top of page

The Big Business of Uyghur Genocide Denial

A New Lines investigation reveals a network of charities funneling millions into left-wing platforms that take Beijing’s side on the genocide allegations — and they’re all connected to an American tech magnate

January 18, 2022


Alexander Reid Ross

Alexander Reid Ross, Ph.D., is a senior fellow at the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right and senior data analyst at the Network Contagion Research Institute


Courtney Dobson

Courtney Dobson is a senior editor at Newlines


Rally in front of the British Embassy in D.C. ahead of an April 22 vote in the British House of Commons on whether or not to declare that a genocide is underway in Xinjiang province and Chinas treatment of the Uyghur Muslims on April 16, 2021 / Drew Angerer / Getty Images


Amonthslong investigation by New Lines can reveal that over the past five years almost $65 million has filtered through various entities connected with people who have defended the Chinese government and downplayed or denied documented human rights violations committed by Beijing against the Uyghur and Turkic Muslim minorities.

This funding has moved through a complex series of mostly tax-deductible investment funds and charities, all linked by virtue of their governance structures to one man: the 67-year-old American tech magnate Neville Roy Singham.

Of mixed Sri Lankan and Cuban heritage, Singham has long held an ideological affinity with the Chinese Communist Party, dating to his youthful membership in the League of Revolutionary Black Workers, a Mao-influenced group based in Detroit, Michigan. In his capacity as a cadre of the organization, which advocated revolutionary unionism in opposition to racist policies within reformist unions, Singham took a job at the Detroit Chrysler plant in 1972 at the age of 18.

After attending Howard University, Singham spent the next several years cobbling together a consulting firm for equipment-leasing companies out of a basement in Chicago. In 1993, he named his company Thoughtworks, then expanded its focus to incorporate what Singham calls “Agile” software development, which involves adaptive management, decentralized systems, and close collaboration between developers and users.

In many ways Singham’s radical evolution from an evangelist of the Black industrial working class into a luminary of the information age embodies the high-flown dreams of the transformative ’90s.

According to a biographical note on the Chinese recruitment platform Boss Zhipin, Singham worked with Chinese tech monolith Huawei from 2001 to 2008 as a strategic technical consultant. During that period, he raved about China’s economic model, telling Fortune magazine’s senior editor David Kirkpatrick in 2008, “China is teaching the West that the world is better off with a dual system of both free-market adjustments and long-term planning.” Two years later, Thoughtworks’ Fifth Agile Software Development Conference was held in Beijing, with Singham proclaiming his own influence on Huawei in his opening speech.

Thoughtworks has since expanded to 17 countries, taking on clients in the business world while showing an interest in pro bono work for progressive media such as the news organization Democracy Now! and the Grameen Foundation, a well-regarded nonprofit focusing on microloans to the world’s poor.

In 2017, Singham sold Thoughtworks to Apax, a British private equity fund, for an undisclosed price (although thought to be in the hundreds of millions) and left the company altogether. Apax recently took Thoughtworks public on the Nasdaq stock exchange, in September 2021, with a valuation that nearly reached $9 billion.

Singham did not respond to multiple attempts to reach him via email and phone.

Singham is in a relationship with Jodie Evans, one of the founders of the women’s group Code Pink. New Lines was unable to confirm whether they are officially married, but in February 2019, Evans posted photos on Facebook of the couple celebrating their anniversary and referred to Singham as her husband. Code Pink was formed in 2002 as an activist group for progressive women united in their opposition to the Bush administration’s impending invasion of Iraq.

In September 2020, Evans was one of the speakers at an online conference of far-left activists convened under the slogan of “No Cold War.” The speakers contended that the United States escalates conflict with China, which, according to them, continues to wish for rational, peaceful relations with the West. “Today the U.S. elite are obviously terrified at the tremendous economic success of China,” Evans insisted, arguing that “China is not threatening the U.S. militarily.” Also, she said, “China’s success stands in the way of U.S. domination of the world.”

American history, says Evans, “begins with what is called original sin. China, beginning in the 1400s, has not sought to be a maritime power. Sections of the U.S. capital and the deep state,” a term popularized by the pro-Trump right to characterize the U.S. intelligence community, “sadly have concluded that … China [is] an existential threat.”

Pitting the virtually irredeemable U.S. against the innocent and besieged China has become something of a narrative mainstay among segments of the anti-imperialist left in North America. Ostensibly rooted in ideological conviction, this line of thinking is also incredibly well financed.

