open Democracy News Analysis - Philanthropy - Comments

Phoenix landscaping on "Civil society and capitalism: a new landscape"

Phoenix landscaping — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 23:21:05 +0000

Capitalism dude? What`s that I mean..come on. Not again. I`m so glad we live in a democratic republic not in capitalism where we were allowed to buy only 1 bottle of milk per person or watch 2 our of television per day...come on..

Fishman5 on "Philanthropy for social change: a response to Michael Edwards"

Fishman5 — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:46:28 +0000

This reminds me of the new show on NBC called the Philanthropist. I have not seen it yet but I would imagine its going to be awesome. I feel more people in this world need to give than take. A defiant child acts out because they feel like they are a victim. No one wants to give, everyone just wants to take. Probably because we have made it much easier in society to take than to give.

stateless123 on "A life to save: direct action on poverty"

stateless123 — Mon, 25 May 2009 07:27:16 +0000

This is the one problem I have with telefons. It's all about a mindset which says "what can I do to appease my guilt this year". It's a woeful attempt at a quick fix, where a quick fix isn't possible. An all too ofen seen sudden intense gaze followed by months of nothing, which seems to be the cornerstone of reporting and public interest nowadays.

Of course the central problem really is that it's hard for people to emotionally connect with something they only ever see on TV, or rather they actually prefer it to be that way. People are far too busy with their own "problems", which for the most part are trivial, to give headspace to people who had the misfortune to be born into poverty.

It's hard to know what can truly be done about this. Maybe children should be encouraged to study areas of the world where life is surviving day to day. Maybe encourage penpals or at kind of substantive connection at a young age. There needs to be a realy connectin, real feeling. At the moment, it's all so very "out of sight, out of mind" which is saddening.

Horse Racing Tips

NYCartist on "A life to save: direct action on poverty"

NYCartist — Thu, 21 May 2009 10:35:12 +0000

Peter Singer's opening fantasy stays with me like a piece of street litter caught in the wheel of my wheelchair. How would you read his words, if you knew his views that urge parents to have and use a "right" to kill a baby born with disabilities after its birth?
His fantasy of saving a child who fell in the water and if you have new shoes.... To him, people with disabilities, like me, are "old shoes".

NYCartist on "A life to save: direct action on poverty"

NYCartist — Thu, 14 May 2009 18:46:18 +0000

Please get a view of Peter Singer's record by looking
at Not Dead Yet's website, and blog by Stephen Drake. www.notdeadyet.org Singer's record, his views and writing, on
people with disabilities, is ugly.

Helen Todd on "A life to save: direct action on poverty"

Helen Todd — Thu, 14 May 2009 00:44:16 +0000

I'm amazed by the oversimplification of the issues in this article, coming from one of the world's leading thinkers on ethics. To extend the analogy... what if you realise someone is systematically depositing children into the pond. You can keep saving the children, or take a pause to try and analyse how to stop the other person chucking the children in the pond in the first place. OK, children will die in the interim period but in the long run you should hopefully save more children.

This is what everyone involved in global campaigns on debt, trade and other fundamental causes of inequality is trying to do. Had a quick look on Peter Singer's website and no mention of looking at bigger picture solutions in the 'what you can do' section... bizarre.

Logged in Lawrence Efana on "A life to save: direct action on poverty"

Logged in Lawrence Efana — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:31:59 +0000

Much is ongoing on discussions about what "Direct Democracy" can and cannot do. Now from the look of things where would you place it in relation to: (a) the logic and hence (b) the problems] highlighted in the article?

The point is the appeal made here is decent and also from the heart, but are there equally decent minds and reformed institutions out there enough to act swiftly on it? On the latter, take into consideration Walden Bello on "Capitalism's crisis and our response"

Parallel to direct democracy discourses, the paper "Poverty and political freedom" - Rajeev Bhargave (2003), isn't bad for trying to comprehend rightly the depth and implications of fighting poverty locally and globally.

But permit me to be sentimental, whether or not you publish this comment. Doesn't it just seem that we, our moral values, practices and institutions are stock-up? Where then is my sentiment? Let me quote it in 'Swedish' language from a book titled "Under Ytan..", the following "Människan tycks vara den enda varelse, som vet om att hon skall dör. Genom sitt språk och sin kultur kan hon observera tidens gång och fundera över sin icke existens. Hon foljer inte bara nedärvda beteendeönster utan upplever sig som fri. DENNA FRIHET ÄR BÅDE HENNES FÖRBANNELSE OCH VÄRDIGHET"] - Owe Wikström (2004:92-93).

Should this be worth sharing, let it be added that by not reevaluating our values, governance systems and morals as well as institutions, we will continue to play foul game of politics and reap the results we reap now and then - whether on poverty, environment or inertia to act swiftly.

Ndayse on "A life to save: direct action on poverty"

Ndayse — Tue, 12 May 2009 14:32:27 +0000

Peter Singer is correct in identifying poverty as the cause of the death of the child that stands in this article for all the miseries of the Third and other disadvantaged Worlds. But it is an ingenuous argument since the life of that child can also be attributed to poverty.

