaife family foundations.” (p. 73-74)

“Ball argued that the mechanism wasn’t suspicious, or even unusual, and that liberals too had their own donor-advised fund, the Tides Foundation. DonorsTrust, the conservative answer to the Tides Foundation, however, soon had four times the funds and a far more strategic board. Its directors consisted of top officials of several of the most important institutions in the conservative movement, including the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, and the Institute for Justice, the libertarian legal center whose start-up funds had been supplied by Charles Koch. They functioned as a central committee, coordinating grant making.” (p. 207)