Charles Koch wrote an impassioned editorial in the Wall Street Journal last week. He sees himself and his vision for America as under attack. The amount of resources that he has to engage in the social and political systems of this country gives him immense influence. I wonder if he really believes that he is fighting to restore a free society? I wonder when he thinks such a society existed.
Charles Koch: I'm Fighting to Restore a Free Society - WSJ.com
I came across this opinion article last week and happen to strongly agree with him. To answer your question on whether he is truly fighting for a free society, I do believe he is because of his similar background to my grandfather's. The Koch family and my grandfather were able to prosper under an environment that rewarded hard work and allowed anyone to be successful. My grandfather lived in poverty during his childhood, but was able to lift himself out because the economic environment allowed income mobility, a key part of a free society. Today, my grandfather tells me that he does not see the same environment he grew up in. Today's society is ridden with welfare and cronyism that does not properly reward hard work and success.
ReplyDeleteBut.....should anyone be allowed to spend millions to influence politics?
ReplyDeleteSaying that Charles Koch isn't allowed to use his wealth to influence politics is like saying George Washington isn't allowed to use his wealth to influence the outcome of the Revolutionary War. Every political, economic, or social idea needs financial support. Academic institutions, political think tanks, etc. require strong financial backings and that money tends to originate from wealthy people. As long as it's ethical, anyone should be allowed to spend money that way. Unethical forms of spending include bribery and extortion.
ReplyDeleteSaying that Charles Koch *shouldn't* (he in fact does) be allowed to use his *massive* personal wealth to influence politics is ~**nothing**~ like saying that George Washington *wasn't* allowed to use his wealth (he did) to influence the outcome of the revolutionary war: to start, such a statement equates the current political climate to a *war,* a troubling thing to do. You say, "as long as its ethical, anyone should be allowed to spend money that way." Well, what the hell makes it ethical? Many Americans would say ethical actions are typically just actions, which typically are fair actions, i.e. ethical actions are actions that are at least "intuitively fair."
ReplyDeleteMany Americans don't take kindly to the Koch brothers barrage of money into politics because, well, it isn't fair. Not everyone, or every interest, or every minority opinion has the ability/resources to toss around like Mr. Koch, and by saying they can use as much money to influence politics as much as they want you are complicit in the inevitable outcome where those with the most dictate for the rest (which, very ironically, is what Mr. Koch accuses our bastard government of doing in the first place!). What Koch and his endorsed candidates are saying is that, don't tell me what to do with my money even if I'm using my money to pay people to tell you to think what I want you to think!
People tend to be self-interested. Mr. Koch has boatloads of cash. Chances are he wants to keep it that way. I rather not see a world where the money of men like Koch runs *entirely* unchecked, we are approaching it and it looks like utter.... In the meantime can we at the least avoid equating the man with our greatest founding father?
Oh, and I still don't get how Koch's rhetoric of "government intervention only leads to disaster" and "we need the private sector for innovation" still holds credence. Take a look at many (not all) of the major technological innovations of the past 30 some years--chances are there's government cash behind it.
The statement I made was a hypothetical statement. However, I'll admit that I should've said "American Revolution" (the war and its aftermath) instead of just the war. Charles Koch isn't alone. There are other wealthy people on both sides of the political spectrum who spends money the way Koch does.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to eliminate this kind of political spending, you're just throwing the baby out with the bathwater. When that happens, you're not only limiting the power of "politically incorrect" people, you're also limiting the power of people who are promoting good causes. It's a trade-off.
- Tyler McFarland
It is easy to look at somebody and say that it can be done, but I believe Koch is advocating against equality. To me his words can be equated to saying Usain Bolt can run X mph why can't you? Although people are capable of pulling themselves out of poverty there are so many factors fighting against them. I am a strong believer in the idea that (wo)men are born equal, but if that is the case then we are seeing some people struggle through the psychological barage of poverty with little to no resources to help. It has been show that the increase in allostatic load (stress) from poverty is directly correlated with a decrease in working memory. I believe that Koch is using his money to advocate against addressing a serious issue of inequality in this country.
ReplyDelete