IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v56y2022i1d10.1007_s11135-021-01127-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public issues, policy proposals, social movements, and the interests of the Koch Brothers network of allies

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Doreian

    (University of Ljubljana
    University of Pittsburgh)

  • Andrej Mrvar

    (University of Ljubljana)

Abstract

There are many important societal issues facing the US and the world. There are also policy initiatives intended to deal with the problems raised by these issues. We couple some of the social issues and the policy initiatives to address them to the efforts of the Koch Brothers who created a powerful network of allies mobilized to support their libertarian ideas and ambitions. The relevant theoretical domain concerns the operation of social movements as the network of their allies forms a social movement. The mobilization includes obstructing many of the constructive policy initiatives discussed in the literature. This network has a diverse array of actors, each with their own core interests. A total of 443 Koch Brothers allies were identified. Their URLs were visited repeatedly to identify their core interests, for which a set of 47 keywords were established. A network for these keywords was constructed in which the links are the number of times they were shared by allies of the Koch Brothers. A variant of community detection was used to determine six communities of interests, all of which are very coherent. These communities are discussed in terms of the issues they raise for the US and the world. The implication for theory construction is to more fully understand the organization of actors opposing policy proposals for solving important societal problems and find effective ways for countering their destructive efforts.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Doreian & Andrej Mrvar, 2022. "Public issues, policy proposals, social movements, and the interests of the Koch Brothers network of allies," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 305-332, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:56:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s11135-021-01127-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-021-01127-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-021-01127-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-021-01127-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacob Jensen & Ethan Kaplan & Suresh Naidu & Laurence Wilse-Samson, 2012. "Political Polarization and the Dynamics of Political Language: Evidence from 130 Years of Partisan Speech," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 45(2 (Fall)), pages 1-81.
    2. Jinseok Kim & Jana Diesner, 2019. "Formational bounds of link prediction in collaboration networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 687-706, May.
    3. Jacob Jensen & Ethan Kaplan & Suresh Naidu & Laurence Wilse-Samson, 2012. "Political Polarization and the Dynamics of Political Language: Evidence from 130 Years of Partisan Speech," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 43(2 (Fall)), pages 1-81.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro & Matt Taddy, 2019. "Measuring Group Differences in High‐Dimensional Choices: Method and Application to Congressional Speech," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(4), pages 1307-1340, July.
    2. Azzimonti, Marina, 2018. "Partisan conflict and private investment," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 114-131.
    3. Gloria Gennaro & Giampaolo Lecce & Massimo Morelli, 2019. "Intertemporal Evidence on the Strategy of Populism," Working Papers 647, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    4. Draca, Mirko & Schwarz, Carlo, 2019. "How Polarized are Citizens? Measuring Ideology from the Ground-Up," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1218, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    5. Scott R. Baker & Nicholas Bloom & Brandice Canes-Wrone & Steven J. Davis & Jonathan Rodden, 2014. "Why Has US Policy Uncertainty Risen since 1960?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(5), pages 56-60, May.
    6. Elliott Ash & Daniel L. Chen & Suresh Naidu, 2022. "Ideas Have Consequences : The Impact of Law and Economics on American Justice," Working Papers hal-03899739, HAL.
    7. Roland G. Fryer, Jr. & Philipp Harms & Matthew O. Jackson, 2013. "Updating Beliefs with Ambiguous Evidence: Implications for Polarization," NBER Working Papers 19114, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Bose, Neha, 2020. "Attitude towards Immigrants: Evidence from U.S. Congressional Speeches," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 464, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    9. Bose, Neha, 2020. "Attitude towards Immigrants: Evidence from U.S. Congressional Speeches," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1259, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    10. Hacioglu Hoke, Sinem, 2019. "Macroeconomic effects of political risk shocks," Bank of England working papers 841, Bank of England.
    11. Caroline Le Pennec, 2020. "Strategic Campaign Communication: Evidence from 30,000 Candidate Manifestos," SoDa Laboratories Working Paper Series 2020-05, Monash University, SoDa Laboratories.
    12. Elliott Ash & Germain Gauthier & Philine Widmer, 2021. "RELATIO: Text Semantics Capture Political and Economic Narratives," Papers 2108.01720, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    13. Gloria Gennaro & Elliott Ash, 2022. "Emotion and Reason in Political Language," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(643), pages 1037-1059.
    14. King, Jesse & Gonzales, Amy L., 2023. "The influence of digital divide frames on legislative passage and partisan sponsorship: A content analysis of digital equity legislation in the U.S. from 1990 to 2020," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7).
    15. Sabina J Sloman & Daniel M Oppenheimer & Simon DeDeo, 2021. "Can we detect conditioned variation in political speech? two kinds of discussion and types of conversation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-28, February.
    16. Morales, Juan S., 2021. "Legislating during war: Conflict and politics in Colombia," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    17. Marina Azzimonti-Renzo, 2014. "Partisan conflict," Working Papers 14-19, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    18. Renáta Németh, 2023. "A scoping review on the use of natural language processing in research on political polarization: trends and research prospects," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 289-313, April.
    19. Marina Azzimonti-Renzo, 2013. "The political polarization index," Working Papers 13-41, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    20. Jeremias Nieminen & Salla Simola & Janne Tukiainen, 2023. "Political representation and the evolution of group differences within parties: Evidence from 110 years of parliamentary speech," Discussion Papers 161, Aboa Centre for Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:56:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s11135-021-01127-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.