Dawning of the Dark Side of Philanthropy

A few voices are (re)awakening to the realization that philanthropy is about public relations, not charity.  But they aren't yet ready to abandon the myth of an independent third sector or civil society. 

Testimony to the molasses-slow pace of information distribution in the nonprofit blogosphere, I am passing on a reference:

• Found in Nonprofiteer's blog (in July 2007) to an article by Michael Lerner
• that appeared on a blog called Gates Keepers in April 2007 (the blog seems to be a critique of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation)
• but which was originally an opinion piece in Alliance magazine in December 2006 called Light and Shadow in Organized Philanthropy

Rabbi Lerner leads a renewal synagogue in Berkeley California called Beyt Tikkun (EIN 94-3354385 Old Form 990, no current one because of religious exemption), who also publishes a magazine (Tikkun), which sponsors something called the Network of Spiritual Progressives.  In light of these organizational connections, it's noteworthy what he has to say about philanthropy and civil society in the US.  Some quotes from the article:

• The greatest shadow in organized philanthropy lies in the reality that the country with the largest philanthropic establishment has the worst records among the industrial countries with respect to health care, education, and other basic services to its citizens.
• Even in the social service sector, recent analyses indicate there is no net transfer of income from the wealthy to the less fortunate. This is true in terms of international as well as national grant making. In short, if we look at the sum total of the impact of the philanthropic establishment on American civil society, the evidence that ordinary Americans benefit from the substantial tax advantages provided to the wealthy to set up foundations is, at very best, controversial.
• One could also suggest that philanthropy lures the best and the brightest of those with ambitions to serve humanity away from careers in public service and towards this patchwork quilt of non-profit enterprises that rarely achieve critical mass in terms of real social reforms.
• [T]he only truly major foundation-sponsored social reform of the last half century in the US was the Reagan Revolution, which was to a large extent planned and executed by a relatively small and very skillful group of conservative foundations.

But he shrinks away from the obvious conclusion:

But we cannot exclude the possibility that if the institutions of philanthropy in the US were suddenly wiped out or decisively weakened, American society might actually be worse off than it is with them.

Nevertheless, it's good to see the issue put on the table.  It seems that there has been a general forgetting that the origins of modern US philanthropy began with the work of one of the founders of public relations, Ivy Lee, through his work with John D. Rockefeller. 

Whether it is deliberate or just an unintended consequence, there is little question that the whole foundation grant system has had more of a fragmenting than a unifying effect on social reform movements.   As we recently discussed in connection with the Haas Jr. Foundation, foundations spread their largess so thin (especially when it comes to social reform) it is not surprising that they have little to show for their efforts.  And when they attempt to promote grassroots change with large injections of cash, the results tend to be disastrous.

So ... maybe philanthropy is part of the problem, not the solution. 

Comments

[Sam Davis]

Lerner postulates, "Historically, most American philanthropy has supported causes that serve the power elite."

He cites no data for this contention; indeed, there are several assertions for which no data are offered.

Lerner also fails to fully take into account why so much philanthropy in the US has been directed at changing public policy over recent decades.

He hints at this, but stops short of the obvious conclusion, and that is government has too much power to socially engineer and too much access to individual resources through taxation.

In the US, at least, philanthropy's dark side is a direct result of government's crowding out socially-directed voluntary giving. Prior to the social programs given birth by the New Deal, and nourished by the Great Society, the percentage of voluntary giving going to actual human needs was likely much, much larger, I would guess.

[phil]

Right. Lower taxes. Let's the rich do what they please. The world will be a better place.

[NFL Hats]

Many thanks for the article. I will have a link back to this information from our fresh blog.
http://www.cheaphatcaps.com
http://mvpcaps.org
http://caps2011.com
http://hats-club.com

[バーバリーマフラー]

東京電力福島第一原発事故で東電に巨額の損失が生じたのは、経営陣が地震や津波の安全対策を怠ってきたためだとして、株主らが東電に対し、歴代の経営陣に損害賠償請求訴訟を起こすよう求める書面を提出する方針を固めたことが分かった
請求額や対象者を検討した上で、今月中にも提出したいとしている。提出後、６０日以内に東電が提訴しない場合、株主代表訴訟を東京地裁に起こすという。
株主の一人は「このままでは、過去の経営陣の責任追及があいまいになってしまう。裁判で責任の所在をはっきりさせるべきだ」と話した。一方、東電は「内容を把握していないので、コメントは差し控える」としている。

[ティンバーランド]

ティンバーランド労組への配慮も顕著だ。会社員らの厚生年金と公務員らの共済年金の一元化問題では、公務員労組から支援を受ける議員が「人事院が来年２月に公表する会社員と公務員の退職金比較調査の結果が出るまでは、共済年金の特権的な上乗せ部分である職域加算の取り扱いを決めるべきではない」と主張。時間稼ぎをして法案の中身を骨抜きにしようという意図は明白だが、骨子案はあっさりとその主張を受け入れた。

　ティンバーランド首相は年末までに、社会保障分野と消費税増税部分をあわせた一体改革素案をまとめる方針だ。古本伸一郎党税調事務局長は１２日の党一体改革?税制両調査会合同会議で、「３１日の除夜の鐘のところまで、みなさんと相談していきたい」と強調したが、抜本的な改革は先送り必至の情勢だ。

[Tibbie]

I can araeldy tell that's gonna be super helpful.