Ralph welcomes Chris Anderson, author of “Infectious Generosity: The Ultimate Idea Worth Spreading” where he explains how techniques for tapping into the potential of “the internet to turbocharge generosity” can fund and scale-up bold, audacious projects for the common good.
Did I just spend an hour listening to someone advocate for the privatization of government and then calling this neoliberalism ‘generosity’? Perhaps ‘Infectious Generosity’ refers to the infection the public gets when government is generous to the private sector, for-profit or non-profit?
What separates this RNRH episode from an NPR show is that at least Steve, David, Hannah, and Mr. Nader all offered valid retorts to the neoliberal claims made by the guest. Regardless, I still feel the need to take a shower to rid myself of the pro-privatization filth promoted in this episode by the guest.
Now, let me make it clear that I am not against non-profits when non-profits are doing work that are outside the scope of work governments should be doing on their own to protect their citizens and citizens of the world. I’m posting this from Firefox on a computer running Linux. Both of these open-source software projects benefit from non-profit status. There are many beneficial non-profits like this and Mr. Nader mentioned several instances where non-profit organizations can work well.
However, the guest was pushing a narrative that government is ineffective versus the private at promoting health, providing infrastructure, and providing other essential public services. This is balderdash. If we look at 19th and 20th century Britain, as an example, Dickensian-style charity did not solve the childhood health problems nearly as well as the implementation of the National Health Service in the UK which guaranteed public healthcare for all citizens. In the US, and elsewhere, public sewer and water supply systems in the early 20th century were, and still are, significant factors in promoting public health. When government is strongly encouraged to provide public services, they are actually very effective in delivering good outcomes. When government is hindered in their efforts to provide public services by corporate interests, government often fails to deliver for the public. Why, then, should non-profits funded and shaped by the same corporate interests be trusted to deliver for the public?
The guest even made a comment about NASA versus SpaceX. First of all, NASA has always been rather privatized. As someone who spends a lot of time in Southeast Houston, I can tell you that the road leading to the Johnson Space Center is, and has been for many years, lined with offices for private NASA contractors such as Boeing and SpaceX. Thus, NASA has always been a corporate welfare arm to a certain degree much like the military. That said, NASA still does important public work which has not been privatized. When the NTSB, for example, wants to get research on commercial aviation safety topics such as crew resource management and pilot fatigue, they work with experts at NASA and that research has helped to dramatically improve commercial aviation safety over the years through better FAA regulation. NASA’s work in that regard may not be profitable on a balance sheet, but their work is more than profitable in terms of public service.
Furthermore, the topic of Mr. Nader’s non-profit work towards auto safety was mentioned as an example of pushing government towards pro-citizen objectives. First, this use of non-profit organizations to advocate for increased government regulation is one thing, but the guest seems to be advocating for non-profits as a way to privatize and deregulate government so I'm unsure why Mr. Nader would find the guests commentary to be agreeable. Secondly, while I agree that Mr. Nader's organizations did, and do, help push for safety, I’m also sure that Mr. Nader would have gladly ceded work in the auto safety field to an aggressively pro-safety NHTSA and Congress who wished to seek major advances in auto safety if/when those bodies took a pro-safety stance. On the other hand, we have non-profit organizations, such as hospitals, which fight against non-corporatized versions of universal healthcare proposals because they wish to keep their hospitals and funding structure intact. I think this is broadly in agreement with Hannah’s point about large non-profits because large non-profits need the problem they are claiming to solve to continue to exist in order to keep their organizations going unless they engage in mission creep. Is this really beneficial for the public?
Furthermore, the topic of HIV prevention in the developing world was mentioned by the guest. The prevalence of HIV in places such as Africa is caused in large part by non-profits! Many in the US gladly trade in government support for non-profit support, mostly by religious charities, and many of those religious charities, like Catholic charities, refuse to advocate for condom usage and sex education. If anything, they shame the Africans for using condoms by claiming it is sinful. And, yet, non-profits are the solution to this HIV problem caused by non-profits?
I know that privatization is generally thought of as a for-profit sector activity, but the non-profit sector is just as capable of being actors of privatization. Also, the for-profit sector can use non-profits as a way to transfer funds from the non-profit sector to the for-profit sector by giving contracts to for-profit companies with little public scrutiny. The guest gave away his neoliberal orientation by mentioning the word ‘de-risk’ during the interview. De-risking is merely the 2020s phrasing of the 1990s term ‘PPP’ (public-private partnership) which was advocated by the likes of Bill Clinton, Bush Jr., Obama, and Tony Blair to promote privatization and public protection of private organizations….AKA corporate welfare.
