Image via CrunchBaseTweet 1Tweet 2
Tweet 3
Tweet 4
Tweet 5
Tweet 6
Tweet 7
Tweet 8
Tweet 9
Tweet 10
Tweet 11
Tweet 1
Tweet 2
Tweet 3
My latest push for my fundraising goal for my Iran democracy work has been this list: Prominent Iranian Americans.
If I can get 200 prominent Iranian Americans to give me $1,000 each, that is all I need. That has been my thought. I am still thinking along those lines. But then earlier today I went on Twitter, did a search on "Iran democracy," and sent reply tweets to about 10 people talking about Iran, each time linking to my main Iran democracy page - bit.ly/irandem - and already there is some welcome chatter.
Now I think my preferred method is to get 2,000 people on Twitter to give me $100 each.
I should keep this fundraising two track. I should try both ways.
These two tracks beat trying to get the CIA - the thought did cross my mind; think Bourne - or the State Department, or some NGO to give money. I am saying no to any kind of paperwork. You look at my blog posts and you donate. That's it. Anything more is way too complicated.
My work is a netroots/grassroots thing. We netroots/grassroots people are not big on hierarchies. We want Obama to make as much data public as possible. We don't want to go to the White House. We want the White House to come to us, wherever we are. That's the spirit of grassroots governance.
That is the absolute best way to work on Iran democracy.
I have no desire to launch an organization. No NGO, nothing. So the contributions are not tax deductible.
I want to keep things simple. I have already stated where the 200K will go. And I will report periodically on how much I raise. That much transparency is all you get. And that ought to be enough.
There is no other political challenge on earth I salivate over more than the Iran democracy movement. This is what I want to put most of my time into until a regime change in Iran.
It is possible, or I would not be looking into it.
Let's go raise some money. Help me out.
Of the two stated methods, the Twitter method is perhaps the better one. You talk to people who are already explicitly interested in Iran democracy. That is a good starting point. They are interested enough that they are talking about it.
New York Times: Message to Muslims: I’m Sorry: Muslims are one of the last minorities in the United States that it is still possible to demean openly, and I apologize for the slurs. ..... “Sorry for Portraying Muslims as Human.” ..... Must coverage of law-abiding Muslims be “balanced” by a discussion of Muslim terrorists? ..... should reporting of Pope Benedict’s trip to Britain be “balanced” by a discussion of Catholic terrorists in Ireland? ..... I also want to defend America against extremists engineering a spasm of religious hatred. ...... Japanese did attack Pearl Harbor and in the end killed far more Americans than Al Qaeda ever did. Consumed by our fears, we lumped together anyone of Japanese ancestry and rounded them up in internment camps. The threat was real, but so were the hysteria and the overreaction. ...... Radicals tend to empower radicals ..... We’ve mostly learned that about blacks, Jews and other groups that suffered historic discrimination, but it’s still O.K. to make sweeping statements about “Muslims” as an undifferentiated mass.
No comments:
Post a Comment