I recently saw a BBC newscast that featured an interview with a Congolese refugee in his thirties, destitute father of nine children. Why do such people breed? Not merely because sex is one of the few (apparently) free pleasures available to them but because in a world that lacks any form of governmental safety net, one's kin and ultimately one's children offer the best old age pension and insurance against all manner of ills. So it is worthwhile to breed. By the time a child in such circumstances is twelve she or he is already paying their way, a net economic benefit to the parents.

But children are a risky investment in such circumstances; a high proportion die before puberty. So in order to guarantee one's security one needs to have many. No wonder then that the number of years of women's schooling is negatively correlated with the numbers of their offspring. Decreasing poverty is the underlying variable.

Of course the rich, Westerners and others, will continue to exploit the Third and Fourth Worlds while bitching about illegal immigration and the fecklessness and irresponsibility of the poor. In this area I see no change I can believe in.

Rich S on "A life to save: direct action on poverty"

Rich S — Mon, 11 May 2009 19:23:29 +0000

I agree completely that choosing between expensive shoes and a child's life is grotesque. This is what people are asked to do with every charity donation tin in a supermarket.

What is the cut-off point? £20 for groceries and t-shirt and £10 for starving children, or maybe £15 each? How much is enough? This choice will always be grotesque.

Should medical care be funded by individual charitable donations? Should it be based on private investment and ultimately be driven by profit?

I find it also grotesque that most products you buy in shops have probably been produced in some way that violates Human Rights, whether it be labour, environmental, health, a simple decent wage for work done. How much would products cost if trade was 'fair' and everyone had decent labour rights?

Does the aid I give negate this? Is it my fault?

By giving aid I may be giving someone a helping hand, but out of the corner of my eye I can see I am still standing on their head with my international expensive shoes (the varnish on which has accidentally contaminated the water). If I move my leg then I might fall in the man-made pond. What is stronger my arm or my leg? The person in the water probably has a good opinion about this, as does the person selling shoes.

Jeff Mowatt on "A life to save: direct action on poverty"

Jeff Mowatt — Mon, 11 May 2009 18:46:55 +0000

You may be interested in the microeconomic development work we've been doing in Eastern Europe which began in 1999 with sourcing a microfinance bank in Russia and takes us today to leveraging social enterprise in Ukraine.

It began with a call for a more inclusive form of capitalism pitched at the US President in 1996.

http://www.p-ced.com/about/history/

edwarmi@hotmail.com on "Philanthrocapitalism: after the goldrush"

edwarmi@hotmail.com — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 14:36:00 +0000

I recently published a summry of responses to "Just another Emperor" here: http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/philanthrocapitalism-the-myths-and-realities-of-the-myths-and-realities

Not logged in on "Philanthrocapitalism: after the goldrush"

Not logged in — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 09:18:47 +0000

oh really when did the tobacco death rate drop?

I thought it was still pushing half a million yearly just like the last 40 years.

You're obviously of the mind to measure social advancement by dollars in the bank, in the tobacco example you site, that'd be dollars in the bank for multimillionaire personal injury litigation lawyers.

Yea, tobacco murder raves on AND some lawyers got rich...

What could be "done" on tobacco is that they stop growing the stuff in plutonium laden fertilizer. Tobacco is today intently grown in plutonium laden fertilizer which was suppressed by the courts, the media and the lawyers who operated the tobacco lawsuit scam on the American people...

Nah, lets just measure it by dollars in the bank for the wealthy and call it a win.

One more thing, what was gotten from the tobacco companies was a pittance when for their mass murder they should have been bankrupted and jailed.

Civil rights is now, you have the right to give your child pthalate and lead poisoned toys for Christmas... and feed your child melamine tainted formula...

Daniel Kelley on "Philanthrocapitalism: after the goldrush"

Daniel Kelley — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 08:27:18 +0000

The "Swill and Melinda Gates Foundation" lends some mouth piece to micro credit if you do a search on their site... Try to find a link on there to sign up to provide a micro credit loan or to apply for a micro credit loan. You won't. I guarantee 99% of Swill and Melinda Gates funds are "donated" within an operating agreement that restricts their use to what Swill Gates seeks and are NOT dispersed as microcredit loans, 99%. In fact, I'm guessing a hefty portion of Swill's Fill My Butt Ant Trophy actually goes to the management of the supposed charity, 20% or more, just like all the other wholly bogus charities that operate as seeming nonprofits, profitting the management by cash, profitting the Philanthropist by a$$ and profitting no one really otherwise.

Realer solution, than buying Windows, for microcredit participation:
http://www.kiva.org - a website that directly facilitates microcredit lending in amounts as little as $25.

