Make the Road New York (MRNY) and CASA are such radical supporters of illegal immigration that they have both promoted the abolition of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), the federal agency charged with enforcing border security. Since January 2024, these two nonprofits have received a combined total of $1.1 million from the Ford Foundation.
Ford’s grant portal reveals Henry Ford’s fortune is now shipping out a minimum of $20 million per month to lefty policy advocates. That’s a pace of nearly $700,000 per day.
You have likely been one of the funding partners. During the Biden administration, federal agencies approved a cumulative total of more than $7 million in taxpayer-financed grants just for CASA and MRNY. This mix of federal and foundation funding for Left-wing advocates was the subject of “Public Funds, Private Agendas: NGOs Gone Wild,” a June 4 subcommittee hearing of the U.S. House Committee on Government Oversight.
Scott Walter, president of the Capital Research Center, was invited as a witness to help the committee understand the problem. But not all the witnesses wanted to acknowledge that America’s nonprofit sector is the home of political beasts, let alone that the vast majority of them are on the Left.
“Nonprofits feed, heal, shelter, and nurture people of every age, gender, race, socioeconomic status and political persuasion,” claimed Diane Yentel, the president of the National Council of Nonprofits, in her written testimony.
She stuck with that script throughout the hearing, not even deviating when challenged about the funding agendas of the foundations listed as her “Core Mission Partners” (i.e.: donors) at the National Council of Nonprofits. A partial list of her partners includes not just Ford, but also the Freedom Together Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the W. K. Kellogg Foundation, William & Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Kresge Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation, the Marguerite Casey Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, and the David & Lucile Packard Foundation.
According to their 2023 IRS filings, just those ten have combined net assets of $125.1 billion. Like Ford, most of them are spending the money of industrialists who have been deceased for decades. And they are only some of the larger stars in a vast galaxy of lefty donor foundations.
As Yentel said, it’s true that her donors—including Ford—also provide funding for unobjectionable social goods such as food, health care and shelter. But it’s disingenuous (and that’s putting it nicely) for her to go before the people’s House and pretend her donors haven’t also “gone wild” with partisan lefty advocacy.
An analysis of the Ford Foundation’s $20 million per month Left-wing advocacy spending sprees demonstrates what she was dodging.
Just one telling, partisan example is more than $3.4 million awarded by Ford since April 2024 to the Center for American Progress (CAP). The flagship think tank for the mainstream Democratic Party CAP has been the premier professional parking place for Clinton Family loyalists waiting for a political campaign or White House to run.
But the Ford Foundation’s funding agenda veers far harder to the Left than all that.
Hammers against capitalism
Ford gave a $200,000 grant to New Venture to be used as “Core support to change economic policies and narratives to build public power.” Placed within the context of Ford’s repeated and documented hostility to free enterprise and capitalism, it’s not hard to imagine what sort of “economic policies” they hope to change and the “public power” they desire to enhance.
Hammer & Hope, an avowedly communist journal, has received a minimum of $1.25 million from Ford since January 2024. They are proud to have a name associated with the former Soviet Union’s hammer & sickle flag. But the staff of H&H concede that even that may not be crazy enough for a woke era in which—they imply—hammers aren’t used by women.
“The symbol of the hammer has its limits,” explains the H&H website. “Its arcane, masculinist imagery makes it an unsuitable representation of a working class that today is concentrated in health care, the service sector, and the apparel industry, and, especially if we count unpaid household labor, is overwhelmingly female.”
Another group with a strong radical Left agenda is Jews For Racial & Economic Justice Community, recipient of a $200,000 check from the Ford Foundation in August 2024. The mission of JFREJ Community is to grow the “New York Jewish Left” and the city’s “progressive Jewish community.”
Jews For Racial & Economic Justice Action (JFREJ Action), described by JFREJ Community as its “sister organization,” is a political advocacy nonprofit. Earlier this year, JFREJ Action endorsed socialist Zohran Mamdani in his ultimately successful campaign to win the New York City Democratic mayoral primary. Among his campaign statements, Mamdani pledged to create free mass transit, government-run grocery stores and arrest Benjamin Netanyahu if the Israeli prime minister visited the city.
