[CIMC-work] last one, but beautiful
Garth Liebhaber
garthliebhaber at care2.com
Tue Jun 22 01:38:57 PDT 2004
makes me think about the utility of our office...
---- Begin Included Message ----
From: hep <hep at linefeed.org>
Sent: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 23:47:04 -0700
To: imc-us-process at lists.indymedia.org
Subject: Re: [imc-us-process] Definition of nonprofit, not-
for profit
Hi Folks!
I just wanna weigh in here with my opinion on this matter
of need vs. pay, etc.
I think this sort of scenario that Chris came up with, while
in the best of intentions, is one that is far too easy to
subvert.
Because what really defines poor? I have a lot of friends
who are jobless, they have no income and live very hand
to mouth, yet
they have extensive trust funds that they choose not to
use, or rich parents who would be willing to help them if
they wanted
it. While there are others who have a job making decent
wages, but since they have kids they really have no extra
money at all
and pretty much live paycheck to paycheck. Who in this
case is the more needy? Who in this case has "more"? It's
the same logic
that the welfare to work program tried to use. The
misperception that the person who has a job is less poor
than the person who
doesn't is a bad place to start. I can see this system
ending up with abuse pretty easily. In Chris's scenario,
while I would be
sad to lose that IMC asset, I would suggest they go forth
with the job, and hope that something else came a long.
You never know
what benefit might come from it in the long run, who is to
say that company that they go work for doesn't find out
about IMC
from that person and want to donate old computer
equipment? or something like that?
In regards to the FSTV issue:
Sooo, here is my opinion. Why don't we draft our own
reverse proposal to them, and include all such ideas as
"providing gas
money" and "providing sleeping arrangements" etc. And
have people from each IMC that wants to participate to
sign on as liason
to organize that part of the trip? Write it all up and send it
back to the FSTV people? Instead of arguing about it for
months
on a list :)
As for the "should people get paid for IMC work" issue, my
personal opinion is no. I think a lot of activists can get too
wrapped up in the activist "scene" and forget the very
people they are trying to help. Instead of paying people
for IMC work,
instead devote those funds to more outreach in the
community. A lot of times I see people starting new
projects (for me it's
probably different since I live in the most left city in the
US, san francisco) in the activist scene and it disturbs me
because
it appears to me that they do it for their own benefit and
ego stroking and have lost sight of actually helping the
poor and
oppressed. You get locked into the "activist ghetto" and
forget about the very real ghettos out there. For instance,
here in the
bay area, some friends just put a lot of money into
making a leftist newspaper. To me, this is insanity, there
are about
23728974897398743 leftist newspapers here, last night
at the local video store I grabbed a copy of *5* different
ones. How much
better could that money have been used to go into local
highschools and run an afterschool program to teach
journalism to kids
in the poorer neighborhoods whose schools have little to
no funding for such things? Or to outfit a mobile
computer lab for the
same thing to teach kids html and other computer skills?
So I think there are many issues here, but the most
important is "will this help the larger community need"?
This FSTV thing
could be a disaster, I really haven't studied enough about
it, but it could also start an important dialogue on helping
the
community and building new relationships for activism.
Has anyone brought up these concerns with the FSTV
people and proposed
solid alternatives yet?
-hep
sfimc
deva <drdartist at riseup.net> said:
> Hi Chris,
>
> This is a good question, and will hopefully lead to
important
> discussions of sustainability and use of resources.
>
> Why does that volunteer "need" more money than they
currently have?
> Most people in the world would consider that cold water
apartment to be
> a luxury.
>
> Let's examine our ideas of what we need. We need a
place to sleep,
> food, clothing, fulfilling work, and friends/
companionship/community.
>
> We can live fulfilling lives living in mud huts without
running water
> at all. It is important to challenge the sense of
entitlement of the
> western industrial mindset. It is not a suffering to live
without hot
> running water. That person may be tired of a cold water
apartment
> because society looks down on you for it. Maybe you
feel
> 'unsuccessful'. Maybe you feel poor and thus unworthy.
It is important
> to challenge the social pressures that lead us to
'needing' more,
> consuming more
>
> Do you think the world can sustain 6 billion people
having apartments
> with hot water, a car, a tv, and so on? Here in this
country in
> particular, we need to develop the ethic of voluntary
simplicity.
> Apartments can be shared, rooms can be shared, food
can be grown,
> purchased in bulk, clothes can all be obtained from
Goodwill stores and
> the like. I have lived the past 3 years on an approximate
total of
> $12,000. I feel like I have lived very well. Now rent here
in Portland
> is cheaper than in NYC, but so are wages. Still it is
easier here, but
> nevertheless, the concepts remain the same.
>
> To live simply, is a beautiful life, not some sort of
suffering.
>
> Our society is at a critical point. We are damaging our
environment at
> an alarming rate. It is making us sick. We have polluted
our minds and
> our bodies. Our social fabric is crumbling and we are
overwhelmingly
> dependent upon a resource (oil) which is running out.
We are in
> trouble.
