Pablo Eisenberg, at the Chronicle of Philanthropy, on the misplaced giving priorities of America's wealthiest. My best insight into why the rich are more likely to give to savedogs or cats or pandas rather than the poor came, actually, from a rising corporate star whose house was full of adopted cats. "The cats are poor through no fault of their own, unlike people."
Travelling on philanthropic business, I shunt from country club, to luxury homes, to businesse high rise with donors, to Holiday Inns for fundraisers and bare church basesments for social justice work. These are mutually insulated real worlds. Both are real, but few participate in both, other than "Jane," "Bill," or "Sharon," the waiters on a first name basis with Members at The Club. Feudalism, yes, but where is our Veblen or Matthew Arnold, or the Fitzgerald of Great Gatsby, to chronicle our new Barbarians? Yes, I would rather be fed by loyal Sharon, than be her. I wonder how she pays her bills? Well, maybe they get to eat the leftovers.
Moral imagination - thank God, drink dulls it. Sharon, another carafe please!
Caring for the poor is so ... so majoritarian.
Posted by: Curator | January 26, 2012 at 07:24 PM
Wish it was so. The majority believe still it seems in the dream of personal advancement. The majority all believe they are brighter than average, too.
Posted by: Phil Cubeta | January 27, 2012 at 03:54 PM