The simple reality is that the US federal government can fund any initiative that could be done by the non-profit sector especially as it pertains to essential public services. Stephanie Kelton even did a TED talk about this (though if you’re interested in the subject, I suggest sources other than TED as there are many better discussions on the subject from Kelton and others). With this, the public does not need to advocate for ‘the rich to save us’ via philanthropy and continued profit-seeking by the private sector. Yes, this does involve the public demanding that government take the needs of the citizenry seriously. That is a challenge, of course, but it is much easier to push for that than it is to push the private sector, for- or non-profit, to make substantive change for the positive. As opposed to the nonsense stated by the guest, government’s track record is far superior than the record of the private sector in this area.
To the RNRH staff, please, enough with the neoliberal guests. The neoliberals already have NPR. We count on Mr. Nader and this show to present non-corporate views on how we should advocate for government to benefit the citizenry since this is lacking on other major radio shows.
Highly questionable points and arguments in this program! What a waste of a program. A slick, glib, velvety smooth operator with a British accent. Not just Gates but also the con known as "Ted Talks".
And I gave in the past to Ralph Nader's organization and was shocked by the fundraiser's shakedown. The paid fundraisers is yet another scandal.
The best thing Chris said was at the end. That the single best thing we can all do is simply give time to one another.
But mostly what he said comes down to what Anand Giridharadas wrote in his seminal book, Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing The World. The concept that doing well by doing good -- "they're doing well by doing good, stand on someone's back while saying you're helping them".
For example in Chris's view we're to forget about all the harm someone does if they give a few bucks to help fund a good idea. To me, that sounds like Israel saying to the Palestinians "Sure we'll stop killing innocent citizens - as soon as you release the hostages".
For example here in CO, Coors used to get a lot of press for giving money to progressive causes. Coors would give $1 million to gay rights for example. But what wasn't reported, was the millions Coors spent funding politicians who wanted to take away gay rights.
Chris also mentioned Microsoft. He seemed to defend them. Microsoft is the world's 2nd largest owner of farm land, next to the Mormon church. Somehow I think that's not going to work out well for us citizens. Because in Microsoft's view, we should all be eating fraken food.
So I'm not buying most of what Chris said. Mainly because it's just more of the same. I'm all for capitalism. But I also think millions should be in the streets, practicing their civic duty to protest against the system.
Because as Ralph says:
"The greatest threat to our country is the lack of civic engagement".
This HOPEFUL podcast made me cry (and I've shared it far and wide)! I've had many ideas over the years for what I would do when I win the lottery.: ) We'd just have to get rid of all the Dr Evils who work against these brilliant and generous ideas in order to maintain their illusions of grandeur.
MY WISH: Let's end homelessness by pulling those in the trades who have "retired" but still have so much to give work with the homeless to build tiny homes with and for those who have nothing (material). There could be a central kitchen/dining area for socializing and gathering and a clinic (all volunteer). It would be a win/win by having those with skills who feel forgotten, to restore self-respect to the others who--for whaever reason--have lost all hope.
Thanks for putting up Ralph's statement on generosity is more than just money.
I hope this discussion will infect Ralph with the spirit of generosity to share some time, advice, benefits of experience, connections and networking to discuss organizing citizens to demand small donor candidates and enforce that demand with our votes in 2024.
This will not require raising large amounts of money to get started as there will be few, if any, small donor candidates on ballots in 2024. What we can do in 2024 is get citizens to participate by casting a write in vote if there are no small donor candidates on their ballots in 2024.
As described many times here just 10% national participation in 2024 can lead to more citizens participating in 2026 and many small donor candidates on ballots in 2026.
As just 6-7% of the 150 million 2020 voters investing 100 dollars in contributions to small donor candidates would total 1 billion dollars with even just 15% of citizens participating in 2026 would mean that only half of the participants in 2026 making the 100 dollar investment would total 1 billion dollars and could be just the tip of the iceberg.
Please, Ralph, extend some infectious generosity on organizing citizens to ignite some infectious democracy.
