Print

Print


George is being too modest here.

Like many of us, George has made a quite respectable salary for many yy (he 
was one of the original UMass Boston faculty, now retired).  But unlike the 
vast majority of us, I'm sure (apologies to Phil), he has supported 
progressive organizations, including Science for the People and TecSChange, 
to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars annually, and I'll bet 
(apologies to Phil, I know I can do better) hundreds of thousands over the 
decades.  He could have taken fancy vacations and cruises, but he eschewed 
such activities and lived modestly.  For example, he drove a 1979 VW Rabbit 
Diesel until it almost crumbled into a pile of rust, and then gave it away 
with a great running engine to someone who needed it and could fix the body. 
  He also has set up a foundation with a board of progressives who will 
eventually determine the dispersal of his estate.

And he fought the academic establishment at UMass in order to teach and have 
students receive science-elective credit for his hugely popular course 
"Science for Humane Survival".

I haven't read the referenced article yet, but I am quite certain (sorry, 
Phil) that George's "philanthropy" was by no means "propping up capitalism". 
  Quite the contrary.  It was strengthening the opposition.  More of us 
should follow his example.

And, incidentally, the work of TecSChange also should not be characterized 
as philanthropic in the traditional sense.  Their progressive nonsectarian 
board carefully considers the politics of their work and the work of 
cooperating recipient organizations all over the world.

No "liberal do-gooders" here.


----Original Message Follows----
From: George Salzman <[log in to unmask]>
To: Science for the People Discussion List 
<[log in to unmask]>,        Eric Entemann 
<[log in to unmask]>
CC: Carmelo Ruiz Marrero <[log in to unmask]>,        Charlie Welch 
<[log in to unmask]>,        Joan Roelofs <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Propping up capitalism without wanting to
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:44:29 -0500








Oaxaca, Thursday 26 July 2007

Friends,

 Carmelo Ruz Marrero is the friend whose fury at Alexander
Cockburn's arrogance and stupidity about his position on global warming
first restirred my interest in the Science for the People listserv. We
lost Carmelo, who is doing yeoman's work in a way I believe SftP ought
to function. We lost him because of the childish personal attacks then
going on within the group. Carmelo, like Charlie Welch at TecsChange
and Eric Entemann teaching at Roxbury Community College, are DOING
Science for the People. Here's an item Carmelo sent today that rings
true to all my experience. In particular it ought to speak to all of us
who think of ourselves as middle class and yet want to be part
of the struggle for human emancipation. The link is

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_6262.cfm
.

 The article begins

How Foundations & Non-Profits Prop Up Corporate Control

    The Third Sector as a Protective Layer for Capitalism

By Joan Roelofs

NameBase.org, Posted on July 25, 2007

      Straight to the
Source





Those who wish to promote change should look closely at what sustains
the present system. One reason capitalism doesn't collapse despite its
many weaknesses and valiant opposition movements is because of the
"nonprofit sector." Yet philanthropic capital, its investment and its
distribution, are generally neglected by the critics of capitalism.
Most studies of the subject are generously funded by the nonprofit
sector itself; few researchers have followed up on the observation of
Marx and Engels in The Communist Manifesto:



"A part of the bourgeoisie is desirous of redressing social grievances,
in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society.... To
this section belong the economists, philanthropists, humanitarians,
improvers of the condition of the working class, organizers of charity,
members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals,
temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable
kind."



The United States is unique in the size and scope of this sector which
spends over $400 billion annually. Its tax-free wealth is largely
unaccountable: just imagine the land, the buildings, their contents,
and the investments of churches, private universities and schools,
museums, zoos, teaching hospitals, conservation trusts, opera houses,
etc.

_______________________________________________




 What the middle class does with the wealth over which we have
control is a significant part of the problem, in my opinion. We ought
to think about it. Maybe it would be good if more of us were, like
Eric, compulsivly frugal (referring to the thread on the internet
divide).

Sincerely,

George

_________________________________________________________________
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_2G_0507