If you followed the sources I'm using combined with the group narrative and agenda, they correlate with the narrative in the article. I've spoken on these issues a number times while addressing certain advocacy groups or special interest groups. I'll attempt to get you caught up with this conjecture.

As the article suggest there is currently a rift in the BLM construct. This is relevant to many organizations and grass roots movements that often eventually end up aligning with an establishment party, then they begin receiving injections of large donations from corporations, foundations, and NGO's (non government organizations). Often these entities are the very opposition in which the movement began from. In essence it ends up diminishing the movements agenda as the party they align with and or these entities manage to control their advancement they might reach otherwise as a grassroot.

We can clearly see this in the BLM aspect after several years of essentially getting no where in their cause. Having aligned with the democratic party, it's basically done nothing for them. Policies are brought up and gone with the wind. An example would be the latest Floyd issue on choke holds. These have been "outlawed" in many states, including where his death happened, yet no real sense of holding anyone to accountable occurs. To date as we bring it up, we've essentially have silence on what's being done. Gone with the wind. It will happen again. Then there's the defunding issue. Clearly a disinformation tactic to create division. No one wants to defund law enforcement, but divert some funding to a socialized combination partnership where force isn't necessary. Yet BLM doesn't help to emphasis this to a means it's almost compliant to allow its own diminishment. Or how about using some of that 90 million to stress their point as an offer to partner with local law enforcement. Where's all that money going!

That leads to who's getting all the money. And why is it taking this long to get a report on who's injecting it. Why's there seemingly a discrepancy in the group on money management? By now you might be getting a sense of how aligning with these entities have managed to diminish the movement? It's They are creating another sense of division on top of one already installed in the societal arena.

For this particular article I'm simply concentrating, as the article is, on that narrative between money and the movements current challenges from within.