Though its fortune was earned in the free market by a legendary auto pioneer from Dearborn, Michigan, the Ford Foundation has long since decamped with the loot to a fancy building in New York City. The Big Apple’s sane voters and entrepreneurs may soon regret this relocation.
Similarly, the mission of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) is to “win transformational progressive change.” A June 2024 IPS essay argued that “U.S. Capitalism is unsustainable,” and proposed replacing it with “economic democracy and public ownership of green energy.”
The Ford Foundation has been comfortable enough with this message to ship at least $440,000 to IPS since June 2024.
Putting these ideas into practice is the job of the Congressional Progressive Caucus Center (CPCC), an advocacy think tank for those who think congressional Democrats haven’t moved far enough to the Left. This includes the Ford Foundation, which gave CPCC $300,000 in February 2024. As with many Ford grantees, the home page of the Congressional Progressive Caucus Center website features images of demonstrators shaking fists and shouting into megaphones.
Presumably opposed to profits, the commies at Hammer & Hope began operating as an independent nonprofit in July 2024. Before that they were incubated as a project within the New Venture Fund.
New Venture is one of seven donor NGOs managed by Arabella Advisors, a network that annually rakes in more than $1 billion from many of the same funding foundations that make up the “Core Mission Partners” for Ms. Yentel’s National Council of Nonprofits. In 2022, the Marguerite Casey Foundation, one of those Core Mission Partners, also gave $750,000 to New Venture for Hammer & Hope (then known as the “Black Radical Project.”)
Arabella’s role as a huge advocacy hammer for the Left is well established. A November 2021 report from The Atlantic referred to it as “The Massive Progressive Dark-Money Group You’ve Never Heard Of.” An April 2021 New York Times analysis described Arabella as a “leading vehicle” of “dark money” for the Left “that has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars through a daisy chain of groups supporting Democrats and progressive causes.”
Since January 2024, the Ford Foundation has given at least $29.3 million combined to three of Arabella NGOs: the New Venture Fund, the Hopewell Fund and the Windward Fund.
For example, in October 2024 Ford gave a $200,000 grant to New Venture to be used as “Core support to change economic policies and narratives to build public power.”
Placed within the context of Ford’s repeated and documented hostility to free enterprise and capitalism, it’s not hard to imagine what sort of “economic policies” they hope to change and the “public power” they desire to enhance.
Ford granted $3.5 million to Arabella’s Windward Fund in August 2024., earmarked for Windward’s Heartland Fund. Just as Hammer & Hope once was at New Venture, Heartland is currently a fiscally sponsored project of the Windward Fund. Heartland’s “Key Policy Progress” page lists the Inflation Reduction Act and the other severely partisan, big government accomplishments of the Biden administration.
Climate colonialism
The “just transition” language is often lefty code-speak for “push unreliable weather dependent energy on poor people who can’t fight back.”
Despite the name, the Inflation Reduction Act hiked wind and solar energy subsidies rather than reduced inflation. Since January 2024, the Ford Foundation has sent tens of millions of dollars to support this cause.
A $300,000 grant was approved in September 2024 for PowerSwitch Action. The Ford grant description reads: “Core support to Green Workers Alliance to elevate workers’ voices in the renewable energy sector.”
Eighty-two percent of total American energy consumption in 2023 was sourced to oil (38.8 percent), natural gas (34.5 percent) or coal (8.9 percent.) The so-called “renewables” – a public relations euphemism for weather restricted wind and solar energy—were together good for just 6.8 percent.
Nuclear power is not restricted by weather, nor really anything else. With a 92.3 percent capacity factor, meaning that it runs at full power almost all of the time, a nuclear reactor is the most reliable energy system we have. It is also far safer and cleaner than all of our reliable electricity fuels and emits no greenhouse gas emissions at all.
