I'm going to have one last try because I feel a bit sad about what seems to be the answer. Do you disagree that people advocating for social change are performing a different activity from people who are putting forward positions to benefit their clients financially?
-
-
Replying to @alexcobham @DanNeidle and
Making proposals, commenting on proposals etc is same activity whoever does it. As a society we are better off if able to judge and test solutions without trying to weighing the souls of those involved or decide a solution must be right because it's advocated by the 'right' team.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @MForstater @alexcobham and
And another issue is whether activities in support of social change/justice are assessed differently from activities of businesses, non profit making bodies, etc. If so, what are the differences, eg whether and when is it acceptable to personalise?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @iaincampbell07 @MForstater and
I think the key is for all those commenting to be clear on their own position, and (if relevant) funding. Then those reviewing the comments can take that into account. But also TIIN process could be improved - numbers often opaque, and rarely reviewed with hindsight.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @hselftax @iaincampbell07 and
Most responsible NGOs do. Do you also agree thought that lawyers that are active in policy debates should disclose their clients? I see little difference (other than the fact that lawyers charge more than lobbyists)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @georgenturner @hselftax and
If they’re acting for clients, absolutely. If they’re not, then of course not.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DanNeidle @georgenturner and
what if they're acting in the interests of their current, past and prospective clients generally, rather than a specific client(s)? this happens all the time.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nickshaxson @DanNeidle and
It really does. Can’t really comment on the tax world but have seen it a lot when lawyers talk about NDAs. Lots of lawyers feel they can’t openly because they’ll upset wealthy clients.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Jeremy, you do understand that's completely different? If an activist sticks to their organisation's agreed advocacy position, even if their own view is (say) more nuanced, it's a good faith decision taken for the greater good - not a question of personal financial motivation.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Back in the real world, not for profits have funders, people who work for them have careers and mortgages, there are significant personal costs to taking a position which is is unpopular.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.