Red Aid? [Archive]

Martin Blank

28th January 2010, 00:48

There is the Red Star Society USA, http://redstarsociety.com/index.html which still seems to be in the formative stages, though it did conduct an excellent relief campaign (considering its numbers) in the wake of the Hurricane Katrina disaster and is now involved in collecting money for Batay Ouvriye in Haiti.

This, obviously. With the aid collection work for Haiti, the RSS is getting more active again. In reality, the only thing really still "formative" about the Society is its administration. It's something that, for the moment, is still acting more ad hoc than ongoing. In a sense, that's both a strength and a weakness. On the one hand, everything we collect for aid and relief is forwarded on or given directly to those we are helping, since there is no administrative "overhead". On the other hand, the lack of an administration means that efforts that are narrowly time-sensitive efforts suffer for a lack of full presence.

It should be noted that the RSS, though started by the League and supported by both it and the WPA, is not a "front" and is open to comrades from other political currents and trends that are interested in this kind of work. As long as there is agreement around the mission statement of the RSS, any working person can be a part of the Society.

It should also be noted that, at the same time as we launched the RSS, we also sent out a letter to other organizations around the world proposing the formation of an international non-sectarian workers' aid and relief organization, tentatively called the International Committees of the Red Star. We never received a reply from international organizations, and only a few replies in the U.S. about it (from posts made on Indymedia and here, actually).

The proposal is still on the table, as far as we're concerned.

Steve_j

5th February 2010, 20:09

Just bumping this one because im quite interested in this, there must be more please share.

5th February 2010, 20:11

Just bumping this one because im quite interested in this, there must be more please share.

Yeah, there must be more than just Red Star Society and Rote Hilfe.

Martin Blank

6th February 2010, 03:33

If you include groups that do explicitly legal defense work, the Spartacists have the Partisan Defense Committee, which defends class-war defendants and sends stipends to class-war prisoners, and the IWW has legal-defense arm (forget the name off-hand) for the same reason. Then there would be the Anarchist Black Cross and similar groups.

But in terms of straight-up aid and relief, there's not much of it out there sponsored by workers' organizations. Somewhere along the line in the 20th century, the idea of having such organizations exist and sponsored by left groups fell out of favor. Even the Black Panthers, with their aid and relief groups, social service programs, etc., were attacked by the left for doing "bourgeois charity work". That line continues to dominate the left today.

Die Neue Zeit

6th February 2010, 06:37

Somewhere along the line in the 20th century, the idea of having such organizations exist and sponsored by left groups fell out of favor. Even the Black Panthers, with their aid and relief groups, social service programs, etc., were attacked by the left for doing "bourgeois charity work". That line continues to dominate the left today.

Probably as early as the formative years of the Comintern itself. I mean, "Left-Wing Communism" said nothing about alternative culture. :(

6th February 2010, 06:52

So, looks like we have to start up such organisations from scratch. Where to begin?

Die Neue Zeit

6th February 2010, 07:05

I, of course, suggested food banks as a starting point to alternative culture.

Steve_j

6th February 2010, 21:35

So, looks like we have to start up such organisations from scratch. Where to begin?

I think its a great idea, and particularly looking at your original post inline with an organisation i would like to support.

What I'm looking for is ideally an organisation using a two-track approach:
1. Give first aid after disasters, famine, etc.
2. Support working class grassroots organisations in order to establish the fight for a socialist alternative.

It would take alot of support but if you could get a few leftist parties/organisations on board, even in terms of forwarding call outs via mailing lists and so on, it could actually go somewhere.

For the disaster relief, might be a good start to identify distater prone areas and look at some local organisations that are on the ground and ready to go. Make a list and when the time comes make a call out for support the relevent organisations.

Where possible you could avoid the middle man (ie a charity) and just encourage people to donate directly to the relevent organisations, although this is not always viable or easy.

Although, if establish it as a registered charity there are some advantages. Ie in the uk, a person donating the money who is earning a taxable income has already paid the tax so the govenment will pay the charity the tax on the money donated. So in the uk it works out around 25 pence for every £1 donated which aint bad.

As for the second objective it might need a different approach. If you can get people signing up to donate an amount each month, that would mean you could divide it up between supported orgaisations.

Anyway a few things to think about and discuss.

Martin Blank

6th February 2010, 21:55

So, looks like we have to start up such organisations from scratch. Where to begin?

We started with an obvious one: Hurricane Katrina. We started collecting supplies and donations, designated a collection point (at the time, we had supporters in Birmingham, AL, and they volunteered), and launched the effort. If you're going to start something like this, or a social-service organization, or anything like it, start with a specific task and goal. That gets the ball rolling and gives you something concrete to build the effort around. From there, you can flesh out organizational details (name, scope of activity, etc.). When we did the Katrina aid, we didn't even have a name for the work; calling it "Red Star Society" came later.

Now, I guess for the sake of my own curiosity, the question I have is whether those comrades who are outside of the U.S. were interested in developing this along the lines of the proposal we put in our letter of late 2005, and were wanting to help create what we had tentatively called the International Committees of the Red Star, or if we're not there yet?

