#239 Musings Beyond the Bunker (Tuesday January 4)
Good morning,
THE PERSONAL SATISFACTION OF PHILANTHROPY
I have been writing about how nonprofits for a while (and have several more coming later this month), from the perspective of their management, operations, and challenges and the importance of supporting them. But a number of people have weighed in recently on thinking about nonprofits in a different way—namely, the satisfaction and sense of accomplishment derived from being involved with philanthropy. As much as it is important to give to charities, it arguably is as beneficial for the giver.
Howard Sherwood encapsulates this sentiment well, noting, “I was surprised that you did not include anything about the joys that can come from giving and/or volunteering your time, and the purpose that it adds to your life. You know better than anyone how gratifying it can be to serve on a not-for-profit board, the friendships that seem to build naturally because you and other board members share a common passion.”
FEWER PEOPLE ARE PHILANTHROPIC THAN ONE THINKS
But for all the Howard Sherwoods and others out there, there aren’t enough. Howard has done a little informal survey regarding how philanthropic we are as a people:
“I was disappointingly surprised when speaking with a few wealth managers recently and asked them what percentage of their clients were truly philanthropic. The response from three of them, none knowing each other, was possibly 20-25%.”
Proving that similar minds think alike, I also have been inquiring with wealth managers regarding the prevalence of philanthropy in the financial plans of successful people. My sample came to the same sad and shocking result. Namely, that only around 25% of wealthy people are contributing meaningfully to charity. This is a startling statistic and indictment of our “I deserve everything I have” and “it’s all about me” prevailing societal philosophy.
Some people have to raise money for a job. Others do so as volunteers. The job is thankless and sometimes is met with a hostile response. Jack Hubbard, former president of USC, once told me that he never felt guilty asking people for donations. He said he actually was doing people a favor—enabling them to be better versions of themselves and to revel in the joy of seeing their positive impact on society.
RITTENHOUSE MAY NOT BE GUILTY OF MURDER; BUT HE CERTAINLY WAS GUILTY OF TERRIBLE BEHAVIOR
There is a lot of anger/concern associated with the Rittenhouse verdict. Judith Kitzes summarizes a prevailing view: “The Rittenhouse verdict was a travesty. Not only was he underage he took an assault weapon from his home in ILLINOIS and traveled across state lines to WISCONSIN to ‘protect his community’ – it wasn’t his community at all, and he killed someone. That person was in no way threatening Rittenhouse. In finding Rittenhouse not guilty, the court put a stamp of approval on vigilantism. There is no justifiable reason for Rittenhouse to have been in Kenosha. He went looking for someone to kill.”
Alan Rosenbach’s spin compares legality and morality: "Rittenhouse was found not guilty because he was in fact defending himself in the moment. Unfortunately, the right is using this exoneration as proof that Rittenhouse acted morally. The verdict allows Rittenhouse apologists to avoid examining whether or not parents should give their children military weapons, or whether those children should be free to walk amongst a rioting crowd with such a weapon."
WHERE WERE THE PARENTS?
Much has been written about the guilt of the Crumbley parents, whose child committed mass murder in Michigan with a gun provided by his parents. Those parents chose to ignore any concerning signs regarding their child’s behaviors and, in fact, made light of the school’s concerns. They have been charged with crimes. In the case of Mr. Rittenhouse, some of the same factors no doubt were at play. These irresponsible parents allowed their 17 year-old child to own a gun, travel across state lines and use it, all while likely aware of his vigilante dreams, seemingly without providing appropriate oversight and education.
THOUGHTS ON THE MEDIA
I have yet to hear someone railing against the “Main Street media” as leftist ever concede that the right wing outlets (e.g., Fox, Breitbart, OANN) are biased at all.
And then there’s Skip Kessler, who very politely responds to right-wing friends spouting off about some theory or another that doesn’t make sense, “where’d you learn that, Breitbart?”
Have a good day,
Glenn