Should Activists Should Be Unpaid and Poor?

Why do so many socially and environmentally "aware" people resent activists earning a living?

A few days ago, one of my favorite blogs, Deconsumption, posted its very first advertisement ever. I had absolutely no problem with this. Afterall, Steven has easily invested upwards of 1000 hours of his time into researching and writing his excellent articles. Then today, I read this: "...I've always had a fundamental aversion to posting advertising on Deconsumption -- an version which has only been strengthened by looking at the Sidewinder ad on the sidebar."

After explaining that he's moved the offending ad to a new section called Deconsumption Product Cata'blog, he felt obligated to further disclose, "And in full disclaimer, for some of the product links if you click through and then actually buy anything I might get a couple bucks or so as a referral credit--but not all of them."

Now this by itself would not have gotten a rise out of me. Steve has the right to do whatever he wishes with his blog. Besides, working in the investment industry, he probably doesn't need the extra income. However, let me explain why I'm asking here why so many "concerned citizens" resent activists earning any money. Last night I dropped by another blog belonging to a very high profile writer and activist. On the front page he starts with these words:

Please excuse me for making this personal appeal to you, but you have been a valued friend, peer and/or reader, and I am afraid I must ask for your help. I am not soliciting donations, but am simply seeking to promote the sales of my new periodical ********.

Currently all of my income is derived from *******.  To date, the first issue has sold 38 copies, and the second issue has sold 11 copies. I receive $2 for every copy sold, so this means that my income since February of this year is $98. Were it not for food stamps, heating assistance, and *****'s $350/month alimony, I would not be able to write to you now.

Goddamn it. This makes me angry.

The same people who resent an activist attempting to earn a modest income have no second thoughts about giving away their hard earned money to big business for $150 sneakers, trips to Disneyland, $2000 big screen TVs,  or other worthless crap which they have been brainwashed into thinking that they need.

The day before yesterday, I stopped by writer and activist Daniel Pinchbeck's forum. He was almost apologetic about plugging his new book 2012 on his own forum. Here are his own words, "Since I seem to get crucified for commercialism and shameless hucksterism no matter what I do, I might as well go for it." Let this sink in:  He's apologizing on his own forum.

A few months ago, I was watching a video online of Mike Ruppert speaking at Solfest. At one point, about halfway through the hour long talk, he felt a need to stop and lecture the audience as if they were spoiled children on the need to financially support the activists they had come to hear by purchasing their books and tapes. He begins this lecture with the words, "Perhaps the most insidous poison that the devil of capitalism and big business has injected us with is the notion that we activists should be poor, do everything for free, and give it away."  To hear this go to this video and fast forward to the 37:30 minute mark.

It really makes you stop and think.

So, is there a problem? You bet there is. I have been witnessing this phenonmenon for over a decade. Useless idiots, whose sole talent lies in being able to dunk a basketball or persuade the gullible into purchasing something that they don't need, make millions in our society. Meanwhile, if an activist earns anything close to a "living wage", people accuse them of profiteering or being too commercial.

Activists shouldn't have to be fearful of the reaction that placing affiliate links on their sites might elicit from their steady readers. I know quite a bit about business--especially the online variety. Medium traffic websites can easily incur several hundred dollars in hosting fees per month. This has to come out of the pocket of the person running the site. Then there is the unpaid time in researching and writing the articles as well as promoting the site which can amount to the equivalent of a second fulltime job.

So, if you are one of these people who get's into a snit whenever people like Rupprt, Savinar, Fitts, or all the others, don't give you their books and other materials for free, take a moment to ask yourself why that is.

Don't they have a right to earn a living?

I'll leave you with a final thought. Why are all the bad guys livin' large while most of the good guys are fretting over where next month's rent will come from? Why are the bad guys, who are destroying the environment and perpetuating a society where only the few who thrive on toxic destructive competition prosper, rewarded so lavishly and generously by you? At the same time why do you resent that an activist may be earning a 4% affiliate commssion on a $19.95 book sale? Is it any wonder the bad guys have been winning for so long?

Actually "winning" is an understatement. They are trouncing the good guys and I see no end in sight. 

Is it any wonder at all?

Comments

[Kurt]

Most activist types I have known over the years become bitter over the years. When you throw yourself fully into fighting the good fight for the best years of your life and then realize that you are impoverished at 45 or 50, it hurts. It hurts like hell. You have to ask why people even bother when the reward is so little.

[Big Gav]

On the plus side - it seems activism is cheaper than it used to be - anyone can publish a blog nowadays, for example.

There are no running costs - just time. But as most people seem happy enough to waste their lives sitting in front of the TV or killing themselves with overwork, you could look at this as an educational hobby (thats certainly how I view it).

If people want to make money by doing the right thing, there are plenty of green business opportunities out there - and the world needs more green entrepreneurs. That way one can have the bext of both worlds...

(Not a criticism of your post, just an observation - I don't want to see activists poor and hungry either - but I also don't think things have to be that way - and I certainly think people should get into the habit of paying something for information they value - the world needs a good micropayments system - and Amazon affiliates, Google adwords and PayPal begging bowls don't quite seem to cut it).

[Peter]

What annoyed about the first activist is that he refused to do anything even remotely commercial. There were no affiliate links for book sales. No pay-per-click ads. Nothing. I suppose he was operating in a different dimension where money wasn't required.

Sad thing is that I discovered last night that his site had been removed by the hosting service and and replaced with a notice to "contact the billing department."

I think a combination of affiliate links and p-p-c ads would have at least covered his hosting fees.