One of the primary conduits for these donations, the People’s Support Foundation (PSF), was co-founded by Evans; documents describe her as its president. With an avowed mission to empower people through education, research and community, the PSF appears harmless, like any other philanthropic organization seeking to do good in the world. Capitalized to a tune of $163.7 million, PSF, which is registered in the U.S. as a 501(c)(3) organization that grants its funders tax-deductible status for their donations, invests heavily in corporate stocks and securities and uses its revenue to disburse grants to other like-minded funds and educational projects. An unmistakable bias in favor of the Chinese government runs throughout the activities of PSF, which has no website.

The year 2017 appears to have been pivotal for those employed by, or personally close to, Singham. Not long after he sold his company to Apax, Thoughtworks employees began jumping ship only to turn up at PSF — and, conveniently, PSF’s headquarters is only a five-minute walk away from Thoughtworks.

PSF was established with the help of Chad Wathington, Thoughtworks’ chief strategy officer, who served as the foundation’s treasurer and director until late 2017, according to financial statements seen by New Lines. Jason Pfetcher, the treasurer and director of PSF from 2017 to 2019, is Thoughtworks’ former general counsel.

Neither Wathington nor Pfetcher responded to New Lines’ repeated efforts to contact them, and PSF’s financial filings for 2020 are not yet publicly available. (The extent of this investigation carries through 2019.)

Nevertheless, overlapping personnel and a carousel of large disbursements of funding going to like-minded and interlinked organizations remains a constant in all the tax and financial data that New Lines analyzed, as does the pro-China bias of the recipients of tens of millions in largesse.

While PSF has no public profile, Code Pink has generated its fair share of controversy in the intervening period for being less focused on specific acts of U.S. foreign policy and more sympathetic to authoritarian governments considered hostile to the U.S.

In 2014, the Anti-Defamation League revealed that Medea Benjamin, one of Code Pink’s founders, had attended a conference in Tehran that included German neo-Nazi Manuel Ochsenreiter and Kevin Barrett, who has claimed that “al Qaeda is Israeli and the state of Israel is a branch of al Qaeda.” When one fellow attendee, the journalist Gareth Porter, expressed regret for participating in the conference, Benjamin, a former Green Party candidate for California’s governorship, doubled down and insisted that she had no qualms with the conference.

In 2020, Code Pink initiated a campaign titled “China Is Not Our Enemy” in which the organization advocates for the U.S. to adopt a thoroughly conciliatory approach toward China. It calls on supporters to lobby members of Congress and hosts podcasts and webinars advancing the same argument.

Code Pink’s website also includes an FAQ section on the Uyghurs. “Our concern is that it is being used as a tool to drive the U.S.’s hybrid war on China,” it states, “instead of a human rights issue that needs to be addressed as such.” This page provides links to “helpful resources” on the topic, one of which appears to treat the plight of the Uyghurs as a human rights nonissue: A video featuring Evans and British academic John Ross shows the latter characterizing the Uyghur genocide allegation as “farcical” and a “total lie.”

Elsewhere, Ross, who was previously an economic and business adviser to Ken Livingstone, the controversial former mayor of London, has written, “If the real meaning of the term ‘human rights’ is used, it is evident that China has the best human rights record in the world — and those words are carefully chosen. … What is particularly striking is the factual contrast between what China has achieved and the laughable claim of the U.S. to a superior human rights record.”

According to Brian Hioe, editor of the Taiwan-based, left-wing news and commentary site New Bloom, this form of defense is part of an old playbook that uses anti-imperialist tropes to “paper over genocide.”

“The Chinese government, as well as its defenders, sometimes try to insist that Western powers are exaggerating or exoticizing what is taking place within Chinese borders,” Hioe told New Lines. “What is ironic, however, is that China’s rhetoric justifying the detention of Uyghurs was in many ways originally drawn from the U.S. War on Terror.”

“This is one means by which one can point to convergent behavior between the U.S. and China in terms of police or surveillance states, though certainly there are not vast detention camps on the scale of China in the U.S.,” Hioe continued. “One can otherwise point to, for example, China’s use of Israeli technology for its surveillance of Uyghurs. But the strategy taken by the Chinese government is to relativize the issue, while also deflecting blame back on the U.S. and other Western powers.”