6th February 2010, 22:26

Now, I guess for the sake of my own curiosity, the question I have is whether those comrades who are outside of the U.S. were interested in developing this along the lines of the proposal we put in our letter of late 2005, and were wanting to help create what we had tentatively called the International Committees of the Red Star, or if we're not there yet?

We're obviously not there yet. And on the note of international cooperation: do you have any contact with Rote Hilfe in Germany?

danyboy27

6th February 2010, 23:10

7th February 2010, 00:06

I dont fully agree with having Political aid organisation.

i think people should put their efforts together regardless of their political goal to help peoples struck by natural disaster.

Political aid would lead to uproductive distribution of the aid.

I disagree. Given the fact that many natural disaster have a clear connection to the failings of capitalism, a socialist aid organisation that strives to help out grassroots organisations in the disaster area in order to bring forward a socialist alternative is a logical step.

Besides, the current - non-political - aid organisations are often very wasteful. The director of unicef in the Netherlands for example earns about 200 000 euro's a year, bonuses excluded. Due to this kind of shit many people have become wary of donating.

Martin Blank

7th February 2010, 00:10

We're obviously not there yet. And on the note of international cooperation: do you have any contact with Rote Hilfe in Germany?

We contacted Rote Hilfe in 2005 about the idea. We've since written them a few times about things the RSS was doing since then, but we've never received a reply from them.

I guess it's probably too early to think about this as something that could coalesce quickly. But I do think the general principle we used for the RSS is something that should be applied here: a non-doctrinaire, non-sectarian coordinating center for aid and relief, by working people, for working people. If these organizations are developing on the basis of that principle, then I would say we're all definitely on the same path.

I should bring up another point here, and that's about the symbols. We chose the red star as a logo for the aid effort for three reasons: 1) it's identifiable as an historic symbol of the workers' movement, 2) when a red star is placed on a white field (as in an armband or on a flag), it is immediately visible from a distance, and 3) as an aid and relief society that will inevitably operate in theaters where military personnel are present, it is important to have an identifiable symbol that is recognized by the Geneva Conventions.

This last point might seem either unnecessary or ridiculous, but one thing we learned from our aid work in hurricane zones is that having a Conventions-compliant insignia does improve the ability to move through regions under emergency declarations. From our work in protests, we learned that having that insignia gives you a better chance of not being shot at by riot cops.

In 2006, the RSS sent an application to Geneva for recognition as a "battlefield civilian medical auxiliary", which would mean that the white flag with red star would be included in the insignia recognition handbook, alongside the red cross, red crescent, red star-of-david and red lion as a recognized aid organization operating in a combat zone. We have yet to have Geneva act on it because we have not submitted to the inspection necessary for certification. But that is open-ended, so we have time to organize for that occasion. However, since we are listed as "pending certification", we are already tentatively recognized.

danyboy27

7th February 2010, 03:06

I disagree. Given the fact that many natural disaster have a clear connection to the failings of capitalism, a socialist aid organisation that strives to help out grassroots organisations in the disaster area in order to bring forward a socialist alternative is a logical step.

Besides, the current - non-political - aid organisations are often very wasteful. The director of unicef in the Netherlands for example earns about 200 000 euro's a year, bonuses excluded. Due to this kind of shit many people have become wary of donating.

i got absolutly no problem whatsoever that leftist go oversea educate and teach to people our ideology, its fine and it should be done.

But if we have to do it, we should make sure that:

1. its done efficiently, and that no money fall in the hand of a fews corrupted peoples.

2. that we, leftist dont look like opportunist assole that exploit the bad consequences of a crisis at our advantage.

In the case of Haiti, for exemple, the phenomenon of plutocracy is something that is vastly widespread amongst the people holding different position of power.

what actually prove that the group called: bataye ouvier actually use the money correctly and not in order to make a fews people from the group live a bourgeois lifestyle?

punisa

7th February 2010, 07:35

So, looks like we have to start up such organisations from scratch. Where to begin?

That would be interesting, but I'm too puzzled over "where to start"?
An organization that is "red" and also does something to help people out could be a great place for breeding new socialists :cool:

7th February 2010, 12:55

i got absolutly no problem whatsoever that leftist go oversea educate and teach to people our ideology, its fine and it should be done.
That is rather ethnocentric and not at all what I meant. In the first stage we would simply support grassroots organisations of the working class. No foreign leftists that educate the natives are needed, or wanted, for that purpose.

But if we have to do it, we should make sure that:

1. its done efficiently, and that no money fall in the hand of a fews corrupted peoples.

