For those who can’t read the graphic (and it’s not easy, I know) – this is a group of activists, mostly in Italy, celebrating their success at pressuring Puma to withdraw sponsorship of a New York City Animal Care and Control (NYCACC) fundraising event.
Which is dumb.
Many activists here in New York have been critical of NYCACCs past inability to fundraise independently of the city and the Department of Health. Then when they start to improve their corporate relations, they are shut down? Is NYCACC to be entirely dependant on whatever the city deems politically convenient forever, or do we want them to form relationships that may someday help to lead to their independence?
We cheer when the city increases their budget because we recognize the potential to save more lives. Is this different? Might the next corporate supporter renovate a building, or buy an x-ray machine? Would we like the opportunity to find out?
I realize the good intentions behind this, but activists who target fundraising and the venues used to hold fundraising functions have to realize that they are striking a blow for the status quo, where the budget depends entirely on the whims of politicians, the city calls the shots, and the facilities consist of whatever old building the city happens to own.
Many New York activists believe that critical to the way forward is a truly independent organization with the fundraising prowess to pursue its own organizational goals as opposed to being the handmaiden of the city, which is inevitable when the city provides nearly all of the funding.
Is the status quo what you want to support?