Charitable Giving: Give Locally...or Internationally?

53 posts / 0 new
Last post

Sven - if each society looked after the basic needs of its people - and if global society looked after the basic global needs - I think voluntary individual gifts, services, acts of kindness, etc., would be wonderful. They still can be.

But "volunteerism" is used to undermine and deny society's obligations to itself, by the worst examples of right-wing barbarians around. Look up Ronald Reagan's "volunteerism". Google George W. Bush's "thousand points of light". Then check into Barack Obama's empty rhetorical calls for individual citizens to dedicate themselves to "public service".

It's easy to recognize the ugly motives and consequences when it's Reagan or Bush preaching it - right? Well, our job is to recognize it when it ain't that easy too.

Once society and societies agree to do the heavy lifting, we can go back to individual giving.

Would you be surprised if I told you that Albertans were second in Canada for individual charitable donations, and Quebeckers were dead last? And that both of them paled to nothing in comparison with citizens of the U.S.?

No, this doesn't prove a single thing about the "generosity" of the populations concerned. It says a great deal, however, about the relative generosities of their societies.




Sven wrote:

saganisking wrote:

yes Im sure people in desperate need around the world are so grateful that you sit around talking to each other on computers on their behalf

I don't think discussing issues is pointless.  But, only discussing issues while people are suffering and dying now is what doesn't make any (moral) sense.

Good, then I hope that soon you will blow up your computer and thus stop your constant neo-con tripe.  Your idea that poor people in Canada are not really poor is the tip off for me.  Going to bed hungry feels the same for a child in Canada as it does anywhere else in the world.  Having comparatively rich people in countries where their wealth is produced by imperial power is not moral it is immoral.  Not only do they take the resources of the poor countries they then send back a pittance and pat themselves on the back for being so kind. 


Soothsayers had a better record of prediction than economists