But PowerSwitch Action and at least eight other recent recipients of Ford funding are all opposed to nuclear energy. The other eight are Friends of the Earth, 350.org, Sierra Club Foundation, Institute for Local Self-Reliance, League of Conservation Voters Education Fund, Oil Change International, World Resources Institute, and the Rainforest Action Network.
Collectively, those nine strident opponents of limitless, clean and reliable energy have received nearly $6 million from the Ford Foundation since 2024.
Similarly, the Sustainable Markets Foundation is both a supporter of the most noxious anti-nuclear NGOs (such as the Nuclear Information and Resource Service) and a major proponent of weather dependent wind and solar power.
Since July 2024, Sustainable Markets has received at least $1.4 million from the Ford Foundation. The grants are for such causes as “secure Indigenous Peoples’ rights in the green economy,” “provide popular education on gender and the climate crisis,” and implementing a “just transition” in the energy markets.
The “just transition” language is often lefty code-speak for “push unreliable weather dependent energy on poor people who can’t fight back.” Since 2024, Ford has used that phrase in the descriptions for grants totaling $11.5 million.
For example, in April 2024, Ford’s philathropoids approved a $500,000 grant so the Natural Resource Governance Institute “for a just energy transition in Colombia and the phasing out of oil in Peru.”
In September and November 2024, respectively, Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs and the International Trade Union Confederation each received separate $1 million grants from Ford to bring about the “just energy transition in Africa.”
Meddling with Africa’s energy needs was the purpose of more than $5 million in combined Ford grants since May 2024 to the Africa Centre for Energy Policy and The African Climate Foundation.
Ford’s description on a $1 million grant for The African Climate Foundation explained that they expected the loot to be used to “leverage a Just Energy Transition in Senegal, Nigeria, and South Africa and support green industrialization.”
According to Our World in Data, those three nations are home to a combined 100 million souls who have less than four hours of access to reliable electricity each day.
Counting all of sub-Sharan Africa, almost 600 million people endure this extreme form of energy poverty. For heat and cooking, they often burn wood and dung—“renewable” energy, to be sure, but at the price of miserable indoor air pollution. They need energy—real energy—not an “energy transition” to weather restricted high school science projects.
Those have already failed them miserably. And they know it.
Roughly 11 million people in India still live in energy poverty. In 2014, Greenpeace tried to yank them off coal and give them solar panels instead. An October 2015 report in Scientific American explained what happened next:
When the former chief minister of Bihar state visited to inaugurate the grid, villagers lined up to protest, chanting, “We want real electricity, not fake electricity!”
By “real,” they meant power from the central grid, generated mostly using coal. By “fake,” they meant solar.
But the carbon cult didn’t stop there, and by July 2023 the failure had become widespread. According to the Washington Post: “About 4,000 solar mini-grids have been installed in India, of which 3,300 are government financed and owned [. . .] Only 5 percent of the government grids are operational…”
And now, Ford is spending millions to inflict a failure on Africa that has already arrived.
“A team of Dutch researchers reported in 2017 that in a sample of 29 solar systems in sub-Saharan Africa, only three were fully working,” reported the WaPo.
Solving such challenges for real—literally brining light to the impoverished people of the world—is what the National Council of Nonprofits president presumably meant when she claimed her members “feed, heal, shelter, and nurture people.”
Henry Ford chased away poverty for billions when he put the world on wheels. But now a National Council of Nonprofits member foundation bearing his name is using his multi-billion-dollar fortune to impose climate colonialism on people too poor to fight back.
What is “multi-racial democracy”?
A Pew Research Center analysis of the November 2024 presidential election concluded that Republican Donald Trump “won with a voter coalition that was more racially and ethnically diverse than in 2020 or 2016.” [. . .] This “multiracial” democratic coalition coming together, but for Republicans, is not what the political progressives at Proteus and the Ford Foundation had in mind.
“Sustainable investment” is another of the grant description babble speak phrases Ford uses to describe its anti-energy agenda. That term appears in a cumulative total of at least $3.5 million in grants sent out by Ford since 2024.