This sounds exactly like "Levers For Change", an organization that finds, vets, preps non-profits around the world and presents donors with video presentations.
MacKenzie Scott's recent mega-donation funded projects presented via Levers For Change.
The organization next plans to select key issues such that multiple non-profits (addressing the issues from different directions) are funded.
If only NGOs and non-profits could operate outside their rich beneficiaries! Look how CISA and Global Engagement Center,et al just co-opted our democracy by working in tandem with government to censor individuals via social media. As for people like Gates, the Non-profits are their propaganda arm while they use it as a write off and then peddle their influence to grow their empires. The enamored culture look up to these megalomaniacs as if they are the second coming. Plus the amounts of money the NP waste on administration and salaries should be regulated so that the donations go where it was intended. Sure, there are many organizations doing great work. How wonderful it would be if they didn't have to beg from the rich for their noble goals! As Steve asked, why isn't our government using our tax dollars for the things these non-profits are doing instead of giving our dollars to war and corporations (run by these same philanthropists) ?
In an earlier show I felt somewhat uncomfortable when Bruce Fein had to be reminded of Alex Navalny’s past.
But this self-proclaimed capitalist was disgusting. He was simultaneously defending multiple corporations. His thoughts on global boiling lacks urgency when 6/9 'tipping points' are already crossed; he pretends not to know such facts as Exxon’s extensive knowledge on this matter. Now he just wants to make a disingenuous request to fossil fuel companies as if they do not know what they are doing. Clearly he is unaware of RN’s thoughts on CEO salaries or corporations, philanthropies and charities. He would have defended Hillary’s 250K/hr talk to Wall Street.
Overall it seems that he wants to put up a front in support of the down-trodden, and prescribes Reaganomics for crumbs from the tables. Recently Varoufakis talked about such characters in the context of the genocide of the Palestinians. Speaking of Palestinians why not invite characters like Dershowitz (a liar and a fraud and a vulgar grotesque apologist for crimes as per Chomsky). A debate between Harvard ‘Law’ professor with RN would be great.
Without wanting to sound flippant, I believe ordinary citizens/pedestrians should be given an opportunity to come on RN radio hour. Once in a month, 12 such ordinary people, who may not speak grammatically correct English but nevertheless concerned citizens, each could read/talk on current affairs for 3-5 minutes.
At one point in this discussion, Nader asked a question that seemed particularly important me, was not seriously addressed. The question was about help for good ideas that so far lack a leader or an organization. Nader made the point that people have different aptitudes and that those who come up with a plan are often not the right people to promote and lead an effort to enact it.
This question seemed particularly relevant to my own situation. Over the last decade I have been thinking about a way to put an end to the two-party duopoly. I think it can work but it is clear to me that, for a variety of reasons, I am not the right person to lead an effort for carrying out the plan. I have published what is now more than one hundred articles to explain and support the plan and this series of articles has a significant following. Still, no one has taken up the challenge to carry out the project. An index to most of these articles can be found at https://www.opednews.com/populum/seriespage.php?r=326&s=time_sorting
I was wondering why online sources for generosity, such as GoFundMe, were not discussed. From my personal use, I find these organizations to be excellent methods to get immediate funding to people in need.
For example, I found out on GoFundMe that a fund had been created for the family of Jacob Flinkinger, the U.S. citizen killed in the World Central Kitchen drone attack. He was survived by his young wife and infant child.
I filled out a short form and contributed through my credit card. It gave me the option of donating in my name or anonymously. It requested a 16% donation to service the website, which I could reduce if I wanted. It took about five minutes and my contribution showed up immediately.
When I contributed a few days ago, others had already donated over $150,000 to the Flinkinger family and when I checked today, the amount had risen to over $250,000 (GoFundMe is only available in the U.S. or I would have contributed to the families of all seven brave people who gave their lives to help others.).
I have used GoFundMe for similar worthy causes in the past. I vet the causes as best I can and do what I can. I’d like to hear from Ralph’s crew or some of my fellow commenters on whether or not they see any downsides to what appears to be an excellent and efficient method for we citizens to help out.
REALLY GOOD NEWS FOR THE NATION – DIRECT VOTE DEMOCRACY
LAUNCHING THE DIRECT VOTE WEB PAGE “WE THE PEOPLE”
The Heart Mind Alliance (.com) non-profit has raised over $30,000 for the development of the direct vote web page https://wethepeople.directvotedemocracy.com which is now functional. The web page is based on the Australian FLUX party's app for direct vote. One's vote is secured by block-chain technology. Every voter has a personal ledger so that votes can be verified not only to have been counted, but counted correctly.
