class=”sc-cffd1e67-0 fmXrkB”>
Philanthropists are a special kind of humanitarian: they give generously, volunteer, and do it all for the world’s disadvantaged and on their doorsteps. Shouldn’t we be grateful to these benefactors? A look at history shows why this is not true and the problems philanthropy brings to society.
Socrates was already raving about “philanthropy.” The ancient philosopher was not interested in monetary gifts, but in the transfer of knowledge without anything in return. However, outside the thinker’s room, everything looked different. Wealthy citizens sponsored festivals and buildings to create monuments to themselves. And they showed everyone how great their political and economic influence on society is.
With Christianity came a bad conscience, and now things got more complicated. Because only with a clear conscience can you avoid purgatory. A good recipe: donations to the poor – Caritas, the commandment of charity. The principle of charity still applies today: the first ten thousand buy a good mood for a charitable donation, ideally at a charity event in a tuxedo and evening gown.
The 19th century brought with it mass poverty along with industrialization. This sparked a boom in philanthropy, with wealthy factory owners, middle-class women, and pastors giving a lot of money and time to society’s losers: abandoned children, ex-convicts, and prostitutes. Philanthropists did not want to revolutionize society, but rather to optimize the individual. The ideal remained civil society: a man should earn a salary, and a woman should manage the household through hard work, abstinence and frugality. In this way, philanthropists stabilized the unequal capitalist society from which they themselves benefited the most.
Since the 1950s, donations have been directed mainly to the so-called “Third World”. When raising funds, church missionaries emphasized “white guilt,” but they perpetuated a mindset of colonial superiority—”We help the poor in Africa because they can’t do it themselves”—and suddenly new relationships of dependency emerged. For philanthropists in Europe, in addition to well-being, there are still tangible financial benefits: every charitable act can be deducted from taxes, wherever it goes.
But the really big chunks are the funds that pump money into the social sector. The state benefits greatly from this because it does not have to worry about it itself. Problem: Funds invest according to their own views and criteria, without any democratic basis.
The latest trendy philanthropic business craze is just as far from democratic rules. The goal here is to make as much money as possible so you can donate as much as possible. But “effective altruists” – say hello to Bill Gates and company – continue the old model: I make the world the way I like it. And others will have to act accordingly, especially the poorest.
Source: Blick
I am David Miller, a highly experienced news reporter and author for 24 Instant News. I specialize in opinion pieces and have written extensively on current events, politics, social issues, and more. My writing has been featured in major publications such as The New York Times, The Guardian, and BBC News. I strive to be fair-minded while also producing thought-provoking content that encourages readers to engage with the topics I discuss.