For example, Arabella’s New Venture Fund was awarded an $850,000 grant in February 2024 “for the US Impact Investing Alliance’s rapid response fund to educate investors, policymakers and the public about sustainable investment.”
The Arabella network isn’t the only giant pass-through funder of Left-wing advocacy and projects that have recently raked in multi-millions from Ford.
The Amalgamated Charitable Foundation has been awarded at least $10.8 million from Ford since March 2024. Now an independent nonprofit, Amalgamated Charitable was spun off from Amalgamated Bank, a subsidiary of the stridently Left-wing purple-shirted warriors at the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).
Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors (RPA) has been awarded at least $24 million from Ford since February 2024. In its most recent annual IRS filing, RPA reported shipping out $410.5 million in grants. Many of the largest recipients of RPA grants are on the list of the world’s most strident, anti-energy, anti-nuclear advocacy nonprofits. Examples include Oil Change International ($3.9 million), Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives ($3 million), World Wildlife Fund ($2.8 million) the Environmental Defense Fund ($1.6 million), the Center for International Environmental Law ($1.6 million), and the Natural Resources Defense Council ($1.2 million.)
Ford grant officers have awarded NEO Philanthropy at least $10.1 million since March 2024. One of the largest piles of Ford loot—$2.3 million—was for NEO’s Four Freedoms Fund. The purpose, according to Ford’s grant description, was “to strengthen the capacity of the immigrant justice movement to ensure all immigrants, regardless of status, have dignity, power to shape change, and agency to determine their life, community, and future.” [emphasis added.]
The Proteus Fund has scooped up at least $4.5 million from Ford since 2024. Proteus doesn’t hide its partisan-Left objectives. A “Strategies for Change” statement on the group’s main page says Proteus exists for “nurturing a progressive ecosystem” and to “promote progressive values.”
With that background, it’s a lot easier to guess what the Proteus mission statement means: “We support movements for justice, equity, and democracy through shared strategies and approaches that lead to legal, social, and cultural sea-changes.”
In November 2024, Ford approved a $1 million grant to Proteus for the “RISE Together Fund to support Black, African, Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim, and South Asian (BAMEMSA) movements to build a just, inclusive, and multiracial democracy in the U.S.”
What does a “multiracial democracy” look like?
A Pew Research Center analysis of the November 2024 presidential election concluded that Republican Donald Trump “won with a voter coalition that was more racially and ethnically diverse than in 2020 or 2016.” [emphasis in original]
Pew also reported that Hispanic/Latino voters were almost evenly split, going 51 percent for Democrat Kamala Harris and 48 percent for Trump, a big difference from the 61 percent support for Joe Biden in 2020. Trump also nearly doubled his support from Black voters.
This “multiracial” democratic coalition coming together, but for Republicans, is not what the political progressives at Proteus and the Ford Foundation had in mind. Nonetheless, “multiracial democracy,” and many variants on saving our supposedly embattled democracy figure prominently in recent Ford grant priorities.
Community Change parks the “multi-racial democracy” goal right at the top of their main web page. The “What We Do” page clarifies how they want the so-called multi-racials to vote: “We bridge the worlds of grassroots organizing and progressive politics to change the systems that impact our communities.” [emphasis added]
Ford has granted at least $3.3 million to Community Change since April 2024.
In November 2024 Ford approved $60,000 for Arabella’s New Venture Fund to respond “to rising authoritarian trends and toxic polarization.”
When too much of the multi-racial democracy voted the wrong way, the Ford team must have become convinced that American democracy itself was dead. In March 2025 they gave New Venture $1 million more “to support a pro-democracy movement and strategy in the U.S.”
Similarly, the Tides Center has been approved for at least $3.1 million in Ford loot since February 2024. The Tides main page boasts of their partnership with the Green New Deal Network. Sponsored by Left-wing Congressional figures such as Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, the Green New Deal was an anti-energy proposal so extreme that former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell referred to it as a “radical, top-down, socialist makeover of the entire U.S. economy.” Even Nancy Pelosi dismissed it as the “green dream or whatever they call it.”
