Post: #1

I only know just enough about US charities to be dangerous and am wondering if anyone else is 501c 3 saavy around here.

This idea is related the definition of a charitable purpose of a charity as:

Quote:The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency

I see the bold statement as completely fitting with defending against false rape cases, educating men on game, equalization in paternity and on and on.

Imagine being able to get a tax deduction for donating to the RVF or being able to mobilize Johnny Cochrane against the mattress bandit or holy shit...using donations to promote 'fat shaming as a legitimate way to improve public health'

Post: #2

Imagine all the donations we'd get after Jezebel ran a campaign against us!

Oh yes, I'm so privileged you literally can't even.
Interested in joining the FFL? I tried (and failed).

Post: #3

Foundations are where most of the world's wealth is parked. For example the Rockefellers - just as the Gates family intends to do - did not "give away" their wealth. They just transferred the ownership of their companies to thousands of foundations - their family still controlling the family business while doing various pet causes to their liking - in addition to that keeping the corporate profits far away from taxation. A foundation does not even have to be very effective to be called that way. They can spend 90% on operating costs and still be called tax-exempt.

In any case - I would not advise it - a Red Pill foundation while having a worthwhile cause would run counter to the entire plutocratic power structure. Even if you become somewhat successful it would be a huge pain in the ass to lead. Taking away the foundation status is actually easy enough if the organization opposes the true movers and shakers. We don't live in a free country - nowhere in the world.

The most powerful relatively risk free thing you could do is to run major promotion for books like the Rational Male. Rollo Tomassi is very hard to attack both for the mainstream as well as feminists. He stays clear of religion, politics and economics presenting a pure Red Pill message that all men can stay behind - MRAs, MGTOWs, PUAs, Game advocates as well as even sometimes Game haters and PUA-haters. If that book was available and promoted all around the world, then the Red Pill might stand a chance to become something more.

That could prove to be a major pain in the ass for the global social engineers. But alas - that is just an idea. There are multiple ways to even stop a self-published global bestseller from reaching the majority of the population. Major chains could boycott a book, total media-blackout etc. - this is their game on their turf.

Post: #4

(05-03-2015 04:20 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Foundations are where most of the world's wealth is parked. For example the Rockefellers - just as the Gates family intends to do - did not "give away" their wealth. They just transferred the ownership of their companies to thousands of foundations - their family still controlling the family business while doing various pet causes to their liking - in addition to that keeping the corporate profits far away from taxation. A foundation does not even have to be very effective to be called that way. They can spend 90% on operating costs and still be called tax-exempt.

In any case - I would not advise it - a Red Pill foundation while having a worthwhile cause would run counter to the entire plutocratic power structure. Even if you become somewhat successful it would be a huge pain in the ass to lead. Taking away the foundation status is actually easy enough if the organization opposes the true movers and shakers. We don't live in a free country - nowhere in the world.

The most powerful relatively risk free thing you could do is to run major promotion for books like the Rational Male. Rollo Tomassi is very hard to attack both for the mainstream as well as feminists. He stays clear of religion, politics and economics presenting a pure Red Pill message that all men can stay behind - MRAs, MGTOWs, PUAs, Game advocates as well as even sometimes Game haters and PUA-haters. If that book was available and promoted all around the world, then the Red Pill might stand a chance to become something more.

That could prove to be a major pain in the ass for the global social engineers. But alas - that is just an idea. There are multiple ways to even stop a self-published global bestseller from reaching the majority of the population. Major chains could boycott a book, total media-blackout etc. - this is their game on their turf.

The rationale of thinking that by starting charitable foundation one instantly is raised to a Clinton Foundation level of scrutiny is jumping the gun. Its like assuming that one will be subject to SEC regulations the day they open their corporation.

In terms of economics RVF and associated sites are keeping Roosh alive but he's not going to Bildeberg group meetings. A thousand-aire charity is not going to attract the eye of sauron.

Not starting something because when it becomes stupendously successful you might be attacked by the corrupt is ridiculous. If that was the case, my local flag football association should never have opened its doors because George Soros may fund its infiltration some day after finding out its comprised of only men.

