I promised a while back to tackle this subject, and here’s my effort. I don’t claim to really know the answer – that’s the short version of this post. But I’ll give it a try.
A great many people would probably answer that his goal is to do evil. But of course, that’s not the way he would conceptualize it. He’s also supported some causes that, objectively, seem inarguably good, such as the end of Communism in the eastern European countries. So, what gives?
One hint is the name of his philanthropic foundation: Open Society. What does that mean?:
Under George Soros’s leadership, the Open Society Foundations support individuals and organizations across the globe working to advance human rights, equity, and justice.
So far, it sounds like basic leftist boilerplate.
More:
Starting in Hungary in the mid-1980s, George Soros used his fortune to build a philanthropic network that became the Open Society Foundations—the name reflecting the influence of the philosopher Karl Popper, whom Soros first encountered as a student at the London School of Economics. In his book Open Society and Its Enemies, Popper argues that no philosophy or ideology is the final arbiter of truth, and that societies can only flourish when they allow for democratic governance, freedom of expression, and respect for individual rights—an approach at the core of the Open Society Foundations’ work.
Except for the “no final arbiter of truth” part, that sounds more like classical liberalism or libertarianism.
He started with efforts that weren’t expressly leftist:
George Soros began his philanthropy in 1979, giving scholarships to Black South Africans under apartheid. In the 1980s, he helped promote the open exchange of ideas in Communist Hungary by funding academic visits to the West and supporting fledgling independent cultural groups, as well as other initiatives. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, he created Central European University as a space to foster critical thinking—which at that time was an alien concept for most universities in the former Communist bloc.
With the Cold War over, he gradually expanded his philanthropy to Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the United States, supporting a vast array of new efforts to create more accountable, transparent, and democratic societies.
He then segued into libertarian efforts to end restrictions on drugs and same-sex marriage, the latter of which is certainly a more conventional leftist cause but could also be considered libertarian. The website explains his “evolving causes” this way:
Though his causes have evolved over time, they continue to hew closely to his ideals of an open society.
I suppose that he would consider anything traditional to be non-open – that is, closed. Which brings us to things such as this:
Since 2016, Soros has been donating sums exceeding $1 million to the campaigns of progressive criminal justice reform proponents through the Safety and Justice PAC in local district attorney elections. In many districts, such large contributions were unprecedented and the campaigning strategy was “turned on its head” with a focus on incarceration, police misconduct and bail system, according to the Los Angeles Times.
There’s nothing more “closed” than a prison, right?
Soros also has promoted “death with dignity” euthanasia and assisted suicide efforts; also basically a libertarian and/or leftist cause. He’s become persona non grata in his native Hungary, because (among other things) he backs lots of “migration” from third-world countries into Europe – again, that seems a very “open” and boundary-free cause.
I’ve written about Soros many times before; see this. For post about his Jewishness, please see this, this, and this. Soros was born an ethnic Jew but had zero education in Judaism and in fact he has said the following:
With Soros there’s also the fact that, that although he was born a Jew by the Nazis’ definition—in other words, he was born in Hungary to parents of Jewish ancestry—he was never given any instruction in Judaism and his parents had actually repudiated Judaism. They weren’t just non-practicing Jews (although they were indeed that), they were actually anti-Jewish, according to Soros himself, who said that he “grew up in a Jewish, anti-Semitic home,” and called his parents “uncomfortable with their religious roots.”
So one wouldn’t expect him to support Israel. What he’s said on that subject is this:
“I don’t deny Jews the right to a national existence – but I don’t want to be a part of it”. According to hacked emails released in 2016, Soros’s Open Society Foundation has a self-described objective of “challenging Israel’s racist and anti-democratic policies” in international forums, in part by questioning Israel’s reputation as a democracy. He has funded NGOs which have been actively critical of Israeli policies including groups that campaign for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel
Typical leftist stuff and quite unsurprising.
I’ve probably barely scratched the surface on this, but I think the basic template is Soros’ opinion that whatever he sees as “open” is good, and what he sees as “closed” is bad.
[NOTE: Here’s a summary of Popper’s book about “open societies.” His definition doesn’t seem exactly the same as that of Soros.]
