Key Takeaways
- • Climate activists protested outside MoMA's annual gala on June 8, 2023, demanding the museum sever ties with Henry Kravis, co-founder and co-executive chairman of KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.), the fourth-largest private equity firm in the U.S., over the firm's fossil fuel investments.
- • Marie-Josée Kravis, Henry Kravis's wife, serves as MoMA's board chair; the Kravis family has endowed a gallery within the museum, creating a high-profile nexus between major cultural institution leadership and a PE firm with significant energy sector exposure.
- • Approximately 15 protesters organized by three community groups—Climate Organizing Hub, New York Communities for Change, and Reclaim Our Tomorrow—coordinated the demonstration, later projecting messages onto the museum's garden wall reading "MoMA Drop Kravis," "Kravis funds climate chaos," and "Kravis Kills Communities."
- • The protest reflects a broader institutional divestment movement targeting cultural organizations' acceptance of donations from billionaires whose wealth derives from sectors with documented environmental and social harms, with particular focus on fossil fuel industry capital.
- • The timing leveraged acute air quality conditions in New York City, where dangerous smoke from Canadian wildfires created real-time visual evidence of climate crisis impacts, with NYC ranked as having the worst air quality among major global cities on the day following the protest.
Summary
Climate activists staged a coordinated demonstration outside the Museum of Modern Art's largest annual fundraising gala on the evening of June 8, 2023, targeting the museum's institutional relationship with Henry Kravis and his private equity firm KKR. The protest centered on KKR's substantial capital allocation to fossil fuel projects and the conflict presented by Kravis's prominence within MoMA's governance structure. Marie-Josée Kravis currently chairs MoMA's board, and the Kravis family has endowed a dedicated gallery within the institution, creating a direct link between the museum's leadership and a major PE investor active in energy sector deals.
The demonstration involved approximately 15 protesters organized by three community groups: the Climate Organizing Hub, New York Communities for Change, and Reclaim Our Tomorrow. The organizations mobilized around a specific demand: that MoMA terminate its association with Kravis and decline future donations tied to his financial interests. According to Climate Organizing Hub executive director Jonathan Westin, the activists framed KKR's fossil fuel investments as directly culpable for climate impacts visible in real time, stating: "This smoke that's in the air is coming from wildfires in Canada that are polluting the air we breathe and that is happening because fossil fuel profiteers like Henry Kravis are pouring billions of dollars into fossil fuels."
The protest occurred under notably hazardous atmospheric conditions. The Northeast experienced dangerous air pollution levels that evening due to smoke traveling from hundreds of Canadian wildfires—unusual in geographic scope and early-season intensity. New York City's air quality registered as the worst among major global cities on Wednesday, June 9, amplifying the activists' messaging about fossil fuel-linked environmental degradation. The protesters dispersed after approximately 90 minutes but returned at 9 p.m. to project rotating messages onto a wall within MoMA's garden, where the gala continued under a smoke-darkened, red-tinged sky.
This action reflects a widening institutional backlash against philanthropic contributions from billionaires whose wealth accumulation has generated documented social and environmental costs. The cultural sector has become a particular flashpoint, with growing activist pressure on museums and arts institutions to establish fossil fuel divestment criteria and reject donations tainted by energy sector capital. The MoMA protest exemplifies how activist organizations are leveraging both structural vulnerabilities—board composition and donor relationships—and acute environmental moments to amplify pressure on institutional leadership to recalibrate their funding sources and stakeholder alignments.
The demonstration involved approximately 15 protesters organized by three community groups: the Climate Organizing Hub, New York Communities for Change, and Reclaim Our Tomorrow. The organizations mobilized around a specific demand: that MoMA terminate its association with Kravis and decline future donations tied to his financial interests. According to Climate Organizing Hub executive director Jonathan Westin, the activists framed KKR's fossil fuel investments as directly culpable for climate impacts visible in real time, stating: "This smoke that's in the air is coming from wildfires in Canada that are polluting the air we breathe and that is happening because fossil fuel profiteers like Henry Kravis are pouring billions of dollars into fossil fuels."
The protest occurred under notably hazardous atmospheric conditions. The Northeast experienced dangerous air pollution levels that evening due to smoke traveling from hundreds of Canadian wildfires—unusual in geographic scope and early-season intensity. New York City's air quality registered as the worst among major global cities on Wednesday, June 9, amplifying the activists' messaging about fossil fuel-linked environmental degradation. The protesters dispersed after approximately 90 minutes but returned at 9 p.m. to project rotating messages onto a wall within MoMA's garden, where the gala continued under a smoke-darkened, red-tinged sky.
This action reflects a widening institutional backlash against philanthropic contributions from billionaires whose wealth accumulation has generated documented social and environmental costs. The cultural sector has become a particular flashpoint, with growing activist pressure on museums and arts institutions to establish fossil fuel divestment criteria and reject donations tainted by energy sector capital. The MoMA protest exemplifies how activist organizations are leveraging both structural vulnerabilities—board composition and donor relationships—and acute environmental moments to amplify pressure on institutional leadership to recalibrate their funding sources and stakeholder alignments.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.