In the case of Haiti, for exemple, the phenomenon of plutocracy is something that is vastly widespread amongst the people holding different position of power.

what actually prove that the group called: bataye ouvier actually use the money correctly and not in order to make a fews people from the group live a bourgeois lifestyle?
Fair point. My answer is two-fold:
1. Before any disaster strikes we try to make as many links to working class movements as we can. This is not only a way to continually raise international solidarity but also a way to build trust over a period of time.
2. If disaster strikes in an area we don't know anyone beforehand, but an organisation does exist, we simply do it the other way around: trust from the outset, yet also keep in regular contact and ask for feedback. If trust is breached, donations can be terminated later on anyway. It might be a jump of faith for some here, but I think in this situation it is important to trust people who are striked by disaster, rather than demand a period of getting to know eachother, which would be absurd in a disaster.

2. that we, leftist dont look like opportunist assole that exploit the bad consequences of a crisis at our advantage.
That is going to be the stance of some people, mainly rightwingers, anyway. To the working class, we can only be honest and try to win their trust, which is mainly achieved via their mass and grassroots organisations..

Martin Blank

7th February 2010, 12:59

That would be interesting, but I'm too puzzled over "where to start"?

The one thing we learned is that you really cannot just start "cold" with something like this, or else it just becomes a name and little else. Organizing around something concrete (e.g., raising funds and collecting supplies for victims of a specific event) is more likely to allow any kind of aid and relief effort to coalesce and actually become something.

There is bound to be something you can organize around that would qualify as providing aid and relief, either where you are or nearby. Otherwise, while it might sound messed up on the surface to say it, the fact is that there will be another earthquake, or hurricane, or other natural disaster that will happen in the near future. When it does, be ready to do something for those workers affected by it.

Martin Blank

7th February 2010, 13:04

That is going to be the stance of some people, mainly rightwingers, anyway. To the working class, we can only be honest and try to win their trust, which is mainly achieved via their mass and grassroots organisations.

This. We prove ourselves the most by what we do, not what we say. Tangible assistance and support goes a lot farther than paper declarations and analysis. The point of organizing workers' aid is to take what we talk about and put it into practice. That means having a measure of trust in our brothers and sisters in other countries, but it also means making good on our own words when it is most crucial.

Steve_j

7th February 2010, 13:25

a non-doctrinaire, non-sectarian coordinating center for aid and relief, by working people, for working people.

Completely inline with what i would like to see materialise.

This. We prove ourselves the most by what we do, not what we say. Tangible assistance and support goes a lot farther than paper declarations and analysis. The point of organizing workers' aid is to take what we talk about and put it into practice.

I agree, but i am a little unsure about sending propaganda along with aid to disaster prone areas. However we can take a two pronged approach to this.

For example, in the wake of the tsunamia, Srilanka for intance, recieved lots of money for "redevelopment" so alot of money was poured into the tourism industry, with the rich having their hotels rebuilt for them, whilst the government drove many fishmen from their lands that were their homes because they declared it "unsafe land" due to the proximity to the ocean. That done the land was bought up cheap and developed by forgin investors.

I think besides direct aid as an imediate response, identifiyng issues like these, rasing awareness and funding in our home countries to help these local workers to resist the capitalist agenda, legallly and through direct action. Although we would be fighting an up hill battle there would be small victories to win.

7th February 2010, 13:30

I agree, but i am a little unsure about sending propaganda along with aid to disaster prone areas. However we can take a two pronged approach to this.

For example, in the wake of the tsunamia, Srilanka for intance, recieved lots of money for "redevelopment" so alot of money was poured into the tourism industry, with the rich having their hotels rebuilt for them, whilst the government drove many fishmen from their lands that were their homes because they declared it "unsafe land" due to the proximity to the ocean. That done the land was bought up cheap and developed by forgin investors.

I think besides direct aid as an imediate response, identifiyng issues like these, rasing awareness and funding in our home countries to help these local workers to resist the capitalist agenda, legallly and through direct action. Although we would be fighting an up hill battle there would be small victories to win.
Yes, this would exactly be the right approach. While perhaps an uphill battle at first, this is the only way how we can build working class self-organisation and, thus, self-emancipation, the prerequisites for socialism.

Martin Blank

7th February 2010, 13:46

I agree, but i am a little unsure about sending propaganda along with aid to disaster prone areas.

I wasn't trying to imply that we send propaganda along with the aid. If that's what seemed to come through, I apologize. I actually agree with your two-pronged approach.

Steve_j

7th February 2010, 13:53

Ah, sorry miles, my hasty reading. Im not sure where i got that from.

So as it seems there is only the three of us here appearing seriously intent on this.

Suggestions as two how we want to implement this? I guess if we get all the ideas out on the table we can way up the pro's and cons and go from there.

Miles this is obiously something you have thought deeply about, can you post the paper/proposition you put out in 2005?

danyboy27

7th February 2010, 14:44

That is rather ethnocentric and not at all what I meant. In the first stage we would simply support grassroots organisations of the working class. No foreign leftists that educate the natives are needed, or wanted, for that purpose.
.
this is not etnocentric, this is reality, a lot of people living in impovrished regions dont have acces to book or educations.

