"Omidyar is basically a dot com version of Soros. He’s a massive leftist donor and his network is fleeing India."
'The move comes a year after Omidyar Network and nine other NGOs came under the radar of India’s Central Bureau of Investigation, which serves similar roles as the FBI in the U.S., over alleged violation of the nation’s Foreign Contribution Regulation Act that oversees a firm’s ability to receive overseas donations.'
Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/crackdowns-on-leftist-nonprofits-cause-omidyar-network-to-flee-india/
(Excerpts from Rajiv Malhotra & Vijaya Vishwanathan's book "Snakes in India" 2022)
Omidyar Network India (ONI), based out of Mumbai, is the Indian initiative by Pierre Morad Omidyar, the founder of eBay, a man with a net worth of around twenty billion dollars. He is a great example of a philanthropist wanting to change the fundamental workings of society and politics. A reasonable way to introduce him would be to think of him as a younger version of another billionaire, George Soros.
Both are ultra-wealthy and self-made and want to use their wealth to bring about social change worldwide in accordance with their favorite model of how society ought to be. Both are portrayed as humanitarians who are ‘protecting democracies’. They want to help societies fight authoritarianism. Both are the proverbial ‘good cops’ operating on the global frontier where savages (i.e., those that disagree with their worldviews) and their cultures need to be civilized.
Between them, Omidyar is far more tech savvy and strategic in his approach to social engineering. His ‘investments’ are couched in carefully selected jargon, and one must dig deeper to tease out the socio- political disruptions hidden beneath the surface. A Forbes article depicts Omidyar as a champion protecting ‘democracies under attack’.1 When he invests in ventures that offer ‘data protection and privacy rights’, the long-term vision is to protect citizens from their own governments that might use the new technologies for surveillance and control. Ironically, many of his own ventures are specifically in the field of data collection, behavioral analysis, and different kinds of AI applications.

Pierre Morad Omidyar
*
By comparison, earlier civilizing missions from the West were less sophisticated, requiring more time, resources, and manpower. Omidyar’s approach is far more efficient because the Indians themselves do the work, generate revenue and provide feedback for real-time monitoring. They are often young, inexperienced and bright, and are being carefully groomed into the kind of leaders that can fulfil his mission. Additionally, Omidyar has investments in organizations of strategic value that can yield datasets or provide the desired media coverage.
*
Omidyar’s activities are described with great precision – quite like an engineering project. There is the aura of a highly disciplined, formal process. Young technocrats are impressed by the jargon that makes them feel like proud members of a movement driven by ‘facts’, ‘science’, ‘evidence-based decision-making’, and various kinds of ‘toolkits’. Omidyar also invests in an extensive network of ‘research’ institutes that compile information and develop position papers for advocacy. This so-called ‘groundbreaking research’ is part of the complex web that supports their ideology.
*
These billionaires have the financial strength to bypass FCRA regulations, and enter India as a for-profit business, to conduct their Breaking India activities. India needs to therefore take another look at foreign enterprises entering India on the pretext of doing business. It is going to be a challenge to separate the wheat from the chaff, but that is the need of the hour.
*
There are four ways in which ONI wants to change Indian society: Build infrastructure to implement tech solutions that will transform society and align it with ONI’s ideology. Invest in innovative entrepreneurs and leaders, especially the young using the latest technology, initiatives, and opportunities. Turn them into Omidyar’s loyal army of youth leaders and help manage their careers. Create a network of tech start-ups with equity enabling this social engineering to become financially self-sufficient. Influence the Indian government’s policies by funding various organizations, including its own start-ups, industry organizations, and established institutions. This four-pronged approach is rapidly building ONI’s footprint in India. It is very open about this multifaceted strategy and its websites and social media publicity are very informative.
***
Omidyar-China Nexus
Omidyar’s connection with the Chinese Communist Party and the fact that it seems to be working in ‘cooperation’ with the party is a direct national security risk to India. Whether this ‘cooperation’ means working for Chinese interests in India is the question. A 2017 report revealed that China was bragging about its control over President Joe Biden’s national security team and names Omidyar among others:
A 2017 report effectively claims – on the CCP’s behalf – that CNN host Fareed Zakaria, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, Facebook Oversight Board member Helle Thorning-Schmidt, NeverTrump philanthropist Pierre Omidyarand many others “co-operate” with the CCP and its goals.
***
One of ONI’s high impact projects brings the latest technology into areas already teeming with missionaries and separatist movements. The ReSolve Initiative project empowers some of those very NGOs we have been fighting over the previous decades that prey upon India’s rural and marginalized populations. It targets the 110 million Indians that help run micro and small businesses and the migrant workers estimated to be between 80 and 130 million.
*
The opportunity ONI has seized upon is that the social and cultural needs of these small businesses and migrant workers ‘have not been addressed systemically’. The vulnerability is identified as follows: ‘How do gender biases against women and the girl child play out among migrant women and children? How many of them get adequate food, nutrition, and education?’
This project brings entrepreneurs, thought leaders and policy makers together. So far ONI has funded sixty-seven rural projects in seventeen states of which twenty-one claim to have nationwide impact. At least 3.2 million people are directly involved; another 48 million Indians will get evangelized by ONI’s social justice activities.
*
Omidyar Network India is investing in Ashoka University’s Centre for Social Impact and Philanthropy, which claims to be India’s first academic center focused on enabling strategic and robust philanthropy for greater social impact. The ONI states: ‘The Centre intends to achieve this by developing knowledge products that inform sector strategy and action, providing independent, non-partisan platforms that build sector vision, voice and norms’.
*
Janaagraha is another NGO funded by ONI claiming to ‘transform the quality of life in India’s cities and towns’. It claims to bring ‘reforms to city governance’ through its activism to educate the public on local political issues and advocacy. This project helps ONI infiltrate local, state and Central governments in four thousand-plus cities across India.69 This is similar to the role Omidyar has played in US local politics to organize voters, promote specific policies, and pressure politicians.
*
Akin to its US parent, ONI is always looking for ways to influence media for political and sociological themes. For example, it has made equity investments in NewsLaundry and Scroll. Its grant to Swarajya raises eyebrows. One wonders if this is meant to be a public display of ‘balance’ or an entry point with long-term strategies to influence the editorial policy the way it did in the case of The Independent.
*
Indians familiar with the East India Company know very well the risks and uncertainties of foreign interventions in political and government affairs. What starts as friendly cooperation can easily turn hostile when there is a conflict of ideological or commercial interests. In Omidyar’s case, there is precedence of this in other countries. One example is the Omidyar funded movements that allegedly helped topple the previous Ukraine government.
*
In effect, Omidyar is building a parallel civic-governance infrastructure that is digital and bypasses the brick-and-mortar infrastructure. It is openly justifying this on the grounds that the existing infrastructure is ‘inadequate’.
*
The process of driving a wedge between the government and the people of the country has already started. The foundation has been laid and the structure is being rapidly built up. The risk to India’s sovereignty and democracy seems unprecedented.