In the article “Are the Cops in our Heads and Hearts?”, Rojas discusses how there are different models for movements. There maybe some movements that are non-profit but also movements based on grassroots organizing. She address that although non-profit is probably not the ideal approach if you are trying to further your movement is it one that helps people in the organizations keep a steady income while still trying to achieve their movement goals.
While reading this is it became very clear that when an organization takes corporate funded money their main goals may be shifted in a different or opposite direction then intended. It turns social justice movements into a job where the few that are trying to make a change are put to work on a particular issue instead of the bigger picture. One thing that Rojas did mention was that she was a part of an organization that was non-profit and they got paid. They received steady checks and this way she could make a living out of trying to make a change. When her organization thought that they should no longer be non-profit and switched to more of a grassroots approach Rojas had become a mother. I believe that this pointed out to Rojas, it should also be pointed out to more people, that ideally a grassroots approach to an organization is better than non-profit because you have liberty of accomplishing your organization's goals without having others dictate what you can and cannot do but there is also a lack of a steady check. People out there want to make a change and with non-profit you do the work you can get paid for it but in order to truly make a change their needs to be a mass movement that requires the involvement of millions of people most of whom cannot get paid. It becomes then a struggle for people trying to be a part of these organizations because they need to be invested to the cause but now they also need a job so they can take care of themselves and their families. It’s a battle of doing what's right in all directions and juggling them all at once. In this situation one can see why a non-profit organization sounds appealing although it may not be the best way to go about making a change but it is a choice for people that need to make a living out of something they want to do.
The link that I’m sharing is basically a list of search engines for non-profit organizations. It’s almost become a thing of the past to go looking for nonprofits on foot when most people can just search for it on the internet. This makes me wonder how many people that get employed for those organizations actually contribute to change if any. I get that people do need to make a living but It also makes me wonder how many of those organizations are actually completing their goals or if they are being derailed.
How do movements stray away from corporate funding? If they stray away from corporate funding will they be able to further their movement and what might be some new strategies to do so?
Hi Elvia,
ReplyDeleteI agree with the point you discussed from Rojas and wonder how movements can get past this issue. As Rojas discussed in the chapter, there are large scale movements in South America that have succeeded as grassroots movements. It brings about the question of how we could bring those kinds of movements to the U.S, which was slightly answered? Rojas mentioned that the people who were part f the movement worked separate jobs and being an activist was more of a hobby (i can't think of another word for it). They weren't paid to be activists, yet their movements accomplished such a wide scale change. I think this could defiantly be something that can happen in the States if we could get people to be dedicated for change as they were in South America. I think it takes a lot to be able to be so active in a cause and still try and provide for yourself and for your family, but somehow it works for people.