Talk:National Endowment for Democracy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Comment[edit]

Just flagged this page for "recentism" because of all the emphasis on the organization's work in Ukraine. If it is really important, you could put a sentence or two under the "criticism" section and maybe cite something like John Mearsheimer's recent article on Ukraine in Foreign Affairs that refers to NED's work as an example of "social engineering in Ukraine, or another similar article. But it certainly does not seem to merit its own section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.142.59.188 (talk) 07:24, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

According to WikiScanner, anonymous user 206.205.146.7 is an employee of the NED, and has been editing the article extensively. Editing articles about oneself or the organisation one works for is against Wikipedia's code of conduct. See the end of the discussion page for details. Schizophonix 00:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


This needs some work for a neutral POV. Also, it claims it was connected to some Latin American campaigns in the 1970's, then in the next sentence says that it wasn't founded until 1983. I'd do it if i had the time. xyzzyva

npov[edit]

i'm labelling this article as npov, due to the heavy amount of evidence on only the side critical of the NED. its liberal propaganda, and while i love liberal propaganda, it definately ain't neutral. Thepedestrian 20:38, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

Cleanup instead of NPOV[edit]

All right kids, this article many not read very smoothly, but at least there's no longer any mention of the 1970s, and all the left-wing criticism has been flagged as left-wing criticism. I suggest we drop the NPOV in favour of a {{Cleanup}} notice. Edit it if it still bothers you. QuartierLatin1968 08:39, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC) (PS: Liberal ain't left. The NED is a liberal institution par excellence.)

Don't confuse 'Liberal' with 'Left-Wing'. Liberal can refer to mainstream establishment Democrats, who have often supported (even initiated and led) Foreign Policy that the Left is very critical of.

The "Subversion of Democracy" section has been renamed and uncited bombastic criticism removed. Remember, this is supposed to be NPOV, not a soapbox.76.248.69.27 (talk) 01:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

alleged links to authoritarian regimes[edit]

I restored the sentence:

Its alleged links with authoritarian regimes in Latin America during the 1980s lead some critics to claim that rather than supporting democracy, it in fact opposes democracy.

Contrary to Trey Stone's comment, this should not be taken as criticism of Ronald Reagan alone. The NED continued to operate during the Clinton Administration. The AFL-CIO has been a source of funding as well.

This is the major criticism of the NED and it seems appropriate to introduce the topic in the introductory paragraph. I did not restore some obvious POV language: its "evil". DJ Silverfish 17:58, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

what "authoritarian" regimes would it be supporting during the Clinton administration? so it receives funding from the AFL-CIO, what does that have to do with anything? i think you're confusing "authoritarian" with "non-leftist governments." J. Parker Stone 23:39, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Bogged down[edit]

This article is merely a litany of charges levelled against the NED by hard-left groups... I hope we can provide some balance relatively soon. J. Parker Stone 19:01, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, TJive did a good job of cleaning the junk out of this article until some new account (now blocked for suspected sockpuppetry) came around and started RVing all his contributions. My sense here is that the NED has its detractors on the Left who don't like the fact that it hasn't supported socialist/demsoc "popular movements," but that doesn't mean we need to introduce criticism in the intro, it can be shown throughout the article, and it can be shown without adding long passages from people who oppose the organization. and "alleged links with authoritarian regimes during the '80s" -- whether it was "alleged" or not doesn't change the fact that it's flat-out wrong. it was Reagan administration policy to support transitions to civilian democracy in the region, defeating leftist "popular movements" that had the backing of Castro, and obviously hoping for elected governments friendly to U.S. interests. any "authoritarian regimes" the administration supported, it supported when those countries were in the midst of civil war -- such as Guatemala and El Salvador, and even those had elected civilian governments in the mid-to-late '80s, it's their militaries (which in that region unfortunately have historically had more authority than anyone else) that continued the human rights abuses the Reagan admin. is always villified for. in any case, this is an article about the NED, and to the best of my knowledge the NED just funds certain candidates during democratic elections -- maybe certain people don't like the candidates it funds, but i have seen no conclusive evidence of "links to authoritarian regimes." J. Parker Stone 23:26, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

As it reads now, the first two paragraphs in a section both begin with "According to left-wing critics..", the third paragraph begins "The NED in fact...". Sounds NPOV, even though an attempt to address NPOV.

Wayne Madsen[edit]

Wayne Madsen as a source? Come on people, I know you are all looking for fodder, but certainly we can do better than this.TDC 22:00, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

The UK Guardian is the source of the Masden information url: http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,706802,00.html This seems reputable. DJ Silverfish 22:14, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Once again, Wayne Madsen's credibility is severely strained. This would be, by the way, the same Wayne Madsen who believes that the Jews are behind 9/11. TDC 23:51, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
oh don't be silly TDC -- he's probably just an "anti-Zionist" J. Parker Stone 02:17, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
I don't quite understand the point of all this. The material has no relevance to the NED, but rather a general fulmination against US policy toward Venezuela. That was implied in the summary for my initial edit. --TJive 03:06, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

Then why don't we do better. Everyone go to the nearest library and pick up William Robinson's "Promoting Polyarchy" for a good analysis of the NED. And to the people who continually fail to properly delineate between "liberal" and "left-wing": I don't know which political science program you paid too much money for, but your ideas are outdated and simply wrong. Stop watching Fox news AND the Daily Show.