To learn more about the web page's development, visit our Go Fund Me campaign “Direct Vote App Development” where we continually update information on the progress of the web page development and will soon upload a “walk through” video. We hope to have cell phone apps available for download to iOS and Android phones in the future. Anyone interested in becoming her or his own governing representative will be able to see how to use the web page, how to register as a voter, how to obtain information on issues, mandates and proposals for vote at local, state or national levels, how to vote, and how to verify their vote on the block-chain platform securing all votes.
The majority of US citizens are certain that democratic (simple majority) rule is our only way out of the abominable system of "governance" imposed by the ruling elite. We believe it to be the best way to change the national and global trajectory towards catastrophic extinction.
I was at Kent State on that day of infamy in 1969 when the Ohio National Guard killed four students who were raising their voices in protest of the Vietnam war. I realized our military-industrial government does not want to hear my voice or yours. Our government places corporate profit before the needs of its Peoples. We believe the majority of the country will mandate that our public servants, soon to be our administrators and not our “representatives,” place People before profit and make every decision based on the criteria of benefiting the Seventh Generation and doing no harm.
The First Question we of the Heart Mind Alliance are proposing for national vote will be asking if you want to be your own representative with our public servants, having sworn allegiance to the public will, responding to mandates from the majority with legislative proposals for national vote. Those unwilling to serve the public simple majority will may step aside or be voted out of office.
Once at the website for direct vote, log in with your phone number (USA numbers only will be recognized) and receive a code which, once entered, will take you to the next step which determines if you are a robot or not. You will then find yourself at the first page and must click on the colorful image of the many facets of Democracy (We will be adding more instructions at the website) to access the page describing briefly, and also in greater detail, in this case, the First Question for national vote. One you have voted you can see the permanent transparent transaction record within the block-chain and be able to verify if a vote was counted and if counted correctly.
There is more upon launch that the first vote places before the People for national vote as they are essential mandates for a true democracy to function successfully: The declaration by the People of the United States of America that the planet is in crisis and that all of our human and natural resources be directed at reversing climate instability and creating a regenerative future unto the Seventh Generation. With this vote we adopt as our Guiding Governing Principle that all decisions be in the light of the Seventh Generation. We will vote to end person hood for corporations, to have the Federal Reserve System transfer its role to the non-profit US Treasury in control of the People. Income tax (unconstitutional for our founders) should be abolished and the taxation of profits generated from the labor of our nation's workers should be increased to adequately guarantee the right of every individual to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Perpetual war should be ended as we need to heal, to rethink, to restore our country. The global world is demanding the eventual closing of over 750 US military bases and the transferring of our peacekeeping efforts to international peace-keeping organizations. We will demand proposals and legislation responding to the issues presented for consideration by the People, including those outlined in the Great Mandate, now a MoveOn.org campaign. The Great Mandate for national vote can be read in its entirety at www.heartmindalliance.com
At that site we have the link for the Move On campaign. One can see who has signed the Great Mandate and also read the comments in support of the transition to a true democracy, now, thanks to block-chain encryption, possible for all. We believe we will inaugurate an historic planetary first. This is what we now celebrate.
To guarantee your voice is heard and counted visit: https://wethepeople.directvotedemocracy.com/ Register to vote, become informed regarding mandate issues and legislative proposals for vote and get information regarding voting dates and times.
Producer of the documentary "Bolivia Beyond Belief" (on You Tube) regarding the Bolivian Democratic Revolution I witnessed while living in Bolivia from 2005 to 2008
Initiated as an Andean Cosmovision Amauta
After working in 20 countries in community development: created a You Tube channel with 132 videos of the most successful appropriate technologies I learned of: "Community-based Appropriate Technologies"
Founder of Colorado's San Luis Valley Solar Energy Association and Alamosa Childrens' School
Founder of the Rio Arriba Bioregional Council and the Espanola Valley Community Council, New Mexico
Author of I Am: A Journey Through Times and Spaces and the book The Great Mandate (available via Kindle)
Did I just spend an hour listening to someone advocate for the privatization of government and then calling this neoliberalism ‘generosity’? Perhaps ‘Infectious Generosity’ refers to the infection the public gets when government is generous to the private sector, for-profit or non-profit?
