To make you fume this weekend (or laugh, according to taste): a regulation Graun article on divesting portfolios of their involvement with fossil fuels etc. It's full of the usual communistic claptrap: "A vast amount of the financial system is deeply undemocratic...", with entertaining followup exchanges BTL - "Are you presenting that as a bad thing? Should people get a vote on how you spend or invest your money?" / "Above the level of personal expenditure: yes".
And, as ever, more participating CiF-ers are hostile to this dictatorial crap than support it. Recall the saying of Nietzsche cited a couple of weeks ago: "You preachers of equality - from you the tyrannical madness of impotence cries out for 'equality': thus your secret desire to be tyrants disguises itself in words of virtue." Not everyone warms to tyrannical instructions.
Midway through, the mask slips well and truly as the writer bemoans:
there is a limit to the number of endowments and funds that represent beneficiaries who can be readily organised and are willing to submit to these demands, such as student bodies, religious communities and the constituents of progressive councils and cities
"Submit to demands" might be a form of words to be regretted after due consideration. And as a student of these things, I can unpack "organise" for you. It means "give instructions that will be obeyed". As in: "our problem is, we are good at mobilising the youth, but we are bad at organising them", a plaint made variously by (e.g.) Momentum in the wake of GE2019, and the mobilisers of the Occupy movement.
Ahh, the frustrating limitations of anarchy ...