Evans is a staunch advocate of the Palestinian cause and a fierce opponent of Israel. She and Benjamin support the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement that seeks to bring about economic consequences for Israel’s mistreatment of the Palestinians living under military occupation. Oddly, though, this doesn’t seem to apply to investments made by Evans’ PSF organization. According to the tax forms examined by New Lines, PSF has invested heavily in Israeli companies that openly work with the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).

In 2017, for instance, PSF held $59,424 in corporate stock in the firm Israel Chemicals Ltd. — a holding whose worth fell to just over $48,000 the following year but grew to over $72,000 in 2019. On its website, Israel Chemicals, Ltd. describes an ongoing collaboration with the IDF in “erecting a salt wall opposite the border with Jordan.” The nearly 10-foot-high wall “will form a natural and innovative engineering obstacle, contributing to Israel’s security in an area that will suffer no major environmental impact and will not be visible from the nearby hotels area or road.”

PSF also holds stocks in Caterpillar, the U.S.-based construction vehicle company that is vociferously opposed by pro-Palestinian activists for aiding in the demolition of Palestinian homes in the Occupied Territories. The BDS movement’s website hosts a number of articles condemning Caterpillar’s fleet of vehicles for participating in these acts. Yet according to its 2019 Form 990 filings, PSF had an investment worth about $200,000 in the company that year, down from its peak value of $291,365 in 2017.

PSF further invests in other major BDS targets including Hewlett Packard ($139,129 in 2019), which has provided technology to aid in the biometric monitoring of Palestinians by the Israeli military, according to multiple articles on the BDS Movement website. Another PSF investment is in Atlas Copco ($114,222 in 2019), which sold materials “used in the construction of the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem railway, which is partially built on occupied Palestinian territory,” according to the American Friends Service Committee’s website Investigate, which maintains a list of corporations and banks targeted by BDS.

These investments are not flukes but appear to be the result of conscious choices by PSF.

Out of 216 companies recommended for divestment by Investigate, PSF is invested in 51 of them, totaling over $13.5 million, approximately 8% of the foundation’s initial capital fund.

Neither Evans nor PSF responded to numerous attempts by New Lines to comment.

The proceeds from PSF’s investments are used to fund a variety of other organizations, ostensibly for charitable purposes. But here, too, a striking pattern emerges — this one leading back to Singham and his sprawling global portfolio.

A large portion of the grants disbursed by PSF has gone to the New York-headquartered United Community Fund, New Lines has found. PSF’s 2019 tax filings itemized some $6.7 million in wire transfers to that fund and their 2018 filings showed $6.17 million. According to 2019 Form 990 filings, the United Community Fund, a non-tax exempt 501(c)(4) corporation, is focused on “education and advocacy programs that promote human rights and social justice.” It is run by Franziska Kleiner, the former social and economic justice lead of the German subsidiary of Thoughtworks, the Singham-founded IT company. Like PSF, the United Community Fund has no website.

In a strange labyrinth of money funneling, some of the money that PSF gave the United Community Fund was redistributed to other entities that have ties to both organizations.

In 2019, for example, the United Community Fund gave $700,000 to an organization called Tricontinental, whose deputy director, Renata Porto Bugni, also happens to be the co-director and treasurer of the United Community Fund.

Another of the fund’s co-directors is Tings Chak, who is also head of Tricontinental’s art department. Thus, out of the United Community Fund’s four co-directors, two hold positions with Tricontinental and one was previously employed at Thoughtworks.

Chak, meanwhile, is a board member and co-director at the Justice and Education Fund. Her colleague from Tricontinental, researcher Manolo De Los Santos, is also a co-director at the Justice and Education Fund. The two organizations share an organizational secretary, Nancy Taylor.

The New York-based Justice and Education Fund describes its mission as raising “awareness through education and dissemination of information about pressing problems of society to effect social change.” Public records obtained by New Lines show that in 2019, the Justice and Education Fund gave $8.33 million to the United Community Fund.

Established in 2017, Tricontinental presents itself as an “institute for social research,” hosting articles on global issues and bringing together conferences like the one titled “No Cold War” in September 2020 where Evans spoke in defense of China.