What separates this RNRH episode from an NPR show is that at least Steve, David, Hannah, and Mr. Nader all offered valid retorts to the neoliberal claims made by the guest. Regardless, I still feel the need to take a shower to rid myself of the pro-privatization filth promoted in this episode by the guest.
Now, let me make it clear that I am not against non-profits when non-profits are doing work that are outside the scope of work governments should be doing on their own to protect their citizens and citizens of the world. I’m posting this from Firefox on a computer running Linux. Both of these open-source software projects benefit from non-profit status. There are many beneficial non-profits like this and Mr. Nader mentioned several instances where non-profit organizations can work well.
However, the guest was pushing a narrative that government is ineffective versus the private at promoting health, providing infrastructure, and providing other essential public services. This is balderdash. If we look at 19th and 20th century Britain, as an example, Dickensian-style charity did not solve the childhood health problems nearly as well as the implementation of the National Health Service in the UK which guaranteed public healthcare for all citizens. In the US, and elsewhere, public sewer and water supply systems in the early 20th century were, and still are, significant factors in promoting public health. When government is strongly encouraged to provide public services, they are actually very effective in delivering good outcomes. When government is hindered in their efforts to provide public services by corporate interests, government often fails to deliver for the public. Why, then, should non-profits funded and shaped by the same corporate interests be trusted to deliver for the public?
The guest even made a comment about NASA versus SpaceX. First of all, NASA has always been rather privatized. As someone who spends a lot of time in Southeast Houston, I can tell you that the road leading to the Johnson Space Center is, and has been for many years, lined with offices for private NASA contractors such as Boeing and SpaceX. Thus, NASA has always been a corporate welfare arm to a certain degree much like the military. That said, NASA still does important public work which has not been privatized. When the NTSB, for example, wants to get research on commercial aviation safety topics such as crew resource management and pilot fatigue, they work with experts at NASA and that research has helped to dramatically improve commercial aviation safety over the years through better FAA regulation. NASA’s work in that regard may not be profitable on a balance sheet, but their work is more than profitable in terms of public service.
Furthermore, the topic of Mr. Nader’s non-profit work towards auto safety was mentioned as an example of pushing government towards pro-citizen objectives. First, this use of non-profit organizations to advocate for increased government regulation is one thing, but the guest seems to be advocating for non-profits as a way to privatize and deregulate government so I'm unsure why Mr. Nader would find the guests commentary to be agreeable. Secondly, while I agree that Mr. Nader's organizations did, and do, help push for safety, I’m also sure that Mr. Nader would have gladly ceded work in the auto safety field to an aggressively pro-safety NHTSA and Congress who wished to seek major advances in auto safety if/when those bodies took a pro-safety stance. On the other hand, we have non-profit organizations, such as hospitals, which fight against non-corporatized versions of universal healthcare proposals because they wish to keep their hospitals and funding structure intact. I think this is broadly in agreement with Hannah’s point about large non-profits because large non-profits need the problem they are claiming to solve to continue to exist in order to keep their organizations going unless they engage in mission creep. Is this really beneficial for the public?
Furthermore, the topic of HIV prevention in the developing world was mentioned by the guest. The prevalence of HIV in places such as Africa is caused in large part by non-profits! Many in the US gladly trade in government support for non-profit support, mostly by religious charities, and many of those religious charities, like Catholic charities, refuse to advocate for condom usage and sex education. If anything, they shame the Africans for using condoms by claiming it is sinful. And, yet, non-profits are the solution to this HIV problem caused by non-profits?
I know that privatization is generally thought of as a for-profit sector activity, but the non-profit sector is just as capable of being actors of privatization. Also, the for-profit sector can use non-profits as a way to transfer funds from the non-profit sector to the for-profit sector by giving contracts to for-profit companies with little public scrutiny. The guest gave away his neoliberal orientation by mentioning the word ‘de-risk’ during the interview. De-risking is merely the 2020s phrasing of the 1990s term ‘PPP’ (public-private partnership) which was advocated by the likes of Bill Clinton, Bush Jr., Obama, and Tony Blair to promote privatization and public protection of private organizations….AKA corporate welfare.