An $800,000 Ford grant to Tides in March 2024 was to be used to help “social justice advocates committed to a pro-democracy framework.” Another $100,000 was added in October 2024 for the “Democracy Revival Center.”
Then the “democracy” didn’t put the right people in office. Tides responded with $250,000 more in December 2024 “to develop strategies and partnerships for a multiracial democracy.”
“Civic engagement”
Are the Ford philanthropoids going to begin subsidizing lawsuits against the Ford Motor Company for creating the demand for Exxon’s gasoline? To be ethically consistent, should the Ford Foundation sue itself on behalf of the Earth?
“Nonprofits exist to serve the public good, not partisan politics,” claimed National Council of Nonprofits president Diane Yentel in her testimony last month.
It’s fair to say most Americans agree, and don’t think altering American political outcomes for “progressive” or any other agendas is appropriate. Charities are, after all, implicitly subsidized by the taxpayers who must pay more in taxes so the tax-exempt can pay nothing.
But, as the previously discussed Ford grants demonstrate, the definition of “public good” has been stretched much further than Ms. Yentel lets on. In her testimony, she elliptically referred to the exemptions in nonprofit law that her members exploit.
“Nonprofits engage in public policy education related specifically to their missions, but may not and do not use federal funding for lobbying federal policymakers,” Yentel told Congress. “Public policy engagement and understanding is essential for nonprofits to address challenges and ensure their communities’ voices are heard in the legislative process. Nonprofits also may promote civic participation in a neutral, nonpartisan manner. Helping citizens understand the electoral process, ensuring they are informed, and promoting civic engagement are fundamental components of a strong, participatory democracy.”
The Ford Foundation organizes its grants into nine program areas. The largest is named “Civic Engagement and Government.” By the overwhelming evidence on its own grant website, the Ford Foundation is heavily invested in this form of “charity.”
Since 2024, at least 568 Ford grants have gone out under this program label. None of the other eight program areas are credited with even 100 grants. Four of the nine have fewer than ten grants. (In many cases, Ford files individual grants into more than one of the nine headings or none at all.)
One of the largest examples of these recent Civic Engagement and Government program grants was approved in July 2024 for EarthRights International (ERI). The $2.9 million award to ERI was for “general support.”
What is Ford generally supporting?
ERI supports lawsuits aimed at “climate justice.” An example of what that euphemism means in practice is Earth Rights International’s legal representation for left-wing local governments that are suing Exxon for its history of selling gasoline in Colorado. An ERI news release claims the energy giant “should be held financially responsible for their contributions to the climate crisis.”
Ironically, the Ford Foundation’s entire fortune was created from this supposed offense against the climate. Are the Ford philanthropoids going to begin subsidizing lawsuits against the Ford Motor Company for creating the demand for Exxon’s gasoline?
To be ethically consistent, should the Ford Foundation sue itself on behalf of the Earth?
In addition to placing this ERI grant under its Civic Engagement and Government program listing, the Ford Foundation has dual-posted it to the “Natural Resources and Climate Justice” grant programs. The latter, though not as commonly used as the “civic engagement” tag, was the parking spot for most of the previously mentioned anti-energy grants.
To Ms. Yentel’s point, some of Ford’s larger “civic engagement” grants really do go to what the National Nonprofit Network and the rest of us would consider the “public good.”
A June 2024 general support grant for $750,000 from this program went to the Henry Ford Museum, back in Dearborn, Michigan, where the Ford Foundation’s money came from in the first place. Similarly, there was a September 2024 grant of $350,000 for the Detroit Institute of Arts.
But then there’s the $700,000 Civic Engagement and Government program grant, also given in September 2024, so the aforementioned NEO Philanthropy’s State Infrastructure Fund (SIF) can “engage historically-underrepresented voters in the democratic process and protect their right to vote.”