Tricontinental’s founder, Vijay Prashad, is a former professor of international studies at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, whose work focuses on the Non-Aligned Movement during the Cold War and on the development of the BRICS countries: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. He resigned from Trinity College in 2017, and now serves as a senior fellow at the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, a think tank affiliated with Beijing’s Renmin University, which is jointly financed by China’s Ministry of Education and the Beijing municipal government. One of Prashad’s colleagues at the institute is Ross, who is listed on the website as a senior resident fellow.

Earlier this year, the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, along with two other think tanks based in China, Taihe Institute and Intellisia Institute, published a polemical and awkwardly worded report titled “‘America Ranked First’?! The Truth about America’s fight against COVID-19,” which reads as if it had been translated from Chinese into English using a Google algorithm. “Objective facts have shown,” the report stated, “that the U.S. is well deserved to be the world’s No. 1 anti-pandemic failure, the world’s No. 1 political blaming country, the world’s No. 1 pandemic spreader country, the world’s No. 1 political division country, the world’s No. 1 currency abuse country, the world’s No. 1 pandemic period turmoil country, the world’s No. 1 disinformation country, and the world’s No. 1 origin tracing terrorism country.”

Prashad’s own corpus has lately tended toward defending the Chinese government with respect to one of its worst human rights abuses: the mass internment, reeducation, forced labor and sterilization campaigns waged in the northwest province Xinjiang against ethnic Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslim populations. The Biden administration recently labeled this ongoing gross human rights abuse a genocide and cited it as the reason the U.S. — along with the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand — is diplomatically boycotting next month’s Winter Olympics in Beijing.

In April 2021, Prashad co-authored an article for an organization called Globetrotter, which was then published in Asia Times and Peoples Dispatch. It presented the diplomatic boycott as part of an American disinformation campaign to ratchet up hostilities with China. “The U.S. government’s information warfare against China has produced the ‘fact’ that there is genocide in Xinjiang,” the article said. “Once this has been established, it helps develop diplomatic and economic warfare.”

Such articles appear to be part of a broader strategy to cultivate media outlets where pro-China propaganda can filter through.

Globetrotter is an international syndication service that produces articles focused on “the struggle for democracy and equitable societies across the planet,” according to its website, and Prashad is listed as its “chief correspondent.” Globetrotter has also partnered with the Peoples Dispatch to bring in additional writers who report on “people’s movements” around the world. Chak and De Los Santos are among Globetrotter’s inaugural writing fellows for 2020-2021.

Formerly known as The Dawn News, the Peoples Dispatch bills itself as “an international media project with the mission of bringing to you voices from people’s movements and organizations across the globe.” Like Globetrotter, contributors to the Peoples Dispatch include a familiar cast of characters in Singham’s constellation of friends, colleagues and family members including Kleiner and Singham’s son Nathan, and again Prashad, De Los Santos and Chak.

The registered address of Peoples Dispatch is the same New York address given on tax forms for the Justice and Education Fund.

Around the time that Prashad denied the Uyghur genocide in the article for Globetrotter, he also appeared on a YouTube channel called The Zero Hour with RJ Eskow, casting doubt on the plight of the Uyghurs, which human rights monitors had by that time labeled a genocide. “What’s the evidence?” he asked rhetorically. “Well, there’s none, really.”

There is plenty, according to Amnesty International.

“Amnesty has documented how Uyghurs, Kazakhs and other predominantly Muslim ethnic minorities in Xinjiang face systematic state-organized mass imprisonment, torture and persecution amounting to crimes against humanity,” Amnesty International U.K. campaigns manager Kristyan Benedict told New Lines.

Media reporting has corroborated Amnesty’s findings.

In November 2019, The New York Times published a major exposé based on 403 pages of leaked internal Chinese state documents, which, as the paper noted, “provide an unprecedented inside view of the continuing clampdown in Xinjiang, in which the authorities have corralled as many as a million ethnic [Uyghurs], Kazakhs and others into internment camps and prisons over the past three years.” And in 2020, BuzzFeed News won a Pulitzer Prize for its four-part investigation into the infrastructure of this internment program in Xinjiang based on satellite footage and interviews with former detainees.

That Prashad’s denial of atrocities against the Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslim minorities should coincide with mounting evidence that implicates the Chinese government is particularly noteworthy because, until recently, his organization was on record lending credence to the fact that these abuses existed.

Early into its existence, in 2018, Prashad’s Tricontinental highlighted key “problems” with Beijing, which it characterized as “very grave,” namely, “the detention of unknown numbers of China’s Uyghur minority — and the arrests of Marxist students.” By Prashad’s current standards, his own newsletter from this time would be guilty of “information warfare” in tandem with the U.S. military-industrial complex.