The simple reality is that the US federal government can fund any initiative that could be done by the non-profit sector especially as it pertains to essential public services. Stephanie Kelton even did a TED talk about this (though if you’re interested in the subject, I suggest sources other than TED as there are many better discussions on the subject from Kelton and others). With this, the public does not need to advocate for ‘the rich to save us’ via philanthropy and continued profit-seeking by the private sector. Yes, this does involve the public demanding that government take the needs of the citizenry seriously. That is a challenge, of course, but it is much easier to push for that than it is to push the private sector, for- or non-profit, to make substantive change for the positive. As opposed to the nonsense stated by the guest, government’s track record is far superior than the record of the private sector in this area.
To the RNRH staff, please, enough with the neoliberal guests. The neoliberals already have NPR. We count on Mr. Nader and this show to present non-corporate views on how we should advocate for government to benefit the citizenry since this is lacking on other major radio shows.
Highly questionable points and arguments in this program! What a waste of a program. A slick, glib, velvety smooth operator with a British accent. Not just Gates but also the con known as "Ted Talks".
And I gave in the past to Ralph Nader's organization and was shocked by the fundraiser's shakedown. The paid fundraisers is yet another scandal.
Howdy,
The best thing Chris said was at the end. That the single best thing we can all do is simply give time to one another.
But mostly what he said comes down to what Anand Giridharadas wrote in his seminal book, Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing The World. The concept that doing well by doing good -- "they're doing well by doing good, stand on someone's back while saying you're helping them".
For example in Chris's view we're to forget about all the harm someone does if they give a few bucks to help fund a good idea. To me, that sounds like Israel saying to the Palestinians "Sure we'll stop killing innocent citizens - as soon as you release the hostages".
For example here in CO, Coors used to get a lot of press for giving money to progressive causes. Coors would give $1 million to gay rights for example. But what wasn't reported, was the millions Coors spent funding politicians who wanted to take away gay rights.
Chris also mentioned Microsoft. He seemed to defend them. Microsoft is the world's 2nd largest owner of farm land, next to the Mormon church. Somehow I think that's not going to work out well for us citizens. Because in Microsoft's view, we should all be eating fraken food.
So I'm not buying most of what Chris said. Mainly because it's just more of the same. I'm all for capitalism. But I also think millions should be in the streets, practicing their civic duty to protest against the system.
Because as Ralph says:
"The greatest threat to our country is the lack of civic engagement".
This HOPEFUL podcast made me cry (and I've shared it far and wide)! I've had many ideas over the years for what I would do when I win the lottery.: ) We'd just have to get rid of all the Dr Evils who work against these brilliant and generous ideas in order to maintain their illusions of grandeur.
MY WISH: Let's end homelessness by pulling those in the trades who have "retired" but still have so much to give work with the homeless to build tiny homes with and for those who have nothing (material). There could be a central kitchen/dining area for socializing and gathering and a clinic (all volunteer). It would be a win/win by having those with skills who feel forgotten, to restore self-respect to the others who--for whaever reason--have lost all hope.
Thank you, Hannah, for the excellent and much needed push-back on this guest. You won this episode!
Thanks for putting up Ralph's statement on generosity is more than just money.
I hope this discussion will infect Ralph with the spirit of generosity to share some time, advice, benefits of experience, connections and networking to discuss organizing citizens to demand small donor candidates and enforce that demand with our votes in 2024.
This will not require raising large amounts of money to get started as there will be few, if any, small donor candidates on ballots in 2024. What we can do in 2024 is get citizens to participate by casting a write in vote if there are no small donor candidates on their ballots in 2024.
As described many times here just 10% national participation in 2024 can lead to more citizens participating in 2026 and many small donor candidates on ballots in 2026.
As just 6-7% of the 150 million 2020 voters investing 100 dollars in contributions to small donor candidates would total 1 billion dollars with even just 15% of citizens participating in 2026 would mean that only half of the participants in 2026 making the 100 dollar investment would total 1 billion dollars and could be just the tip of the iceberg.
Please, Ralph, extend some infectious generosity on organizing citizens to ignite some infectious democracy.
This sounds exactly like "Levers For Change", an organization that finds, vets, preps non-profits around the world and presents donors with video presentations.
MacKenzie Scott's recent mega-donation funded projects presented via Levers For Change.
The organization next plans to select key issues such that multiple non-profits (addressing the issues from different directions) are funded.
