Why does the author of this article act like there is not a difference between clearly ngo funded protest movements and grass root movements?
It is like an embedded watermark :)
This is how the game is played. Both teams play the game this way. Labelling one side as "shadowy" is just dishonest.
Shadowy is perfectly apt. The criminalization of protest uses deceptive techniques, out of proportion labeling, smearing, intimidation, the enactment of new laws, its arsenal is quite endless.
Haven't seen any left-wing groups do any of it.
His detractors though don't seem to see the difference between supporting things like lgbt rights and communism as an economic system.
https://www.geekwire.com/2023/the-billionaires-are-in-charge... https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2022/1/3/billionaire...
>To act like there is the same billionaire class interest in "protecting >climate" as there is "continuing burning fossil fuels if it makes us money" is >childish naiveté. Joker indeed.
I will put my conspiracy theory hat on. If you want to continue burning fuel and you have these pesky climate change activists. Why not fund the most aggressive and annoying groups? People get pissed off and vote for politicians that do not fight climate change. You can clearly make a case for why it makes sense.
plenty of them are left-leaning. I'm not sure about the "dark money" bit though