 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Sign up to receive PND e-newsletters. |
|
| |
|
| Re: Ethical: receiving assistance from, & lending credibility to brutal regime?
Posted by carl   on 2/3/2009, 8:30 pm, in reply to "Ethical: receiving assistance from, & lending credibility to brutal regime?"
VIP Poster
Hi,
Doesn't seem like anyone wants to touch this, but I'll have a go.
First a question: Is the mission of the nonprofit "the address of human rights issues?" If not, then the ethical obligation of the nonprofit lies squarely with its constituency. Is the constituency served by the gala? Yes. Are unrestricted funds made available for staff, facilities, etc. made available? The answer again will be "yes."
Is the nonprofit patently endorsing the Asian embassy? Remarkably, the answer is "No." Is there a "legitimacy by association?" Not really. No one at the gala thinks the Asian government is any better on human rights. Neither does anyone think the nonprofit's silence is endorsement.
Gandhi, possibly the world's greatest champion of human rights issues, quickly and effectively made friends with the American press, at the time one of the world's greatest offenders of human rights. Was Gandhi endorsing the Ku Klux Klan? Hoover's investigations? the House Committee on Un-American Activities? The answer here is "No. Not at all." Gandhi was marshaling the greatest network of communications media in the world to serve his constituency.
There is no one size fits all answer to this question. In this case, however, the onus is on the nonprofit to serve its clients. There will be another day to serve the clients of the Asian government.
Just my two cents,
Carl
|
| |