If only NGOs and non-profits could operate outside their rich beneficiaries! Look how CISA and Global Engagement Center,et al just co-opted our democracy by working in tandem with government to censor individuals via social media. As for people like Gates, the Non-profits are their propaganda arm while they use it as a write off and then peddle their influence to grow their empires. The enamored culture look up to these megalomaniacs as if they are the second coming. Plus the amounts of money the NP waste on administration and salaries should be regulated so that the donations go where it was intended. Sure, there are many organizations doing great work. How wonderful it would be if they didn't have to beg from the rich for their noble goals! As Steve asked, why isn't our government using our tax dollars for the things these non-profits are doing instead of giving our dollars to war and corporations (run by these same philanthropists) ?
That guy needs to get injured by the fake vaccine to wake his ass up.
In an earlier show I felt somewhat uncomfortable when Bruce Fein had to be reminded of Alex Navalny’s past.
But this self-proclaimed capitalist was disgusting. He was simultaneously defending multiple corporations. His thoughts on global boiling lacks urgency when 6/9 'tipping points' are already crossed; he pretends not to know such facts as Exxon’s extensive knowledge on this matter. Now he just wants to make a disingenuous request to fossil fuel companies as if they do not know what they are doing. Clearly he is unaware of RN’s thoughts on CEO salaries or corporations, philanthropies and charities. He would have defended Hillary’s 250K/hr talk to Wall Street.
Overall it seems that he wants to put up a front in support of the down-trodden, and prescribes Reaganomics for crumbs from the tables. Recently Varoufakis talked about such characters in the context of the genocide of the Palestinians. Speaking of Palestinians why not invite characters like Dershowitz (a liar and a fraud and a vulgar grotesque apologist for crimes as per Chomsky). A debate between Harvard ‘Law’ professor with RN would be great.
Without wanting to sound flippant, I believe ordinary citizens/pedestrians should be given an opportunity to come on RN radio hour. Once in a month, 12 such ordinary people, who may not speak grammatically correct English but nevertheless concerned citizens, each could read/talk on current affairs for 3-5 minutes.
At one point in this discussion, Nader asked a question that seemed particularly important me, was not seriously addressed. The question was about help for good ideas that so far lack a leader or an organization. Nader made the point that people have different aptitudes and that those who come up with a plan are often not the right people to promote and lead an effort to enact it.
This question seemed particularly relevant to my own situation. Over the last decade I have been thinking about a way to put an end to the two-party duopoly. I think it can work but it is clear to me that, for a variety of reasons, I am not the right person to lead an effort for carrying out the plan. I have published what is now more than one hundred articles to explain and support the plan and this series of articles has a significant following. Still, no one has taken up the challenge to carry out the project. An index to most of these articles can be found at https://www.opednews.com/populum/seriespage.php?r=326&s=time_sorting
I was wondering why online sources for generosity, such as GoFundMe, were not discussed. From my personal use, I find these organizations to be excellent methods to get immediate funding to people in need.
For example, I found out on GoFundMe that a fund had been created for the family of Jacob Flinkinger, the U.S. citizen killed in the World Central Kitchen drone attack. He was survived by his young wife and infant child.
I filled out a short form and contributed through my credit card. It gave me the option of donating in my name or anonymously. It requested a 16% donation to service the website, which I could reduce if I wanted. It took about five minutes and my contribution showed up immediately.
When I contributed a few days ago, others had already donated over $150,000 to the Flinkinger family and when I checked today, the amount had risen to over $250,000 (GoFundMe is only available in the U.S. or I would have contributed to the families of all seven brave people who gave their lives to help others.).
I have used GoFundMe for similar worthy causes in the past. I vet the causes as best I can and do what I can. I’d like to hear from Ralph’s crew or some of my fellow commenters on whether or not they see any downsides to what appears to be an excellent and efficient method for we citizens to help out.
Sincerely,
Erik B. Thueson
REALLY GOOD NEWS FOR THE NATION – DIRECT VOTE DEMOCRACY
LAUNCHING THE DIRECT VOTE WEB PAGE “WE THE PEOPLE”
The Heart Mind Alliance (.com) non-profit has raised over $30,000 for the development of the direct vote web page https://wethepeople.directvotedemocracy.com which is now functional. The web page is based on the Australian FLUX party's app for direct vote. One's vote is secured by block-chain technology. Every voter has a personal ledger so that votes can be verified not only to have been counted, but counted correctly.