All knowledge, from building a road to political explanation of the classes are needed for those peoples. Efforts should be made by the left to make sure the most worker possible get acces to political education and knowledge in general.
beccause one without the other is useless anyway.

you can help a fews people that can read to lead a worker movement composed of angry poor uneducated peoples who dont know better but to fallow, or you can teach them marxism and education at the same time, giving them the mean to efficiently think by themselves and eventually topple the regime.

Fair point. My answer is two-fold:
1. Before any disaster strikes we try to make as many links to working class movements as we can. This is not only a way to continually raise international solidarity but also a way to build trust over a period of time.
..
making link sound a good idea but i think its too not enough.
rather than maintain link we should give them a constant flow of help of all sort, just like the komintern used to do.

2. If disaster strikes in an area we don't know anyone beforehand, but an organisation does exist, we simply do it the other way around: trust from the outset, yet also keep in regular contact and ask for feedback. If trust is breached, donations can be terminated later on anyway. It might be a jump of faith for some here, but I think in this situation it is important to trust people who are striked by disaster, rather than demand a period of getting to know eachother, which would be absurd in a disaster.

Nigerian Scammer are a great exemple on how this is not possible.
A lot of people lost a lot of money in those scam beccause they received regular info about the situation; false pictures of peoples helped by the money, phone call from a phony bank, etc etc.

T
That is going to be the stance of some people, mainly rightwingers, anyway. To the working class, we can only be honest and try to win their trust, which is mainly achieved via their mass and grassroots organisations..
Well, i know many worker who know that the US are doing thing in an opportunistic fashion, i think it would be an improvement not being perceived like that.

7th February 2010, 15:00

this is not etnocentric, this is reality, a lot of people living in impovrished regions dont have acces to book or educations.
The point I'm trying to make here is that building a socialist alternative is a task of the local organisations of the working class. You can't simply "parachute" some revolutionaries in and expect the masses to flock around that.

All knowledge, from building a road to political explanation of the classes are needed for those peoples. Efforts should be made by the left to make sure the most worker possible get acces to political education and knowledge in general.
beccause one without the other is useless anyway.
1. The picture that the third world has zero access to knowledge is quite outdated. Internet is accessible, even in Haiti right now.
2. Your stance on political education is incredibly paternalistic and, yes, ethnocentric. It is also very inefficient.

you can help a fews people that can read to lead a worker movement composed of angry poor uneducated peoples who dont know better but to fallow, or you can teach them marxism and education at the same time, giving them the mean to efficiently think by themselves and eventually topple the regime.
Again, paternalistic. Third world workers aren't stupid and ideologically in need of our assistance. What they need is aid to rebuild their socialist movement after a disaster has struck and thus be in a favorable position in the balance of forces post-disaster.

making link sound a good idea but i think its too not enough.
rather than maintain link we should give them a constant flow of help of all sort, just like the komintern used to do.
I agree, but this is beyond the scope of Red Aid. On the other hand, Red Aid could be a building block for a new international.

Nigerian Scammer are a great exemple on how this is not possible.
A lot of people lost a lot of money in those scam beccause they received regular info about the situation; false pictures of peoples helped by the money, phone call from a phony bank, etc etc.
Fair enough, but these scams eventually fail and when they do such an organisation is blacklisted. Also, credibility can come from peer-knowledge between left organisations worldwide, in other words: what are the experiences across left organisations with the aid receiving organisation? Thirdly, I'm not saying we can never send someone over to meet the organisation in question, just that this is not a high priority.

Well, i know many worker who know that the US are doing thing in an opportunistic fashion, i think it would be an improvement not being perceived like that.
We can only offer full disclosure of our finances and status updates on what happens with the money. I think that, in the long term, this is the only viable way to build up trust in the western working class for such projects.

Steve_j

7th February 2010, 15:09

All knowledge, from building a road to political explanation of the classes are needed for those peoples. Efforts should be made by the left to make sure the most worker possible get acces to political education and knowledge in general. beccause one without the other is useless anyway.

Good point.

you can help a fews people that can read to lead a worker movement composed of angry poor uneducated peoples who dont know better but to fallow,

Sorry im not sure if you were being serious on that one?

or you can teach them marxism and education at the same time, giving them the mean to efficiently think by themselves and eventually topple the regime.

Whilst i would support this one, this could be an issue in terms of funding. Im sure many governments would crack down hard on any organisation doing this with the help of forign funding so it might need a more diplomatic approach.

making link sound a good idea but i think its too not enough. rather than maintain link we should give them a constant flow of help of all sort, just like the komintern used to do.

Whilst this would be ideal in terms of supporting development through education and such, it would take time to build up a movement capable of finacially sustaining such actions.

Perhaps it would be best to focus on the easier of the two, which would be chanelling direct support from workers to workers in need of aid relief and to develop it along a political line in terms of supporting them in the struggle against capitalist opportunism in the aftermath.

Steve_j

7th February 2010, 15:17

Perhaps a nice way to look at it, instead of supplying "aid workers" we are supplying "workers aid" :)

danyboy27

7th February 2010, 17:25

The point I'm trying to make here is that building a socialist alternative is a task of the local organisations of the working class. You can't simply "parachute" some revolutionaries in and expect the masses to flock around that.
.
no, you cant really expect that to happen, but you can expect that a few peoples will, those people will be able to do something for their peoples.

