Begin forwarded message:

From: Orsan Senalp <[email protected]> Date: 16 Aug 2016 14:26:10 GMT+2 To: Bob Haugen <[email protected]> Cc: Daniel Chavez <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [NetworkedLabour] a short response to queries about the p2p'f workings in WSF

(I did start to answer Bob, but turned into collective answer to Kevin, Michel, and Daniel Chavez)

There is a good negative-example from US conservative-conspiracy websites, they mission them selves to map power networks of what they call 'political LEFT'; meaning 'liberal right'.

Here their take on Soros' network: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=589

List of all Soros grantees: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1237

Top 150 Soros grantees, from another site on Soros (Soros files): http://sorosfiles.com/soros/2011/10/open-society-institute-top-150-grantees....

There was also a passage mentioning Elle Baker some where.

One would wonder if they are mis-informing their conservative base; or is this a simple manipulative class act; targeting liberals by accusing them as 'left', even socialists?

You will see on the Soros' political network ties drawn from New Economic Thinking to Susan George - to Socialist International - TNI and IPS.

As an answer to Daniel's question; as you see I am not the one obsessed with the organization you work for. I also worked for it, yet with zero hour contract; and after some critical questioning and not in line articles I wrote my contract ended; never received any other support; until the networked labour event. Will not go into details but as soon as it got clear to some people that I am not going to help recruiting new movements and won't represent the policy and strategy largely designed by management ideas or initiatives on networked labour generated on the list or by me did not get any support; and no one can blame anyone for that. This is how things work; that is the point I am making here.

Neither P2p-f, nor TNI, nor Soros, Ford, would support or finance any one critically looking at the work they do. Or would go and act independently. I talk TNI, P2p-f, and unions since I know them from inside and from closest look. I wish Kevin, Daniel, Michel, and others could show any sign of public self-criticism: on their policy, politics, organizational, funding frameworks; but it is of course not interesting to talk about these. The most understandable thing, for you guys who tied to these institutions with industrial relational terms.

This critic is not new, not mine, and not only targets specific individual person or group; this works like this. As piece shared by Roberto argue too; that is also about what is called 'iron cage of oligarchy', or by Bogdanov 'law of minimum' and negative-selection. These dynamics work in a certain way in complex social and natural systems and not we but most of the funders like Soros, Rockefeller, and others posses the expertise on this and apparatus and sources to manage such complexities.

Kevin, you might, I might, others might sincerely focus on what we believe good and powerful, most relevant so on; but in a matrix we all embedded, without having a bird eye view on what it is we do serving there is a very big chance to serve something else.

I would remind once more Hilary Wainwright's warning about how their generation served to renewal of capitalism; and how not to fail in that trap again. This all long and boring argumentation aims to contribute in a conscious perspective on this latter problem.

Orsan

...

...

On 15 Aug 2016, at 20:46, Bob Haugen <[email protected]> wrote:

On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Daniel Chavez <[email protected]> wrote: This is the last comment I will make in response to Orsan's accusations about TNI's supposedly dark side. My apologies for those of you who might not be interested in this type of exchanges.

I don't know anything about TNI, but I do find this type of exchange to be interesting. However, I would like to see it evolve in the direction of a finer-grained analysis than "were they funded" and "who were they funded by".

More like, what did the funders expect to achieve by their funding?

How does that relate to the goals of the funded organization?

Did the funders influence the organization so that it warped the organization's behavior?

How did the funding of this organization affect the ecosystem of emancipatory movements? (As when the funding of non-threatening organizations takes momentum away from, or damages, more threatening but possible more necessary organizations...)

(Not that answers to those questions are always knowable.) _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list [email protected] http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour