POLICY
‘Who do we accept money from’ policy
This policy is our framework when deciding to accept funding from a certain source. It lays out who we want and do not want as funders, and the due diligence process for new funders.
Contents
Policy
Who do we [Gastivists] actively exclude as funders?
- Corporations with destructive activities as core business (fossil fuel companies, industrial food companies, non-ethical banks)
- Organizations or foundations that receive money that can directly be linked to destructive activities
- Organizations, foundations or companies that are vocal on being pro-nuclear
- Organizations, foundations or companies that are on the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions list or in any other way can be linked to the Isreali apartheid regime.
What do we try to avoid (acceptable if we are really in financial troubles)
- Funding that comes with too many reporting requirements (like EU subsidies).To be decided on a case-to-case basis, depending on our needs.
- Funding that limits us too much in what we can or can’t do, especially if it is not in line with our values. To be decided on a case-to-case basis, depending on our needs.
- Funders that ask us to put their logo on all materials
- Governments. Only acceptable if they support our values and goals and it does not come with too heavy reporting requirements.
- Corporations
Who do we want as funders
- Individuals that support our values and goals
- Organizations that support our values and goals
- Foundations with light reporting requirements and high flexibility
- Corporations with an ethical core business
- Ethical banks
Internal due diligence process for new funders
- Someone in the collective proposes a new potential funder
- The Money Circle does research on the origin of the money of the funder, the reporting requirements and flexibility of the funding
- The Money Circle checks based on research if there are reasons to refuse a funder. They take a final decision.
Hi Schuyler -
Just to say, I’m replying from RadHR here, as opposed to the group that uploaded the policy. The broader framing of not accepting money from institutions/governments that are involved with or supportive to a range of unethical regimes makes a lot of sense. I can imagine it being a trickier one to practice, but it’s a helpful change, especially as we know there are so many that violate a range of core liberatory and anti-oppressive values.
Also, there are many boycott campaigns that have targeted a range of specific regimes around the world for many years, based on those country’s actions, which we think are legitimate and don’t believe constitute any form of discrimination. It makes sense that different groups will see specific campaigns in different ways to one another, regardless of what any particular country’s legal framework is.
I’ll be sure to share your post with the group that originally shared the policy.
Liam