To the Editor:
Professor Steven Brint did the profession and the public a great service in “The Political Machine Behind the War on Academic Freedom” (The Chronicle Review, August 28). In chronicling the political operatives waging the culture war against American higher education, Brint powerfully demonstrates that recent legislation attacking critical race theory (CRT) and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives originate with a “national-level political machine” comprised of a “well-established webs of organizations” closely tied to the Republican party. One caveat I would add is that the organizations profiled in the piece are all funded by the same small handful of wealthy plutocratic libertarian donors. Following the money helps clarify the stakes in this full-frontal attack on academic freedom.
For example, as Brint details, Christopher Rufo played a key role weaponizing CRT. However, Rufo’s entire career was possible because of the think tanks that platformed him: Claremont Institute, Heritage Foundation, Pacific Research Institute, and others. These organizations received their funding from the same donors (Koch, Bradley, Scaife, and others). Likewise, the Manhattan Institute, which published and amplified Rufo’s anti-CRT diatribes, has served as a mouthpiece for the plutocratic libertarians since being founded by Hayek devote Antony Fisher in 1978. It receives its funding from a who’s who of right-wing libertarian donors: Bradley ($8.3 million), Olin ($6.7 million), Sarah Scaife ($5.7 million), Spencer ($3.5 million), Smith Richardson ($2.9 million), Templeton ($1.9 million), Mercer ($1.7 million) foundations, Searle Freedom Trust ($5.8 million), DonorsTrust ($1.4 million), and others.
Likewise, when Rufo headlined ALEC’s 2020 conference, he stepped onto a stage funded by the same donors: Koch ($2.5 million), Searle Freedom Trust ($1.9 million), Bradley ($1.5 million), and DonorsTrust ($1.4 million). And when he co-wrote the Goldwater Institute’s anti- DEI model legislation? Goldwater is funded by the same cadre of donors.
Following the money behind this attack machine reveals what is at stake. Plutocrats target academic freedom because donor-preferred ideas, including anti-social notions of individual freedom, are largely discredited within the academy. The war on academic freedom, therefore, is not just Republicans scoring political points but also plutocrats preventing criticism of the ideas used to justify and legitimize their obscene wealth.
Isaac Kamola
Associate Professor of Political Science
Trinity College
Hartford, Conn.