1. The picture that the third world has zero access to knowledge is quite outdated. Internet is accessible, even in Haiti right now.
2. Your stance on political education is incredibly paternalistic and, yes, ethnocentric. It is also very inefficient.
.
i dont think the third world have zero access to knowledge, but i think this knowledge is badly distributed and that efforts have to be made to make it even more avaliable. Yes internet is avaliable in Haiti, to SOME people.
if i am paternalistic beccause i advocate giving knowledge away to the people in order to give them the opportunity to help themselves, well then so be it.
give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

Again, paternalistic. Third world workers aren't stupid and ideologically in need of our assistance. What they need is aid to rebuild their socialist movement after a disaster has struck and thus be in a favorable position in the balance of forces post-disaster.
.
they are not stupid, they have been manipulated and misinformed, that is worst. They need Technical help, nobody can deny it. Haiti for exemple need to receive engineering help in order to build stronger building that can wistand hearthquake, they need to learn how to take care of their land to avoid landslide, they need knowledge more than ever.

Billion of dollars where given to MANY ngo over the year with little or no success at all.

If you give materials to rebuild a home to people without giving them the skill to do it in a verry efficient manner, eeverything gonna fall down again when a hearthquake is gonna struck.

Fair enough, but these scams eventually fail and when they do such an organisation is blacklisted. Also, credibility can come from peer-knowledge between left organisations worldwide, in other words: what are the experiences across left organisations with the aid receiving organisation? Thirdly, I'm not saying we can never send someone over to meet the organisation in question, just that this is not a high priority.
.
The problem is, the world is just so vast, knowing everyone, every groups, is something, that a job of titan.

We can only offer full disclosure of our finances and status updates on what happens with the money. I think that, in the long term, this is the only viable way to build up trust in the western working class for such projects.
okay so, what happened to the money so much revleft member gave to bataye ouvier?

what are the reliable source that this money really made it to an efficient relief effort?

Martin Blank

8th February 2010, 05:16

Ah, sorry miles, my hasty reading. Im not sure where i got that from.

No problem. It happens to all of us.

So as it seems there is only the three of us here appearing seriously intent on this.

Perhaps more just watching. Starting new things like this often have a lot more spectators than participants ... until it begins to take off. It was like that with the RSS originally.

Suggestions as to how we want to implement this? I guess if we get all the ideas out on the table we can weigh up the pros and cons and go from there.

I do think the best option is to begin any actual work around a concrete event: a natural disaster, aid to a war zone, etc. There is a lot of prep work involved, if you're wanting to start out from an organized position.

Most governments have streamlined procedures for establishing a tax-deductible charity, and some even allow you to do the whole application process online (e.g., the U.S.). You'll need a bank account for receiving funds, an address (postal and Internet) and phone number where people can contact the organization, a name, statement of intent and formal list of officers (mainly for the government paperwork).

If you're looking to do more than just collect funds for aid and relief, you'll need to make contact with appropriate personnel willing to donate at least their time, if not also the necessary supplies, for specific situations (e.g., doctors and nurses for medical emergencies, lawyers and paralegals for legal aid, etc.). You don't necessarily need to have them "on-call", but you should have made contact with them, and have an agreement with them about possibly helping when needed.

As you collect more funds for your organization's specific use (instead of collections that are forwarded in whole to another organization, as in the case of Haiti), you might want to look into having periodic audits by an outside company. Public auditing helps with the issue of keeping an independent "paper trail" and providing a measure of transparency in your work.

Miles this is obviously something you have thought deeply about, can you post the paper/proposition you put out in 2005?

This is the original letter we sent out in late 2005:

Dear brothers and sisters, comrades and friends:

Over the last year, we have all seen one catastrophe after another devastate working people across the globe.

The South Asian tsunami, the two hurricanes that struck the Gulf Coast of the United States and the recent earthquake in the Kashmir region, the four most publicized of these events, have taken the lives of thousands of our brothers and sisters, and have made the attaining of the basic necessities of life — food, clean water, shelter, clothing, etc. — very difficult, if not impossible.

Over the years, many of us have organized, or attempted to organize, independent relief and aid for our brothers and sisters. These efforts have ranged from modestly successful to relatively insignificant. Nevertheless, the need for us to undertake these humanitarian efforts has only grown. In fact, that need has now grown to a point where concrete steps need to be taken to insure future successes.

Therefore, we approach you today with a proposal for such a step.

We propose the convocation of a conference to establish an independent international agency that focuses on providing aid and relief for working people in their times of need. We have launched this proposal under the working title of the International Committees of the Red Star.

Our conception of this body would be as a coordinating center for the movement of money and supplies to regions of the world where working people are affected by catastrophes of a natural or human-made origin. It would be a non-partisan, non-sectarian organization, unaffiliated to any particular political current or doctrine.