Examples of small, male charities exist
http://www.sdniceguys.com/
http://www.careergear.org/about/mission-history/
https://www.thecalmzone.net/about-calm/what-is-calm/

As for it being a 'pain in the ass to lead' everything is a pain in the ass to lead...its also a pain in the ass to lift weights or be self employed.

Last. I don't see a charity primarily 'spreading the red pill message' as that already has commercially effective avenues like books as you have mentioned. Books don't always help though, a free copy of a book isn't going to help a guy looking for resources to battle a false rape claim, or find non biased divorce help, or a guy who is struggling with poverty while being cut off from any social assistance (free medicare and food stamps are easy to get if you are a single mom but virtually impossible for a single male)

I think it could be a viable, though challenging, project for someone that wanted something a bit more positive and rewarding in terms of 'fighting the system' instead of soul draining work like twitter warfare, fat shaming and hamster nuking...which grinds you down after a while.

Post: #5

I don't disagree with your goals.

And you are right - it takes a very long way to be of any nuisance for the ruling elite to really start caring about such a foundation. Even if it's backed by 50.000 members, it won't make a dent.

Yeah - worthwhile endeavors indeed - you are much more of a world-improving man than me. The twitter warfare is more fun and entertainment than any real change. However I have started to see some things seep into the male consciousness - meanwhile of course the SJWs have become more crazy and it has seeped into every nook and cranny of the legal system.

Personally while I applaud your resolve I don't see much hope. There are sites and organisations that help guys battle false rape charges - also lawyers who assist men in divorce. The MRAs have been battling the legal changes for a good century by now.

The points you mentioned are basically male help-groups and assistance on legal matters and social services - they only put balm on a festering wound - not invalidating here the fact that one may help some men individually.

Now - that should not discourage anyone from doing what you proposed, if someone has such goals.

Post: #6

Excellent idea. A charity that helps men with legal costs from unjust laws. Even if only 2 men per year were helped, can you imagine the publicity?

Post: #7

(05-02-2015 08:32 PM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  I only know just enough about US charities to be dangerous and am wondering if anyone else is 501c 3 saavy around here.

This idea is related the definition of a charitable purpose of a charity as:

Quote:The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency

I see the bold statement as completely fitting with defending against false rape cases, educating men on game, equalization in paternity and on and on.

Imagine being able to get a tax deduction for donating to the RVF or being able to mobilize Johnny Cochrane against the mattress bandit or holy shit...using donations to promote 'fat shaming as a legitimate way to improve public health'

Starting a charity is not all that complicated. You just start a corporation and apply for exemption. If you can prepare the 990 yourself then maintaining it won't require very much in terms of expenses. You would have to expose your identity though, if that makes a difference, but for someone whose identity is already out there, it could make sense.

Post: #8

(10-05-2015 03:58 PM)Harvey Specter Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 08:32 PM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  I only know just enough about US charities to be dangerous and am wondering if anyone else is 501c 3 saavy around here.

This idea is related the definition of a charitable purpose of a charity as:

Quote:The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency

I see the bold statement as completely fitting with defending against false rape cases, educating men on game, equalization in paternity and on and on.

Imagine being able to get a tax deduction for donating to the RVF or being able to mobilize Johnny Cochrane against the mattress bandit or holy shit...using donations to promote 'fat shaming as a legitimate way to improve public health'

Starting a charity is not all that complicated. You just start a corporation and apply for exemption. If you can prepare the 990 yourself then maintaining it won't require very much in terms of expenses. You would have to expose your identity though, if that makes a difference, but for someone whose identity is already out there, it could make sense.

That's what I'm saying. If someone who already had a public identity, like Roosh, or Matt Forney, just to give examples, started something like this, and put none of their own money into it, instead, just donate some small portion of revenues from the blog, book sales, whatever, the publicity would be HUGE! Now the guy who writes "rape guides" is "defending rapists". (This is how the feminists would argue). In reality, defending men like those in the Duke Lacrosse team against false rape charges would be a very good thing.