So why the remarkable about-face?

The answer may lie in Prashad’s closeness to Singham, whom, as recently as Nov. 24, 2021, he described on Twitter as “[o]ne of my oldest [and] dearest friends.”

In 2017 Prashad abandoned academia in favor of a Chinese think tank, and he inaugurated Tricontinental, which is also bankrolled in part by the United Community Fund.

In an email, Prashad told New Lines that he quit Trinity College in 2017 “because it was clear that neither the [administration] wanted me nor did I really want to spend the rest of my life there. When the opportunity afforded to do new things, for which I am grateful, I took it.”

Prashad declined to address New Lines’ questions about the sources of funding to Tricontinental, and he did not comment on Singham’s alleged financial involvement in his organization.

The majority of Tricontinental’s donor money remains unknown because funds are disbursed as pass-through donations by a major Wall Street investment bank. According to tax filings, Tricontinental received $12.45 million from Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund, a donor-advised charity that conceals its funders from the public record, making it a convenient clearinghouse for moving dark money to politically sensitive or controversial organizations.

Prashad’s outspoken pro-China bent coincides with a nadir in U.S.-China relations, precipitated by the growing evidence that bolsters Uyghur genocide accusations and a host of geopolitical disputes like Chinese industrial cyberespionage; the Chinese navy’s brinkmanship in the South China Sea; the Hong Kong police’s violent suppression of pro-democracy protesters in 2019; and Beijing’s increased belligerent rhetoric toward Taiwan, a U.S. ally.

Tricontinental isn’t the only organization in this network to benefit from the Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund’s anonymous contributors. The Justice and Education Fund also received a generous $15,255,000 — amounting to 99.5% of its total revenue for 2019. Another group, which took in $12 million from the Philanthropy Fund in 2019, is a cultural center in Manhattan called The People’s Forum. Featuring a coworking space, theater, media laboratory and café on its premises at West 37th Street, The People’s Forum characterizes its mission as being an “incubator for working class and marginalized communities to build unity across historic lines of division at home and abroad.”

One event hosted on Sept. 18, 2021, by The People’s Forum titled “China and the Left: A Socialist Forum,” was co-sponsored by Evans’ Code Pink and jointly keynoted by Prashad and the Qiao Collective, a self-described Marxist group of “ethnic Chinese people living across multiple countries” whose Twitter account routinely promotes the Chinese government narrative on most any topic, including denying the Uyghur genocide.

New Lines contacted the Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund to ask whether it’s aware that Tricontinental and The People’s Forum promote and amplify the narrative of Uyghur genocide denial, as well as what ethical standards the fund has in place to assess grant recommendations from donors to such organizations. The fund declined to comment.

Meanwhile, De Los Santos is a co-director at The People’s Forum, and the organization’s operations manager, Rita Henderson, also holds the position of director at Tricontinental, according to the organization’s 2019 Form 990 filings. Henderson’s bio on The People’s Forum states that she sits on the board at Tricontinental. In yet another overlap in personnel, Evans serves as a co-director and secretary of The People’s Forum.

The People’s Forum took in more than $3 million from the United Community Fund in 2019, which is not very surprising since De Los Santos’ Justice and Education Fund gave more than $8 million to the United Community Fund that same year.

Prashad and De Los Santos have collaborated outside of New York’s socialist milieu. The duo are travel companions.

In a photo taken in Venezuela on Nov. 21, 2021, De Los Santos is shown alongside Prashad and Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro giving the thumbs up on the day of regional and local elections in which several Venezuelan opposition politicians had been banned from participating. The European Union, which for the first time in 15 years was invited to send election observers to Venezuela, cited improvements in the country’s voting system but could not characterize the elections as free and fair. Prashad’s tweet embedding the image reads, “sovereignty against imperialism.”

Housed within The People’s Forum New York office is yet another media organization called Breakthrough News. Also pressing Uyghur genocide denial, this project is spearheaded by Rania Khalek, an apologist for Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, whose previous media ventures, Redfish and Soapbox, were both exposed by journalists as cutouts of Russian state-funded media. Soapbox’s parent group, Maffick, sued Facebook for libel in the U.S. District Court in California after the social media company labeled its subsidiaries “Russia state-controlled media.” But the case was dismissed, because the court agreed that Facebook “tendered a substantial amount of evidence in support of its view that Maffick is linked to the Russian government.”

