Why does he support all of these strange causes?

There's something going on with:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper#Political_philosophy
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Open_Society_and_Its_Enemies
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Society_Foundations

emphasis should be put on a hierarchy of humanitarian values rather than advocacy of a free market as envisioned by classical liberalism.

What does that even mean? It sounds too polished. Too many big words. No simplicity here. Whaen I dig deeper I run into something as obscured and overly verbose as this: https://archive.is/KJ1lK Strengthening of the coordination of humanitarian emergency assistance of the United Nations. Can anyone understand what the heck this is? I'm lost. Maybe, that's what they're trying to do here. Hide what they are saying so that no one can understand it but them.

Its $873 million budget in 2013, ranked as the second-largest private philanthropy budget in the United States, after the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation budget of $3.9 billion.[19] As of 2020, its budget increased to $1.2 billion.

Giving away SO MUCH money. Why? What are these guys getting out of this? Bill Gates has made much more money as a philanthropist than he ever made as a capitalist. Huge gains in the biotech sector. George Soros seems to weild massive political influence. He was known for destroying entire countries with his currency trading. Now, he appears to destroy countries by giving money away. How does one world government help him? What's his dog in this fight? Certainly we have a spiritual component here. But, what would an atheist want out of all this? What motivates these people? How much more money would you really need? Or even want?

In 2007, Nicolas Guilhot (a senior research associate of CNRS) wrote in Critical Sociology that the Open Society Foundations serve to perpetuate institutions that reinforce the existing social order, as the Ford Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation have done before them. Guilhot argues that control over the social sciences by moneyed interests has depoliticized this field and reinforced a capitalist view of modernization.

Nicolas Guilhot is incorrect here. Intentionally? To assume that scientists aren't motivated by money is absurd on the face of it. When everyone in a field of study is being funded by the same names over and over year after year, do you think their politics might start to align with their patrons? The academy is captured. Real education must be attained elsewhere.