Also this ‘taking money from’ thing. It’s not always so black and white. This is not a specific comment on Jean or Posie either btw, I am more making a general point. I have said on here before how excellently effective a coalition of ‘unnatural’ allies is in campaigning to gain new supporters. Women working together from across the political spectrum is way more effective than sealing off your issue as a ‘left’ or ‘right’ wing concern.
Yes there is a principle about not being beholden to other sources when you are working towards an aim. Often this is because the other sources might try to influence your direction or they might cause your wider reputation to be affected where people or groups don’t agree with the donor’s politics.
but there’s also practical politics. Which is why financial reporting needs to be scrupulous so that everyone can make there own minds up about the ‘taking money’ thing in the causes they support.
Fine for uninvolved people to keep their hands clean according to their limits but from practical experience there is a clear limit to the effectiveness of collaboration that can be made in any campaigning issue, if in temporary political alliance on a single issue, campaigning groups won’t:
Share venue costs, speaker travel costs
Accept free or reduced cost venues
Share publicity or advocacy material costs
Groups will also ‘give money to’ each other by:
providing ‘free’ staff or volunteer time to another organisation they are working with who is only aligned with them on some things,
providing ‘free’ tactical campaigning advice or expertise,
‘free’ written advocacy resources that can be distributed by the organisation only aligned with them on some thing. (Makes sense- allows reach into a whole new audience)
Some groups also cap donations from any one source to neutralise accusations of ‘taking money’ = buying influence
I don’t think any of us live a perfect life not funding or benefiting from politics we disagree with in some way. I wouldn’t want me or anyone else to do that actually though they are of course free to if they want to or have the option.
I know beneficiaries of work or services who directly benefit from the paid work or generosity of people whose policies or politics they absolutely hated.
Like people who take animal-tested medicine because they need them, and who also actively campaign against animal testing. Or me, by buying from legally-tax-avoiding mega corps where I want or need to. (I try to minimise it but i have other priorities too.)
None of these are activities I would try to stop anyone doing, or personally lose much sleep over. political funding is as much a matter of personal taste as it is of organisational ethics and transparency and legal and regulatory requirements. As long as campaigning organisations are transparent and law abiding I feel it’s up to me and all of us to take or leave the rest.