A Generation of Hope
Note: This post is part of our League Symposium on Charity. Here is the introductory post for the Symposium. Here is a list of all posts so far.
I have some experience on the marketing side of charity, and know that the idea that charities are burdened by the same institutional imperatives as any other organization is frustrating. Believe me, I know how frustrating it is first hand.
It would be nice to imagine that every single dollar donated would go directly to relief efforts, but that’s just not the way it is; and complaints about much charitable orgaziations spend outside of their core mission often remind me a lot of campus Marxists complaining about how much money our capitalist economy “wastes” on making and marketing 20 different brands of toilet paper.
If I have further thoughts on that (actually I do, I once had a mid-level manager at a charity scream at me that my work took rice out of starving children’s mouths) I’ll share them in another post.
In the mean time, I wrote, directed and edited the below film in 2000. I didn’t make as much working on this film (and others like it) as I did when I worked on promotional videos for Fortune 500 companies, but I made more than I did producing and selling Tony Comstock’s erotic documentaries.
So, in keeping with the League Symposium on Charity and since it’s World AIDS Day, here’s A Generation of Hope: Orphans of the Zimbabwe AIDS Crisis
“It would be nice to imagine that every single dollar donated would go directly to relief efforts, but that’s just not the way it is; and complaints about much charitable orgaziations spend outside of their core mission often remind me a lot of campus Marxists complaining about how much money our capitalist economy “wastes” on making and marketing 20 different brands of toilet paper.”
the first bit makes sense, but ignoring that hell of a lot of charitable organizations are, in the utmost kindness, inefficiently run is a bizarre choice to make. chronicle of philanthropy used to do an annual report that was rather illuminating on this front.Report
“ignoring that hell of a lot of charitable organizations are, in the utmost kindness, inefficiently run is a bizarre choice to make.”
No one I know of, and least of all me, is suggesting that you or anyone else make this choice, so let me put it another way.
Like charitable organizations, for profit companies also produce annual reports, which offer, for the discerning eye, a wealth of information. And yet institutional investors are delighted that there are retail investors.
There are many poorly run charities. The Cato Institute strikes me as one; NPR another. That’s not really the point though, is it?Report
well, then the bit i was replying to expressed something different to you than it did to me, because “complaints about much charitable orgaziations spend outside of their core mission” could of course cover someone who’s surprised that they have bills or need to hire fundraisers, creating marketing campaigns, and pay overhead, etc. but that’s not the only objection one can raise. if i read too much into it, i apologize.Report
Cato Institute is invaluable as America’s honest broker between citing Paul Krugman or Fox News.
As for NPR, it is what it is. I listen to it. I learn stuff. What’s wrong with NPR is only what it leaves out. It could use a lot more Cato. 😉
Re the OP: As to David’s propagandizing for good causes, I’m OK with that, in fact I salute it. That he was paid (well) is OK by me too. Doing well by doing good, they call it. David’s alter ego Tony Comstock, an accomplished pornographer, could surely have made more $$ going Boogie Nights. [You know, Dirk Diggler.]
For we must figure into our equation not that good folks will choose this bad charity over that good one, but that people will remain unmoved by All the Trouble in the World, and simply do nothing.
Not only the inertia thing, but what CS Lewis tried to warn us about this modern trend, of using the mind to neutralize the power of the heart, that being moved by our hearts is a bad thing.
Men Without Chests, he called this modern ideal of humanity. Unmovable.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/lewis/abolition1.htm
[My teacher snuck it into philosophy class just at the end of the term, just before I became one. Saved my life.]
Yes, we are gentlepersons of mind and of reason. But man is more than just a thinking machine. Appealing to our humanity in total isn’t cheating. So good for you, David. Man with a chest.Report
Dhex,
Yeah, the “eliminate the sliderules” campaign is going along famously.
[totally not kidding on this one]
Just to pile on:
Don’t forget those organizations who actively prevent finding “cures” for preventable diseases.
Not to mention those who simply line their contributor’s pockets.
“You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours…”Report