To learn more about the web page's development, visit our Go Fund Me campaign “Direct Vote App Development” where we continually update information on the progress of the web page development and will soon upload a “walk through” video. We hope to have cell phone apps available for download to iOS and Android phones in the future. Anyone interested in becoming her or his own governing representative will be able to see how to use the web page, how to register as a voter, how to obtain information on issues, mandates and proposals for vote at local, state or national levels, how to vote, and how to verify their vote on the block-chain platform securing all votes.
The majority of US citizens are certain that democratic (simple majority) rule is our only way out of the abominable system of "governance" imposed by the ruling elite. We believe it to be the best way to change the national and global trajectory towards catastrophic extinction.
I was at Kent State on that day of infamy in 1969 when the Ohio National Guard killed four students who were raising their voices in protest of the Vietnam war. I realized our military-industrial government does not want to hear my voice or yours. Our government places corporate profit before the needs of its Peoples. We believe the majority of the country will mandate that our public servants, soon to be our administrators and not our “representatives,” place People before profit and make every decision based on the criteria of benefiting the Seventh Generation and doing no harm.
The First Question we of the Heart Mind Alliance are proposing for national vote will be asking if you want to be your own representative with our public servants, having sworn allegiance to the public will, responding to mandates from the majority with legislative proposals for national vote. Those unwilling to serve the public simple majority will may step aside or be voted out of office.
Once at the website for direct vote, log in with your phone number (USA numbers only will be recognized) and receive a code which, once entered, will take you to the next step which determines if you are a robot or not. You will then find yourself at the first page and must click on the colorful image of the many facets of Democracy (We will be adding more instructions at the website) to access the page describing briefly, and also in greater detail, in this case, the First Question for national vote. One you have voted you can see the permanent transparent transaction record within the block-chain and be able to verify if a vote was counted and if counted correctly.
There is more upon launch that the first vote places before the People for national vote as they are essential mandates for a true democracy to function successfully: The declaration by the People of the United States of America that the planet is in crisis and that all of our human and natural resources be directed at reversing climate instability and creating a regenerative future unto the Seventh Generation. With this vote we adopt as our Guiding Governing Principle that all decisions be in the light of the Seventh Generation. We will vote to end person hood for corporations, to have the Federal Reserve System transfer its role to the non-profit US Treasury in control of the People. Income tax (unconstitutional for our founders) should be abolished and the taxation of profits generated from the labor of our nation's workers should be increased to adequately guarantee the right of every individual to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Perpetual war should be ended as we need to heal, to rethink, to restore our country. The global world is demanding the eventual closing of over 750 US military bases and the transferring of our peacekeeping efforts to international peace-keeping organizations. We will demand proposals and legislation responding to the issues presented for consideration by the People, including those outlined in the Great Mandate, now a MoveOn.org campaign. The Great Mandate for national vote can be read in its entirety at www.heartmindalliance.com
At that site we have the link for the Move On campaign. One can see who has signed the Great Mandate and also read the comments in support of the transition to a true democracy, now, thanks to block-chain encryption, possible for all. We believe we will inaugurate an historic planetary first. This is what we now celebrate.
To guarantee your voice is heard and counted visit: https://wethepeople.directvotedemocracy.com/ Register to vote, become informed regarding mandate issues and legislative proposals for vote and get information regarding voting dates and times.
For more information, questions, comments, etc write us at heartmindalliance@gmail.com
Looking forward,
Bob Dunsmore
Founder and president of the Heart Mind Alliance (.com) which has created the block-chain secured direct vote
website now taking votes on the First Question before the nation: wethepeople.directvotedemocracy.com
Producer of the documentary "Bolivia Beyond Belief" (on You Tube) regarding the Bolivian Democratic Revolution I witnessed while living in Bolivia from 2005 to 2008
Initiated as an Andean Cosmovision Amauta
After working in 20 countries in community development: created a You Tube channel with 132 videos of the most successful appropriate technologies I learned of: "Community-based Appropriate Technologies"
Founder of Colorado's San Luis Valley Solar Energy Association and Alamosa Childrens' School
Founder of the Rio Arriba Bioregional Council and the Espanola Valley Community Council, New Mexico
Author of I Am: A Journey Through Times and Spaces and the book The Great Mandate (available via Kindle)