Organizations would not be asked to surrender their own efforts or resources. Rather, we propose that these bodies serve as local committees, or affiliates, of the international organization, retaining their autonomy and independence while working together with similar committees locally, nationally and internationally.

We ask you to consider this proposal and, if you agree with the need for such a project, to work with us to bring it into existence.

If you are interested, please contact us.

Die Neue Zeit

8th February 2010, 06:26

As you collect more funds for your organization's specific use (instead of collections that are forwarded in whole to another organization, as in the case of Haiti), you might want to look into having periodic audits by an outside company. Public auditing helps with the issue of keeping an independent "paper trail" and providing a measure of transparency in your work.

Now you're venturing into a specific accounting interest of mine: accounting and auditing for non-profit organizations! :D

[Seriously, f*** the deferral method and hell yeah to the restricted fund method. There's the transparency needed for identifying the various red aid projects.]

Martin Blank

8th February 2010, 06:49

Now you're venturing into a specific accounting interest of mine: accounting and auditing for non-profit organizations! :D

[Seriously, f*** the deferral method and hell yeah to the restricted fund method. There's the transparency needed for identifying the various red aid projects.]

Please clarify this point. It sounds interesting.

Steve_j

8th February 2010, 12:07

Nice work miles, will comment some more when i have some time.

Steve_j

8th February 2010, 13:22

Ok, so have been thinking. The world is a big place, and we obiously cant predict where the next disastor will occur. But perhaps we could identify key areas around the world where these events are unfortunatly most likely to happen next. From there we could start researching local groups that respond to these matters, perhaps contacting local trade unions and see if they do any active, or can suggest local organisations and in some cases to review any organisation that we would consider supporting.

From there we can build a list of the various areas so when the time comes we know in advance where we want to direct any funding raised, and it might also benifit in that when raising funds we could indicate exactly where the funding is going and why.

In terms of the funding itself we have a couple of options. We could either focus on groups that have the means to recieve donations directly via the internet and just solicit people to donate directly too them. Meaning less work for us to start with.

Or we could set up a registered charity with accounts which would make it easier to support smaller organisations that lack an online donation setup.

Either way the better prepared we are in this sense it means the more likly we are able to get funding to where its needed as quick as possible.

Die Neue Zeit

8th February 2010, 15:14

Please clarify this point. It sounds interesting.

When I recently donated money, I specified that it should go towards the Haiti relief effort (even clicking on the button that says "Haiti" counts).

There's an interesting diagram on this website that briefly outlines the two methods, though I remember course emphasis on the restricted fund method when doing exercises on preparing non-profit financial statements:

http://www.calearn.com/library/index.php?lib_art_id=10

DEFERRAL METHOD

At that point of donation, the donation itself is recognized as a liability precisely because it's restricted by myself. Only when the related expenses are incurred is the liability reclassified as revenue. In the case of Haiti, since the relief effort occurred this year, this rule is academic. However, it would apply when relief efforts occur in fiscal years after restricted donations are received.

It would also apply in the case of AIDS relief, which is specifiable as a restriction of funds and which is an ongoing program.

When I did my course on this subject, MSF Canada was at the time using the deferral method, and continues to do so:

http://www.msf.ca/features/2008annualreport/images/DoctorsWithoutBorders_10948AUD08EN.pdf

RESTRICTED FUND METHOD

This is where a spreadsheet really comes in handy. For every financial statement, there's a division not on the basis of aid programs, but on restrictions: unrestricted, restricted, and endowments (say, only the interest portion of an endowment can be used). At least here, though, revenue is recognized the moment the donation is received.

The global MSF uses the restricted fund method:

http://www.msf.org/source/financial/2008/report2008.pdf

Note that, while the presented statement of financial activities combines all restricted funds into one column, internal financial statements could have separate columns for each kind of non-endowment restriction.

Steve_j

9th February 2010, 12:16

Sorry mate im a little lost on this, in laymans terms are you saying that because the restricted fund method becomes revenue as soon as it comes in (as oposed to when it goes out) it means that yearly statements are more open to public scrutiny?

Die Neue Zeit

9th February 2010, 15:16

The accounting treatment is different for both. Only in the restricted fund method do restricted donations get immediately recognized as revenue.

Martin Blank

11th February 2010, 04:43

Ok, so have been thinking. The world is a big place, and we obviously can't predict where the next disaster will occur. But perhaps we could identify key areas around the world where these events are unfortunately most likely to happen next. From there we could start researching local groups that respond to these matters, perhaps contacting local trade unions and see if they do any active, or can suggest local organisations and in some cases to review any organisation that we would consider supporting.

From there we can build a list of the various areas so when the time comes we know in advance where we want to direct any funding raised, and it might also benefit in that when raising funds we could indicate exactly where the funding is going and why.

In terms of the funding itself we have a couple of options. We could either focus on groups that have the means to receive donations directly via the internet and just solicit people to donate directly too them. Meaning less work for us to start with.

Or we could set up a registered charity with accounts which would make it easier to support smaller organisations that lack an online donation setup.