NEO claims the purpose of SIF is to “Empower underrepresented communities to increase voter awareness, civic participation, and advance voting rights in the United States.”
In practice, SIF is a get-out-the-vote program for the Democratic Party.
A hint of this is found in an after-action report on SIF’s work during the 2020 election. SIF boasts of sending $56 million to nonprofits in 17 states: Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin.
At least 13 of the 17 are the plausibly (and often hotly) contested battlegrounds from the presidential and U.S. Senate races over the last dozen years. Equally revealing is the absence of funding for California, New York, Illinois and the other deep blue states.
Is the “empowerment” of “underrepresented communities” in those safe Democratic-voting states not as important to NEO and Ford?
It is easy to imagine a very political and partisan reason why this might be the case, and it fits comfortably with Ford’s other “progressive” aligned grantees.
Charitably partisan
The front page of the Michigan Voices website concedes the supposedly nonpartisan nonprofit’s mission is to “build civic engagement capacity in progressive nonprofit groups that are led by and engage Black, Brown, and Indigenous people in Michigan.” Presumably the “Black, Brown and Indigenous people in Michigan” who don’t practice their “civic engagement” on the “progressive” side of politics need to find a different political committee charity.
But no such imagination is needed. Many other Civic Engagement and Government grants from Ford make the agenda abundantly clear.
The Michigan League for Public Policy is a policy nonprofit dedicated to growing and protecting big government. Since March 2024, Ford has given the Michigan League two general support grants totaling $460,000, both to “promote progress tax and budget policies” (the typo in both grant descriptions should have been written as “progressive.”)
A June 2024 Ford grant description for Michigan Voices proclaims the $100,000 award was to be used to “increase civic engagement” by low-income Detroiters. The front page of the Michigan Voices website concedes the supposedly nonpartisan nonprofit’s mission is to “build civic engagement capacity in progressive nonprofit groups that are led by and engage Black, Brown, and Indigenous people in Michigan.”
Presumably the “Black, Brown and Indigenous people in Michigan” who don’t practice their “civic engagement” on the “progressive” side of politics need to find a different political committee charity. Perhaps President Yentel from the National Council of Nonprofits has a suggestion?
The lefty objectives of the Chicago-based Midwest Academy are similarly clear: “Empowering progressive organizers is our mission.” Since March 2024, Midwest Academy has been approved for a cumulative total of at least $865,000 from the Ford Foundation. Almost half of it is in two “civic engagement” grants where Ford stipulates unambiguously the money is to “build progressive infrastructure.”
Once known for its “Fight for $15” minimum wage advocacy a decade ago alongside the stridently Left-wing Service Employees International Union, Restaurant Opportunities Centers United was granted a total of $700,000 from the Ford Foundation in 2024. One of the grants, for $300,000, is from Ford’s Civic Engagement and Government program.
The People’s Action Institute website has a “Movement Politics” page that forthrightly admits they exist to “shift voters’ perspectives towards progressive, holistic solutions” and boasts of their training of candidates who will promote same. Since May 2024, Ford has given at least two general funding grants totaling $1.3 million to People’s Action, the most recent was from Ford’s civic engagement bucket.
In November 2024, Deep South Today was approved for $3 million, with a Ford Foundation grant description that says it was “for civic engagement and public dialog through service journalism.”
Deep South is a consortium for two news websites covering Mississippi and Louisiana. Both frame their stories from a perspective sympathetic to big government. A sample headline from June: “Trump plan to shut down chemical safety watchdog could mean ‘more explosions, more deaths’ in Cancer Alley.”
The executive chair of the board for Deep South is Andrew Lack, who—until 2020—was captain of the regime media ship at NBC News. Other major donors to Deep South have been a “who’s who” of Left-wing advocacy philanthropy, such as the MacArthur Foundation, the Hewlett Foundation, and the Marguerite Casey Foundation.
As noted previously, the Marguerite Casey Foundation—along with Ford—is also a major supporter of both National Council of Nonprofits and the New Venture Fund’s overtly communist Hammer & Hope media project.
