L’argent fait stealth attacks
Congratuations to David H. Koch for a lavish profile in The New Yorker celebrating his social success with Kennedys and Trumps and especially his munificence with artistic and cultural organizations including the New York City Opera! And further kudos to The New Yorker for noting high up in the article that the publicity-shy philanthropist is “best known as part of a family that has repeatedly funded stealth attacks on the federal government, and on the Obama Administration in particular.” [The New Yorker]
As difficult as it is to see Mr. Koch’s name on a building for the arts, I’m much more concerned about seeing his name on a building at MIT ( which it is)
If he should decide to meddle in artistic decisions, it will be obvious and there will be an outcry. If he decides to do the same in science, it will be more complicated and potentially more damaging. That said, every million spent on good causes leaves less for mischief.
For those who are interested, Rachel Maddow is going to talk about David Koch on her show tonight, interviewing the author of this article.
Interesting, in this context of assuming that “opera can’t be profitable,” that as successful a businessman as Oscar Hammerstein never gave up on money-making opera, starting several houses in New York, Philadelphia, London. In his second Manhattan Opera House alone, he gave the American premieres of Louise, Pelléas et Mélisande, Elektra, Le Jongleur de Notre Dame, Thaïs, and Salome. Mary Garden and Luisa Tetrazzini had their American debuts there, and Nelly Melba left the Met to join his company. I don’t believe he ever did figure out how to keep the profits rolling in, but the Met at one point paid him $1.2 million to refrain from producing operas for ten years!
That’s about as public-spirited on the Met’s part as their selling the old House ON THE CONDITION that it be torn down, in another effort to limit the availability of opera in New York. With friends like that …
Here’s a start on the (very close) Koch connection to the Tea Party’s tax day protests.
Rachel Maddow discusses David H. Koch on her show last night:
Thank my higher power for Rachel Maddow. She’s the only pundit show I can stand to watch, she actually does fact checking. Chris Matthews, O’Reilly, Beck and Ed Schultz need to learn a lesson from her.
I don’t really understand people like Mr. Koch. He donates millions for cancer research but then spends millions to fight legislation that classifies known carcinogens as such. Yes his company produces said chemicals, but still, you would think a man as dedicated to cancer research as he (he does puts his money where his mouth is), would see the futility of what he is doing, or at least, experience some kind of cognitive dissonance. Ditto his stance on the arts. Sure nice of him to spend 100 mil on that theater, but he’s supporting people who want to cut arts funding in public education, which in 50 years, would result in there being no one to fill said $100m theater! His stance on the environment and the gov’t is just unconscionable and makes me too upset to get into. His definition of libertarianism seems to be ‘freedom for him to fuck up the world for everyone else’.
That’s his wife? She looks young enough to be his daughter.
Or is it just botox, makeup, and plastic surgery?
At least she volunteered for the job, instead of being sold by her parents for 20 sheep.
You mean as young as Nicoletta Mantovani?
“There’s no fool like an old fool.”
The conservative Richard Mellon Scaife has also put vast amounts of money into overt and covert attempts to influence/control public policy, via foundations, newsletters, political campaigns, lobbying, etc. Koch isn’t alone in that.
Signed, practically a commie
La Cieca, I am rather disappointed in you. Although you obviously have a bias against conservatives (many of which have an anti-gay, anti-individual rights agenda), you have an artificial blind spot for liberals, up to and including the Obama administration.
For all your vitriol against people like Koch, you seem all to willing to ignore the blatant betrayal of liberals such as Obama and Clinton when it comes to promises and stances they promised to uphold, and yet demonstrated they are no better than Bush and Co. in their lack of integrity.
One would think you would attack both parties equally, but let us be frank here: in the face of the evidence, attacking only one part of the political spectrum renders you in a terribly poor light. (some)conservatives are bad because they dislike gays– we get that, but please attain some consistency and be as equally acidic to the liberals that promised you the moon and then walked away after having their political way with you.
Hmmm I haven’t actually seen La Cieca attack any particular political party. Perhaps, as you astutely point out, she understands that the Democrats are basically a sad imitation of the GOP on all important issues but for abortion and gay rights and even then, they are poor. But is a discussion on the Democrats failures to enact anti-discrimination law that protects sexual orientation, their willingness to support big banks in lieu of consumers, their unwillingness to consider ending the wars as a solution to debt at all relevant to the mission of the website. Koch is a patron of the arts and therefore relevant.
I have always thought that the only true benefactors are the anonymous ones, or at least the very discreet ones who do not want a theater re-named with their names.
I can just see Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder now, posing with the next rich patsy in front of the removable letters at the State Theater.
The joke is on Koch.
Ars longa, vita breva.
That’s brevis, if I remember my schoolboy Latin.
malo, malo, malo, malo.
Yes, yes – thank you! I did not dare correct anything else for fear of being lynched for being a pedantic busybody (guilty M’Lord).
Correct me anytime. I’m a picky English major type myself, but my memory for my Latin obviously is failing.
Mea culpa.