Either way the better prepared we are in this sense it means the more likely we are able to get funding to where its needed as quick as possible.

I think that the compiling of a list of organizations around the world along the lines you're describing above is a good start. I tend to lean in the direction of localized organizing in advance of any kind of fundraising, and keeping active fundraising minimized until it is actually needed. That way, you don't get the appearance that the money is just being poured into the group itself and not into the relief effort. Of course, maintaining a passive fundraising link on a website (a PayPal account, etc.) is definitely preferable to nothing, but soliciting funds should wait....

Wow, that seems jumbled. Let me see if I can bullet-point it as a to-do list:

1. Collect information on organizations around the world where funds and supplies could be sent in case of a disaster.

2. Organize a local workers' aid and relief society with the capability to collect funds and supplies, though not actively doing so at this time.

3. Be prepared to activate the society when needed by having a means of funds collection (e.g., a PayPal account).

4. When a situation arises, move from passive to active collection, and make arrangements with the organization in the area to transfer funds and supplies.

5. Over time, as more and more workers' aid societies are organized, build greater coordination between them with the goal of an international workers' aid organization.

I guess that's clear.

Steve_j

16th February 2010, 11:43

1. Collect information on organizations around the world where funds and supplies could be sent in case of a disaster.

This is going to be quite alot of work to build. Should we perhaps see how many people we can get involved. Select a few areas of the world and split the research between people. Once we build a list for each area we can then cross check each others suggested groups. Eg contact local trade unions or orgaisations to get their opinion... other ideas?

2. Organize a local workers' aid and relief society with the capability to collect funds and supplies, though not actively doing so at this time.

This one i have little experience in, although i have worked with a major charity before it was already established so supporter contacts we already built. Miles you did some work for katrina. Was it just public soliciting (in the street) or other means?

Perhaps a good approach aswell is a cordinated soliciting of existing organisations, eg trade unions, networks and possibly parties to negotiate material support eg the forwarding of a call out via their mailing lists when the time arrives. Perhaps once we are better definied in our ethic and ideas and who we intend to support we could start going this route.

3. Be prepared to activate the society when needed by having a means of funds collection (e.g., a PayPal account).

So u think we should set up a common account? So the soliciting across all regions, ie europe, the americas, australasia ect all go into the one, or seperate ones?

5. Over time, as more and more workers' aid societies are organized, build greater coordination between them with the goal of an international workers' aid organization.

I guess this relates to the above.

Anyone got some decent web building skills, i guess we dont need anything fancey, but something ready to be updated in times of need.

What do other comrades think? Even if your not intending to get involved, comments from the rest of the board would be very helpful.

Lastly should we set up a public revleft group, that way we can seperate all the tasks into individual threads in order to discuss them individually? Or just keep things going on here for now?

Martin Blank

17th February 2010, 00:57

This is going to be quite a lot of work to build. Should we perhaps see how many people we can get involved. Select a few areas of the world and split the research between people. Once we build a list for each area we can then cross check each other's suggested groups. E.g., contact local trade unions or organisations to get their opinion ... other ideas?

It is work that a group can do, with each person taking an area and building up a contact list. Labor unions and workers' political organizations are the best ones to have on the list. LabourStart has a list on their site, IIRC.

I should also add the following to the "to-do" list:

1a. Develop a form letter that can be mailed/e-mailed to each organization when a situation arises, explaining what you're looking to do, asking them if they are planning to do aid and relief and how you can help. (Expect "traditional" organizations and unions to direct you to NGOs and the Red Cross, but don't be surprised if some express interest in workers' aid.)

1b. Do a background study of the organizations expressing interest, to see if there is anything in their history to suggest misappropriation of funds.

I don't think asking other organizations their views on each other is necessarily a good idea. Labor unions have a tendency to have their own "friends" in different countries, as do political organizations, and they will talk down those they consider rivals or opponents. We shouldn't be discriminatory on that basis. I think we can put together a decent list without asking for a lot of outside assistance. Sure, it may entail a lot of "trainspotting", but none of our lists will ever be 100-percent complete anyway.

This one i have little experience in, although i have worked with a major charity before it was already established so supporter contacts we already built. Miles you did some work for katrina. Was it just public soliciting (in the street) or other means?

Our Katrina effort was put together very ad hoc, so almost all of what we collected was from among our members, with a little coming from supporters and friends of the League, and some co-workers.

Public soliciting on the street is full of problems. Some places require you to have a license to solicit, so it's best to keep it personal. Co-workers, neighbors you know and friends are a good base for initial work. A website with a donation link is a good passive approach that can later be used for more active work (this can also get you around soliciting license laws, since you can direct people to donate online and then all you're telling them is a URL -- no money is changing hands).

Perhaps a good approach as well is a coordinated soliciting of existing organisations, e.g., trade unions, networks and possibly parties to negotiate material support eg the forwarding of a call out via their mailing lists when the time arrives. Perhaps once we are better definied in our ethic and ideas and who we intend to support we could start going this route.