Whats wrong with being anti-zionist???

See Also Section[edit]

Why is Students for Global Democracy on there? What is there relation to the NED? We do not discuss this in the article itself, I suggest removing the entry unless someone can elaborate on its significance.JJ4sad6 10:00, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Dictator vs. President.[edit]

Who keeps changing president to dictator? Hugo Chavez is a dictator based on his record running venezuala. This is not biased it's just the truth.

How can we verify that claim? JRSP 19:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
You cannot call an elected president a "dictator" without being slightly biased. Schizophonix 23:48, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
No, it's bias given the fact that he's continually won free and fair elections. Declared free and fair by hundreds of EU election observers and the Carter Center. 76.10.166.54 (talk) 08:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

NED infiltration in this page!![edit]

Anonymous editor 206.205.146.7 is an employee of the NED. They have been editing the article extensively and adding phrases like "according to left-wing criticism" and "in fact...". Use WikiScanner (http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/) if you want to find for yourself exactly what the edits were. (Alternatively follow this link http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/f.php?ip1=206.205.146.0-255) Remember that editing articles about oneself or the organisation one works for is against Wikipedia's code of conduct!!! This constitutes a serious NPOV violation and I think a {{NPOV}} tag should be added immediately. I also think that user 206.205.146.7 should give us immediate explanations about their actions and about not revealing their true identity. I am waiting for your opinions before I make any changes. Schizophonix 00:10, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I could check most of 206.205.146.7 edits have been already deleted. but keep an eye on COI edits. JRSP 00:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm all for external links that criticize the NED...[edit]

...but does anyone else think that the guy who thinks the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile on 9/11 and a website that claims democracy and capitalism to be incompatible are the best we can do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.126.117 (talk) 17:42, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Nope, that's not the best we can do. Links to reputable newspapers preferred imho. I'd say published books, too, but lord knows there's plenty of nutcases publishing unsupported fringe arguments. Pär Larsson (talk) 13:03, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Eva Golinger's article is not a reliable source[edit]

The link used to substantiate the NED involvement in the Honduras crisis is written by Eva Golinger, a known opponent of the US who does not cite her sources regarding the information about NED and IRI involvement in the crisis. It would be best if this source were replaced or removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.187.40.125 (talk) 23:32, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

It's from Democracy Now, which is a WP:RS, and it includes a response from the NED. --Nbauman (talk) 01:49, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Egypt funding controversy?[edit]

Normally I'm not one to cite AJ due to their blatant bias. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/07/2013710113522489801.html should maybe at least be mentioned? Pär Larsson (talk) 13:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Biases[edit]

Some of this stuff reads like it was copied directly from an official website. Eg. -

The Endowment has come a long way from opposition between both political parties in its earlier stages to widespread bipartisan endorsement on the Hill. And even though the American government has implemented its own democracy promoting capabilities through USAID (United States Agency for International Development), NED's independence plays a key factor in its relevance. The organizations independence gives it an ability to work in situations that official bodies may have to avoid and its non-bureaucratic nature enables it to move quickly in rapidly changing situations. NED has become a universal model and has influenced other nations to create their own institutions for the promotion of democracy.

I also believe that it's standard to not have a specific "criticism" section, that criticism (and various pro and anti points of view) should be mixed in with the rest of the article (and the pro stuff shouldn't read like a press release as above). - Matthew238 (talk) 23:14, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


Citation[edit]

In the Criticism portion of the article, the sentence: Historian William Blum quoted Allen Weinstein, who in 1991 said: "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." could be cited to Blum's Anti-Empire Report #126 of March 7, 2014, at http://williamblum.org/aer/read/126 That in turn cites to Washington Post, September 22, 1991. Marbux (talk) 13:22, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on National Endowment for Democracy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:34, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on National Endowment for Democracy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:54, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on National Endowment for Democracy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:45, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on National Endowment for Democracy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:31, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on National Endowment for Democracy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:35, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Relationship[edit]

There is within the context of the United States National Endowment for Democracy, no stipulation regarding the form and manner that such an endowment must be used to influence election processes, or is there.

Defacto, the endowment itself is under strict liabilities of extorsion, if at any point in time it was not to favour the United States itself. This makes polticial interference from the United States onto any other nation a defacto.

It should be included in this section, that such a program would also be favorable for Mexico (mexican labour in the United States), Europe (instead of the bribes they usually hand out), or for that matter Israel, India, China or any other nation.

It would make political mongering in other nations quite a bit more see through.

We do it, you do it, you LOVE to do it. (History of the World, Part III. Humperdinck) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.91.63.146 (talk) 00:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)