logo
    • Magazine
    • Membership
    • Donate
  • Racial Justice
  • Economic Justice
    • Collections
  • Climate Justice
  • Health Justice
  • Leadership
  • CONTENT TYPES
  • Subscribe
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Complimentary Webinars
    • Premium On-Demand Webinars
  • Membership
  • Submissions

“Persecuted Philanthropists” and the Great Unwashed Public Who Criticize Them

Ruth McCambridge
May 16, 2014
Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print

 

Money

May 12, 2014; The Atlantic

Benjamin Soskis wrote an article in The Atlantic entitled “The Importance of Criticizing Philanthropy” in which he contributes some insights into the melee regarding the positive and negative aspects of billionaire philanthropists making investments in public policy and public systems. He begins by referencing a recent op-ed by John Arnold entitled “Attacks and Vitriol Will Not Deter Me From Supporting Fixes to Public Policy,” where Arnold complained about the intensely personal attacks aimed at him as a result of investments he has made in issues like pension reform where he tends to favor reform that would cut pensions.

Soskis writes that this type of bemoaning one’s fate by billionaires who feel that they are misunderstood is becoming unbecomingly common. “Yet,” he writes, “in the midst of this latest Gilded Age, as the prerogatives of concentrated wealth march onwards with little resistance, an aggressive—even at times an antagonistic—engagement between the public and their benefactors shouldn’t be considered a mark of incivility. It should be considered a democratic imperative.”

Of course, as Soskis documents here, our skepticism about the motives of outrageously rich philanthropists is not at all new, but it had enjoyed a bit of a “balmy” break at the end of the last century when, he says, philanthropy was being given the benefit of the doubt. But, he writes, “There is now a significant and vocal faction willing to call philanthropic ambitions into question. In part, the pushback can be traced to the nation’s mounting uneasiness with income inequality and to the spread of an economic populism that refuses to regard the concentration of wealth charitably.” That growing inequality has also resulted in more rich who have more to give and, thus, can wield more influence in resource-scarce times.

Sign up for our free newsletters

Subscribe to NPQ's newsletters to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

{loadmodule mod_banners,Ads for Advertisers 5}

 

He suggests that this distrust is fed by philanthropic involvement with the government. “Whereas once philanthropy could comfortably pose as a disinterested provider of expertise and analysis, holding itself at a safe and decorous remove from the partisan fray, the hyper-partisanship that has infected politics in the recent decade has made that self-image impossible to sustain.”

So, back to Arnold, Soskis details the Arnold Foundation’s involvement in trying to reform state-based public pension systems, which includes the funding of a PBS documentary and a report by the Brookings Institution and Pew Charitable Trusts.

“Critics like [PandoDaily writer David] Sirota noted the ways in which Arnold’s philanthropic campaign converged with his broader political efforts to promote pension reform, particularly his funding of state-based policy advocacy groups, ballot initiatives and electoral campaigns. The PBS series, for instance, touted a California ballot initiative that Arnold was funding; the Brookings report cited favorably the work of a politician who served as a policy consultant for Arnold, and promoted the work of a Rhode Island advocacy group bankrolled by Arnold as well. Arnold’s detractors have also pointed out that, far from providing a balanced perspective, the research he has funded has staked out a strong ideological position; it has overstated the threat that state and municipal public pensions pose to the nation’s fiscal health, they charge, and has neglected to mention that public finances would enjoy a greater boost from slashing corporate subsidies and tax breaks than they would from denying firefighters and teachers the full pensions promised to them.”

In the end, “given the power that private philanthropy can wield over public policy,” writes Soskis, “a spirited, fully-informed public debate over the scope, scale, and nature of that influence is a democratic necessity. It’s our closest approximation of holding our mega-donors accountable.”—Ruth McCambridge

Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print
About the author
Ruth McCambridge

Ruth is Editor Emerita of the Nonprofit Quarterly. Her background includes forty-five years of experience in nonprofits, primarily in organizations that mix grassroots community work with policy change. Beginning in the mid-1980s, Ruth spent a decade at the Boston Foundation, developing and implementing capacity building programs and advocating for grantmaking attention to constituent involvement.

More about: AccountabilityDark MoneyElectoral and LobbyingGivingIndividual GivingNonprofit NewsPhilanthropyPolitics

Become a member

Support independent journalism and knowledge creation for civil society. Become a member of Nonprofit Quarterly.

Members receive unlimited access to our archived and upcoming digital content. NPQ is the leading journal in the nonprofit sector written by social change experts. Gain access to our exclusive library of online courses led by thought leaders and educators providing contextualized information to help nonprofit practitioners make sense of changing conditions and improve infra-structure in their organizations.

Join Today
logo logo logo logo logo
See comments

Spring-2023-sidebar-subscribe
You might also like
The Nonprofit Sector and Social Change: A Conversation between Cyndi Suarez and Claire Dunning
Claire Dunning and Cyndi Suarez
Nonprofits as Battlegrounds for Democracy
Cyndi Suarez
What Did California Miss with Its Recent Slashing of a Key Solar Incentive?
Maria Stamas
Sankofa Philanthropy: Hip Hop’s Sixth Element
Jason Terrell
The Best Elections Money Can Buy
Steve Dubb
Why Social Change Films Matter
Cyndi Suarez and Saphia Suarez

NPQ Webinars

April 27th, 2 pm ET

Liberatory Decision-Making

How to Facilitate and Engage in Healthy Decision-making Processes

Register Now
You might also like
The book "Nonprofit Neighborhoods" leaning against a wall
The Nonprofit Sector and Social Change: A Conversation...
Claire Dunning and Cyndi Suarez
Nonprofits as Battlegrounds for Democracy
Cyndi Suarez
Asian man in black suit jacket and striped pants, facing towards a wall, leaning his head against the wall.
What Did California Miss with Its Recent Slashing of a Key...
Maria Stamas

Like what you see?

Subscribe to the NPQ newsletter to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

See our newsletters

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

NPQ-Spring-2023-cover

Independent & in your mailbox.

Subscribe today and get a full year of NPQ for just $59.

subscribe
  • About
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Copyright
  • Careers

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

 

Non Profit News | Nonprofit Quarterly
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.