That's certainly a possibility -- at the very least, something to advocate to those groups.

I'm not sure what you're saying with the "who we intend to support", though. I think it would be a mistake to say "we'll support this group, but not this group". Part of non-sectarian defense is being willing to work with and assist working people regardless of their political or organizational affiliations. I'm not going to ask a worker to tell me their affiliations before agreeing to provide food or water. The whole point, in many respects, is to demonstrate to workers who don't agree with us the value of united, independent working-class action.

So u think we should set up a common account? So the soliciting across all regions, i.e., europe, the americas, australasia etc., all go into the one, or separate ones?

We have one set up already in the U.S. It would be best if each society kept control of their own accounts, and then we privately share account details when needed. There are banking laws and charity laws that govern these accounts, and they vary from country to country, so it would be easier if each society learned just one set of confusing and seemingly contradictory laws. ;)

I guess this relates to the above.

Anyone got some decent web building skills, i guess we don't need anything fancy, but something ready to be updated in times of need.

The RSS website -- www.redstarsociety.com -- was supposed to be finally designed and updated this last weekend. That's been pushed to this week because of lingering issues with massive data loss from last year. Nevertheless, ours should finally be updated and in good shape by Friday.

What do other comrades think? Even if your not intending to get involved, comments from the rest of the board would be very helpful.

Very much agreed. I would like to hear constructive comments from comrades on here.

Lastly should we set up a public revleft group, that way we can seperate all the tasks into individual threads in order to discuss them individually? Or just keep things going on here for now?

I think an "International Red Aid" social group would be justified at this point. I'll go ahead and create it, and everyone reading this thread is welcome to join.

Martin Blank

17th February 2010, 01:01

I've also been meaning to post these here. These are the Mission Statement and "About Us" for the Red Star Society in the U.S.

Our Mission:

The mission of the Red Star Society is to provide aid and relief to working people who are victims of natural or human-made disasters, regardless of their affiliations, allegiances or views. We seek to provide non-sectarian worker-to-worker aid worldwide, maximizing flexibility in delivery and minimizing non-relief costs.

Who We Are:

The Red Star Society is a working people's aid and relief organization in the United States of America. Founded in late 2005, in the wake of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the RSS realized a need for aid and relief efforts that were based on worker-to-worker support and solidarity. The Red Star Society also manages the International Labor Defense Fund, for legal defense of working people under persecution by the state for defending themselves and their class in times of struggle.

Over the years, we have seen rampant profiteering and extortion of Gulf Coast refugees, culminating in some so-called "aid" organizations charging displaced people and families for such basic things as coffee and water. After witnessing this happen again during one of the greatest disasters in recent memory, we realized what had to be done: form an independent working people's aid and relief organization, not only to provide immediate support to those in need, without conditions, but also to bring to the front our common class interests, both immediate and historic, as workers.

When natural or human-made disasters occur, poor and working people suffer more than others. This is due to our place at or near the bottom of capitalist society, coupled with the fact that we all too frequently have little or no savings to fall back on when the unexpected happens. The Red Star Society exists to provide aid and relief services to those who cannot afford to sustain themselves in such times.

But the Red Star Society is not a mere charity organization. Though the services that ordinary charity organizations provide can be a vital lifeline for the masses of people in need, they treat only the symptoms of poverty and not its root cause. Private charity, along with its counterpart in the modern welfare state, not only fail to eliminate poverty, but also dehumanize those who are forced to become dependent on charity and subsidy for survival. Workers are robbed of their dignity, and capitalists deny them reintegration into the labor force.

While conducting our immediate tasks, we also take care of the future
of our class by offering an explanation to those we serve of why society treats them as they do. Why are workers made to feel grateful for employment when we are the ones who sustain society with our labor? Why does the top 1 percent of the population live in decadent luxury, while the great majority of the people — the source of all their wealth — live hand-to-mouth in constant fear of starvation? Why does the government only seem concerned about "freedom" when it comes to their right to make a profit off our labor, and not when it comes to our right to live a decent life, free from need and material want?

The answer can only be this: the thin layer of capitalist owners and "middle class" managers want to maintain their way of life at the expense of the well-being of working people, and, consequently, at the expense of human progress altogether.

Employed or unemployed, young or old, regardless of race or nationality, what sets working people apart from all other classes in capitalist society is our labor power — our ability to work. Since we do not own our workplaces or profit from the labor of others, as the bosses and their managers do, our means of life comes from our ability to sell our ability to work to those who can make a profit from it. When our ability to work is no longer profitable, or we can no longer work because of age or disability, we are cast aside like a used can or bottle.

As such, as part of our activities of the day, members of the Red Star Society always point to the immediate need for poor and working people to come together and understand that the cause of our poverty is not a personal failing, but a condition of this society, so that we, united as a class, can organize to eliminate poverty, homelessness and want forever by creating a future where the functions of government and economy are controlled democratically by the working people themselves for the benefit of all society: a working people's republic that will make the free development of each the condition for the free development of all.