Ford’s recent fueling of Left-wing media goes even deeper than that.
Media Matters for America, approved for a $250,000 Ford grant in November 2024, was founded by Clinton Family attack lapdog David Brock. As that history would indicate, Media Matters is the epitome of a rabidly partisan, anti-Republican media platform. The only reason to give them money is to advance the political and policy messaging of Democratic presidents and congressional leadership.
Ford has also forked over millions of dollars to news nonprofits that profit off of the intersection of identity politics and actual politics.
19th News is named for the constitutional amendment that gave women the right to vote and has been approved for nearly $1.4 million in Ford grants since July 2024.
Co-founder and CEO Emily Ramshaw claims the idea for 19th News “was born out of the 2016 election, when Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump following a campaign that far too often centered around questions of a woman candidate’s “electability” or “likeability.””
The board of 19th News includes Sunny Hostin, best known as a combatant on ABC TV’s The View, who infamously blamed “uneducated white women” for President Donald Trump’s 2024 victory. After the 2016 race, Hillary Clinton also blamed her defeat on weak-willed white women who were supposedly “under tremendous pressure from fathers and husbands and boyfriends and male employers not to vote for ‘the girl.’”
“The 19th Amendment remains unfinished business,” claims the 19th News. Perhaps the “business” will be completed whenever those insubordinate white women start voting correctly!
Henry Ford’s fortune is there to keep the dream alive.
The rest of the world
…many of Ford’s international grants are earmarked for protection or advancement of democracy, a seemingly worthy goal. But when so much of Ford’s domestic “democracy” grants are aimed at attacking democratic choices they oppose, how can we trust that they truly promote actual democracy elsewhere?
The 19th News grants show just part of the Ford Foundation’s commitment to the dying and discredited diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) regime.
For example, National Partnership for Women and Families (NPWF) was approved for a $4.5 million general support grant from Ford in April 2024. As of July, this is the first message that greets visitors to the NPWF website: “Attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion are attacks on all working women.”
With the exception of the aforementioned and clear anti-energy meddling in developing nations, this report on Ford’s recent grants mostly excludes those sent to nonprofits operating overseas. It is more difficult and time-consuming to prove these grantees are Left-leaning and even hard-Left agitators, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
As one example, the Global Fund for Women was awarded $2 million that the Ford team said would be used for “a pooled fund mechanism centering justice and feminist economic principles in its learning and funding.”
The Global Fund was also granted $400,000 “for the Activist-in Residence program, and for a feminist foreign policy convening to strengthen the capacity of the Women’s Funding Network.”
The regimes in many developing nations treat women and girls atrociously. American philanthropy can and sometimes does do wonderful things to alleviate these situations.
But, given the funding priorities of the Ford Foundation within the United States, it’s difficult to read grant descriptions about “feminist foreign policy” and “feminist economic principles” and not assume this money is inflicting the same loopy left priorities on people outside our borders as well.
Similarly, many of Ford’s international grants are earmarked for protection or advancement of democracy, a seemingly worthy goal. But when so much of Ford’s domestic “democracy” grants are aimed at attacking democratic choices they oppose, how can we trust that they truly promote actual democracy elsewhere? Does it mean they are funding Hammer & Hope-style communist media in poor countries?
If these people are funding so much anti-energy climate colonialism in developing nations with too little electricity, then it’s surely reasonable to assume they could be doing the same with some of those “democracy” grants.
And leaving these suspicious foreign grants out of the tabulation of Ford’s $20 million-per-month spending spree on lefty and partisan advocacy means the monthly count is probably even higher.
“Defending and supporting [nonprofits] should not divide us along political lines – it should unite us as Americans,” concluded Diane Yentel of the National Council of Nonprofits, in her June remarks to the House of Representatives.
She’s correct. But she should have shared that happy goal a long time ago with her fiercely partisan “Core Mission Partners” at the Ford Foundation.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Ken Braun
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://capitalresearch.org and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.
