The Optimism of Philanthropy in Tough Times
The word philanthropy first surfaced 2,500 years ago in the Greek play Prometheus Bound, the Greek word being a combination of caring for humans and promoting human potential. It has come to mean a private initiative for the common good. As such, it is rooted in community.
Philanthropy is also closely tied to democracy so that Alexander Hamilton, in the first paragraph of the first Federalist Paper, promoted the new Constitution as a document benefiting all mankind. He said it “adds the inducements of philanthropy to those of patriotism.” And, of course Benjamin Franklin was a great philanthropist, helping to start a volunteer fire department, hospital, library, and street patrol.
But what happens to philanthropy when the perfect storm of a dismal economy meets the searing revelation that some of the people behind prominent charities are scoundrels? The answer is that donations fall off, donors become disenchanted, and good works are tainted with selfish interest. Add to that the exorbitant salaries that some “philanthropic” CEOs are pulling down, and we are awash in cynicism instead of the milk of human kindness.
The surprise here is not that voluntary giving suffers when the economy tanks or that there are malefactors in high places, but that we are so slow to grasp the essence of human nature. The theologian who most influenced me is Rheinhold Niebuhr through his seminal work The Nature and Destiny of Man. His insight is that man is capable of both selfless sacrifice and appalling cruelty, and this bipolar combination exists to some degree in all of us. Free will allows us to determine, on a case-by-case basis, which trait—the beautiful or the ugly—will prevail.
What makes philanthropy so uniquely American is not so much its connection with democracy but our unquenchable optimism as a country. What has connected Americans with each other in the past is not where we came from, because we come from everyplace and every circumstance, but our shared hope for the future—that we not only can grasp for the American dream, but that we are free to define that dream however we want.
It is optimism that made Henry Ford say, “It is a poor kind of business that makes nothing but money.” He wanted every one of his workers to be able to afford and drive a Ford. Likewise, in 2006 when Warren Buffett gave $31bBillion—that’s _billion_—to the Gates foundation, no one had a gun to his head. He did it because he hoped that his money could be used for education and the eradication of poverty and disease.
The bottom line as far as I am concerned is that we need philanthropy precisely because we humans, as a species, are imperfect and will remain so. While so many of our institutions seem hell-bent on destruction and mayhem, we, individually and collectively, can give of ourselves and our talents to try to make the world a little better for someone else. And when the economy is sour, the need for philanthropy absolutely explodes.
About John Frohnmayer
John Frohnmayer is an author, lawyer, and ethicist. He has served on the board of Oregon Humanities since 2007. He wrote about the problems with capitalism (Beyond Individualism) in the Summer 2009 “stuff” issue of Oregon Humanities magazine.
18 November 2009 | Posted by John Frohnmayer in Advocacy Inside O. Hm. New Ideas
Permalink | Comments? (0 so far)
Add a comment
Oregon Humanities welcomes your commentary. We encourage lively public discourse and civil debate, but please be respectful in expressing your views.