Photo: geckoremWe are in the midst of a national miasma in which the federal government and Wall Street in particular are considered practically vile.
I am sure this will change — either when these institutions improve themselves or when the public moves on to another target.
It is easy to assail institutions because they are so — well, institutional. Large, sometimes faceless, probably richer than you, perhaps impenetrable, etc.
It isn’t hard to think of a lot of institutions that in just the past few years have been roundly called out: the media, organized religion, Hollywood, etc.
So what I’m asking is this: What’s an institution that you admire? And, more important, why?
It might be the small nursery school where you send your kids, or the university you attend; it might be an anti-poverty group or a political-action group where you volunteer.
I am just interested in hearing (for a change of pace) about the institutions that are doing right by people, that stick to their missions (or create better ones), that behave responsibly and creatively, or whatever else you have to say.
Maybe we’ll turn one of the most interesting suggestions into a JungleSmash campaign.
and 
. You can also watch it on 
Kiva.org is one that comes to mind. I encourage people who aren’t familiar with it to check out their site and see if there isn’t a little something you can do.
For those who don’t want to look at their site, Kiva is an organization that works with microlenders in various parts of the developing world – Africa, Asia, Latin America – to fund loans for local business owners. The site’s users fund the loans by putting up small amounts of money from $25 up to a few hundred. Each recipient’s business is profiled and and there’s often biographical information about the business owner(s). As the loan is paid back, the funds you contributed are credited to your PayPal account and can be loaned to another business.
I like this organization because it’s a way that normal people can help others and see the results of their participation.
I admire the Clinton Foundation. I think they’re doing great work. And I am a contributor.
I used to admire NYT. Not anymore. And here are my reasons.
1) COVERING UNIMPORTANT NEWS — They only cover the horse race, money, strategy, ads, and Sarah Palin’s clothes and kids.
2) NOT COVERING IMPORTANT NEWS — Last night was the third party presidential candidate’s debate.
There was nothing the day of the debate in NYT to let people know it was going on. There was one piece in The Caucus over a week ago mentioning that Bob Barr was probably not going to participate. But nothing the day of, and nothing today to report on what happened in the debate. And the moderator of the debate, a former NYT foreign correspondent and pulitzer prize winner said during the debate that NYT and the MSM have “blackballed” Nader and the other third party candidates from inclusion in their publications. I have personally seen this. The only mention in NYT of Nader was several months ago when the writer in The Caucus claimed Nader had made a racist attack on Obama. (which he clearly did not — He merely criticized Obama for not talking about the plight of the poor.) Otherwise, there has been silence in NYT. I remember the public editor’s piece about why NYT didn’t cover Dennis Kucinich a few months back. He said it was because Kucinich had no serious chance of winning the primary. However, this exclusion of Nader seems to go deeper. Nader was seen as a spoiler, rightly or wrongly, in 2000. And the conventional wisdom in the MSM is that Nader takes more votes from OBama than McCain. This is not backed up by the actual statistics, however. So there is a perceived motivation due to bias for Obama to keep Nader off of NYT’s pages. Excluding the third party candidates, particularly Nader who is on the ballot in 45 states and DC, is depriving the American public of his brilliant and timely ideas on the wars we’re in and the Bailouts we’re currently doing, where his ideas are decisively different from the candidates from the two corporate parties. I believe that people want and deserve to have coverage of Nader. Can you guys explain why Nader is being “Blackballed” if you agree that he is.
3) FAIRNESS – I regularly post blogs on The Opinionator, The Caucus, and Freakonomics, where my blogs appear without issue. However, on the main editorials by NYT’s board and OP ED contributors, my blogs rarely if ever appear. My assumption has been that the same standards apply in each of these realms as to the selection of which blogs to print. But it doesn’t appear to be the case. So, I did a test. I wrote blogs directly answering the editorials on the main editorials and then copied the text and re-posted them on The Caucus, The Opinionator and Freakonomics with an additional lead sentence at the top to make them relate to the topic of those specific pieces without altering the body of the blogs. My blogs AGAIN did not appear on the main editorials (which they were written for), but they all appeared on the other three blogs. Either I am personally persona non gratis with the editorial board, which I think is as unlikely as it would be flattering, or a different standard is being applied to those blogs. Can you guys illuminate for me what the different standard is so I can get blogs published on the main editorials?
a workout/day will prevent many problems.
http://www.ymca.net/
The National Anarchist Party. Sure, our convention was a little chaotic, but I guess that’s to be expected…
I’m alright with Costco because they pay well, give their employess insurance, sick leave, and vacations. They are rated as one of the better companies to work for. Makes me feel good to know this when I shop there. My husband and I intentionally switched from Sam’s Club to Costco knowing this.
I also like National Public Radio (NPR)–intelligent radio mostly run by donations. btw, I’m a regular donor.
NPR, and especially This American Life. Nothing else I find so consistently rewarding.
Public education. Not the current model that we have now. But the idea of providing a free education to all in this country is an institution I can back.
In that same vein, I believe that public libraries are very laudable, though need more support and resources to remain effective.
Alcoholics Anonymous. First, for their refusal to endorse or support any outside causes. Second,for their third tradition which states, “Alcoholics Anonymous ought never be organized.”