“It’s completely unsurprising that this network turned to things like Delaware shell companies and U.S. accountancy firms, both of which don’t require any checks on the sources of income or what the funds might be used for,” said Casey Michel, author of “American Kleptocracy: How the U.S. Created the World’s Greatest Money Laundering Scheme in History.” Casey added, “Without increased oversight, expect far more networks like this to emerge — especially those networks that are spinning disinformation to cover up some of the most heinous crimes on the planet.”

Singham and others in his personal and professional network may be sincere in their belief that no abuses are taking place in Xinjiang and that human rights monitors and the U.S. government have exaggerated or mischaracterized Chinese state policy in pursuit of national interests. But Singham has his own bottom line to consider in fostering favorable relations between the U.S. and China.

Huawei, the company he worked closely with for seven years, was sanctioned by the U.S. by restricting American hardware manufacturers from exporting certain technology, including those used in superfast microchips, to the company, one of the world’s largest smartphone makers. Relatedly, Huawei, its chief financial officer, Meng Wanzhou, and two of the company’s U.S. subsidiaries were indicted by a federal grand jury in New York in 2019 on 18 counts of conspiracy to violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, including bank and wire fraud and conspiracy to defraud the U.S. through industrial espionage. (After being detained in Vancouver in December 2018, Wanzhou was released; she returned to China following an agreement she struck with the U.S. Department of Justice.)

The U.S. intelligence community considers Huawei a prominent national security threat: In 2020, the Federal Communications Commission formally designated the telecom giant as such, alleging it maintains close ties to the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese military establishment.

Huawei has also been implicated in China’s repression of the Uyghurs: It tested facial recognition software in 2018 that, according to The Washington Post, “could trigger a ‘[Uyghur] alarm’ — potentially flagging them for police in China, where members of the group have been detained en masse as part of a brutal government crackdown.”

Since being slapped with U.S. sanctions, Huawei’s returns have diminished: In October 2021, The Wall Street Journal reported that its “revenue fell 38% in the most recent quarter,” the fourth straight quarter of such American-induced losses.

Singham’s role as a strategic technical adviser with Huawei may have ended more than a decade ago, but he has continued to bank on Chinese development. He is invested in two companies in the country’s consultancy and food industries: Shanghai Luoweixing, with a registered capital contribution of $20 million; and Gondwana Foods, with one of $32.5 million. Singham is also listed as the legal representative of a third company, Shanghai Shinong Company Ltd., registered in January 2020.

His recent portfolio, too, overlaps with pro-China philanthropy.

In 2019, the Justice and Education Fund contributed $876,000 to a new group registered in Madison, Wisconsin, called People’s Welfare Association. One of the board members of that organization is Daniel Tirado Behrens, an employee at Shanghai Luoweixing.

In five years a web of organizations and individuals that promote apologetics for Beijing has emerged around Singham, and it all started with his sale of Thoughtworks in 2017. Details of the sale were not disclosed, but in a blog post Thoughtworks’ chief scientist, Martin Fowler, offered an explanation as to why Singham wanted to sell the company he had run for nearly two decades: “With the money that selling Thoughtworks would bring,” it would enable Singham to “accelerate” his activism. Yet, for an activist, Singham has remained elusive. He isn’t active on social media; and it seems he has made few public appearances since 2018. For someone linked to tens of millions of dollars going to pro-China causes, it would seem Singham prefers to keep a low profile.

Just as this investigation was winding down, the Twitter account for The People’s Forum published a thread in which it confirmed receiving money from Singham.

“A few years ago we met Roy Singham, a Marxist comrade who sold his company & donated most of his wealth to non-profits that focus on political education, culture & internationalism,” the thread began. “It seems to bother some folk that we receive funding that furthers our anti-imperialist politics. It seems to bother them even more that our funder is also a staunch anti-imperialist whose work goes back to the Black Panthers & the [League of Revolutionary Black Workers] in Detroit. Ultimately our solidarity with the peoples & countries at the epicenter of the struggle against US Imperialism will not be moved by the racist allegations made by people who loudly echo State Dept and Pentagon discourse.”

This thread, published on Dec. 21, followed New Lines’ request for an interview with the leadership of The People’s Forum. As of publication date, the request remained unanswered.



bottom of page