Lets take some examples of Swill Gates bogus philanthropy:
Global Health by Bill Gates. Reading the gatesfoundation website I discovered Swill breaks up his organization into 3 categories. One of them is global health which Bill Gates takes a very American approach to. Should surprise us not with US health failing as it has been in the last few decades. Higher rates of Alzheimers, heart disease, cancer, doctor caused death... Bills Global Health solution? Vaccines and Medicines. Not mentioned on the Gates foundation website? Vaccines are today laced with mercury which is a neurotoxin. Mercury accumulates in the brain and causes twitching, forgetfulness, demented thoughts, alzheimers, autism and ultimately death.

Medicines are good though right? If you want to bolster pharmaceutical industry profits they are. Or if you want to suffer a potentially debilitating and fatal range of side effects.

What's the real solutions? Food grade hydrogen peroxide can cure literally ANY virus, bacteria, parasite AND fungus. The same is true of ozone which can be produced at medical grade requiring only electricity and air. Generating electricity is a function of magnets sweeping past wire coils. Magnets are these days common place, though are greatly wasted, rather than saving lives many magnets are used for convenience transportation.

You think multibillionaire Swill Gates doesn't know this?

6 million children die of Malaria every year.

http://www.whale.to/a/humble.html#The_Miracle_Mineral_Supplement_

That link is to a site of a guy who knows how to cure malaria and has personally spoken to Bill Gates about it. Swill Gates, while operating in Africa says, no FDA approval, no cure. What does FDA approval have to do with treating foreign children for Malaria?

Reference the Lancet Medical Journal:

Killing of Blood-Stage Murine Malaria Parasites by Hydrogen Peroxide. (Infection and Immunity. Jan. 1983, p. 456-459) "A Radical Interpretation of Immunity to Malaria Parasites" (The Lancet Dec. 25, 1982, p. 1431-1433) "Free oxygen Radical Generators as Antimalorial Drugs" (The Lancet Feb. 12, 1983, p. 359-360).

What else is necessary for real global health, rather than Swill Gates fatal hellth plan? The rest of disease is due pollution and malnutrition.

Swill gates is sending white rice all over the planet which is notably devoid of any nutritive value and when PC's are tossed in the trash they wind up shipped over seas to where people are employed to melt them down thereby releasing the toxin load that was stored in the chips. Thanks Bill !

Quote from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation:
"We’re working to link small farmers to new and existing markets and to the information they need to make sound business decisions. For example, we’re providing small farmers in East Africa with the equipment and training they need to grow and sell higher-quality coffee."

Swill Gates is working to create a database of small farmers that they be facilitously stamped out as corporate multinational agribusiness rises to crescendo. He's going to put farmers who should be growing beans and banana's for local sale, in touch with people who will tempt them to grow crops that can be sold for what to them will be considered windfall profits, sold to wealthy nations, while the locals are neglected, eventually revolt in a violent uprising of the starved that results in violent government suppression... Coffee is a classic example of a typically overseas sold addictive agricultural product that very often where it is grown, masses starve to death and children's nutrition suffers.

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Quote:
"We’re working to increase investments in agriculture from leaders in developing countries as well as from funders and partners in the developed world."

These vesting "leaders", do you suppose they're going to want to own the farms? Or at least have a strong influence on the farms policy? Like grow cash crops rather than food?

Next Swill Gates Found A Shun Quote:
"Gather and analyze data to improve decision-making."

Is gathering info on African farmers more important to their farming success than irrigation equipment? Silly question right? I ask though because while Swill Gates is collecting info from every undeveloped nation on their farmers, he's providing irrigation equipment only to Nuclear Armed India...

You'd think India would have a handle on the irrigation equipment before they go building nuclear weapons...

The third arm of Swill gates efforts is making sure people are able to open bank accounts, supposedly with the purpose of helping people save. How many bank accounts are there in America? Americans currently have on average negative savings. So if you want to promote saving, is providing bank accounts really what stimulates such? It seems to me what really stimulates saving is wages above living expenses. Storing your money in a crummy bank with a less than 1% yearly interest rate is not some sure fire plan to stimulate savings. It is though a plan which will facilitate building a database to store names and addresses of the whole worlds population...

The Swill and Melinda Gates Foundation in my estimation is a front to mass murder, waste, greed and massive corruption.

The authors article about Capitalizing on Philanthropy is an egregiously shallow examination of a topic rife with complexity. File with propaganda.

edwarmi@hotmail.com on "Philanthrocapitalism: after the goldrush"

edwarmi@hotmail.com — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 16:24:27 +0000

thanks CG. I recently published a summry of responses to "Just another Emperor" here: http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/philanthrocapitalism-the-myths-and-realities-of-the-myths-and-realities

GGabriel on "Philanthrocapitalism: after the goldrush"

GGabriel — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 01:48:56 +0000

Really great piece. Your points about the potential for structural change in both social relations and economic domination are particularly important. Importing markets into the very domain in which people seek to challenge their distributional failures to me seems deeply illconceived.

We must not allow the "accountability" banner to be appropriated as a justification for marketization, it is too important. We have seen the "accountability" of the market in the generation of the current financial crisis, and the disgusting continuation of smash and grab policies in relation to emergency liquidity injections