>
> We are at a point where it is essential that we sacrifice
things we
> want in order to be able to devote ourselves to saving
our collective
> asses. We have made our bed, and now it is a time of
hard choices. The
> beauty of life though, is that in self sacrifice, we
discover who we
> are and what we really need, and learn that the things
we have been
> taught to desire often do not really feed us.
>
> In a day to day practical sense, I would say to that
person, come on
> over and have a hot shower sometimes. I would say hey,
I got a flat
> roof, lets plant some food and we can save money and
develop the idea
> of urban sustainability at the same time. We can take
some photos, and
> turn it into a kickass indymedia story. We turn our
'poorness',
> something the society condemns, into something to be
proud of by living
> it well. In doing so, we also, through our action, reveal
that money
> and healthy, creative, aesthetic living are not
synonymous.
>
> regards,
> deva
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 21, 2004, at 10:41 AM, Chris Anderson wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > There's been a lot of general discussion about
> > indymedia, non-profits, and "paying" people for
> > indymedia work. I think a lot of this discussion is
> > different (in some ways) from the questions about the
> > specific newsreal grant, and i hope we continue to
> > address questions about that grant on this list, like
> > i wrote earlier. But that said ...
> >
> > I have a hypothetical situation for folks, especially
> > those who have expressed distaste or disgust at the
> > idea of paying anyone anything for indymedia work.
> > This isn't meant to be a slam on people who have that
> > opinion, but i'd like to move from general points to a
> > concrete (though hypothetical) "reality."
> >
> > Hypothetical: An Indymedia volunteer,
> > socio-economically a member of the "working poor"
has
> > been working with an indymedia project for a few
> > years. That volunteer has helped the project become
> > really successful and is one of the key members of
the
> > collective. that volunteer does at least "full-time"
> > work for indymedia, if not more.
> >
> > One day, that volunteer hears that s/he will be able
> > to get a full time job which will raise his / her
> > income level signifigantly. The volunteer is tired of
> > living in a cold-water apartment, and might want to
> > settle down. At the same time, that volunteer knows
> > that taking the job would mean leaving indymedia.
she
> > / he cant imagine doing that, but really needs at
> > least a little more $$ than he / she is making now.
> >
> > the volunteer, who is helping also indymedia raise a
> > little money, tells the imc that if she / he can get a
> > small living stipend from the imc, he / she can stay
> > with indymedia and not take the other job. the
> > volunteer devoted an immense ammount of labor to
> > indymedia, and leaving the project would probably
set
> > the project back months, if not years.
> >
> > OK, so this is YOUR indymedia project. What would
you
> > do? Please take this query in the spirit its meant,
> > ie, one of genuine curiosity and respect; its not one
> > sent out to piss people off.
> >
> > all the best,
> > chris
> > nyc-imc
> >
> > --- Lisa <imc_dc at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> hi everyone,
> >>
> >> i'm not sure where this discussion is going.... but
> >> as
> >> i understand it, i don't think the indymedia charter
> >> outlines that indymedia should be a "nonprofit" as
> >> in
> >> the legal definition, i believe the charter was
> >> meant
> >> to say that no one should profit off of indymedia.
> >> those are two very different things.
> >>
> >> i would also like to point out.. . that official
> >> nonprofits are not supposed to have their members
or
> >> staff profit off the work of the org, however in
> >> reality there are many nonprofit orgs that have ED's
> >> etc that have exorbitant salaries and a hierarchical
> >> structure of pay that may or may not be just. also,
> >> at
> >> least in california, the way nonprofits have to be
> >> set
> >> up, means that the workers (the staff) do not have
> >> control over the org, the board has the final
> >> control
> >> and final say over all issues, including hiring,
> >> firing, and pay rates. there are reasons why this is
> >> the case, the point being so that the workers aren't
> >> able to profit off the nonprofit... however, many
> >> times the board will exist as an entity that has no
> >> real connection to the work of the organization and
> >> yet can wield a lot of power. my personal opinion,
> >> is
> >> that it is close to impossible to set up a really
> >> equitable, democratic, worker-controlled nonprofit
> >> in
> >> the legal sense.
> >>
> >> lisa
> >>
> >>
> >> --- Ana Nogueira <ana at democracynow.org>
wrote:
> >>>
> >>> In brief, nonprofit or not-for-profit means that
> >> any
> >>> income that is
> >>> generated goes to operating costs, which includes
> >>> everything from rent to
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> __________________________________
> >> Do you Yahoo!?
> >> New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB
messages!
> >> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> imc-us-process mailing list
> >> imc-us-process at lists.indymedia.org
> >>
> > http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-us-
process
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
> > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> > _______________________________________________
> > imc-us-process mailing list
> > imc-us-process at lists.indymedia.org
> > http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-us-
process
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> imc-us-process mailing list
> imc-us-process at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-us-
process
----- End forwarded message -----
_______________________________________________
imc-us-process mailing list
imc-us-process at lists.indymedia.org
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-us-
process
---- End Included Message ----
Good People. Great Causes. Get Connected on Care2 Connect:
http://www.care2.com/go/z/C2Connect
More information about the Imc-chicago-working
mailing list