Sunday, November 15, 2009

hand outs

An Oxford academic , moral philosopher Dr Toby Ord , has promised to give half of his future earnings - up to £1m - to fund the fight against poverty.Ord has also set up a society, called Giving What We Can, to encourage people to give up at least 10% of their salary.He also hopes that those on lower incomes will be inspired to donate.
"I've looked into this and I've found that I can do a tremendous amount of good," Dr Ord told Sky News."I could potentially save about 3,000 lives and also produce a huge amounts of benefits for people who aren't in danger of dying, but are suffering from terrible diseases."

Oh well , if the good professor has the spare cash that he can spread around as he wishes then who are we to mock him but if he has any delusion that by re-distributing poverty it will somehow do little more than alleviate some suffering of a very few then he will be sadly disappointed . Poverty is an inherent part of capitalism and no amount of good intentions and good deeds by well-meaning philanthropists will do anything more than present cosmetic palliatives . The philanthropists are, as always, deluding themselves by thinking that the system can somehow be turned into a society where meaning and genuine collectiveness can flourish. charity, however well-meaning, is no answer . The remedies do not cure the disease,they merely prolong it.

Charity is big business in Britain with , as of March 2006, 167,000 registered charities . In the USA there are 1.3 million charities . 85 percent of the British public give regularly to charities. According to a survey the percentage of volunteers in America is the largest of any country - almost 56 percent. The average hours volunteered per week by an individual is 3.5 hours. According to Charity America, donations to charity for 2002 were $241 billion, 76.3 per cent of this given by individuals.

Humans are endowed with the ability to sympathise and empathise with their fellow humans. Humans derive great pleasure from doing good, are at their best when faced with the worst and will go to extraordinary lengths to help alleviate the suffering of others.

It is the profit system that stands in the way of satisfying human needs.

6 comments:

Kirsty said...

If the point of that article is that charity isn't a long term solution then I agree, but it seems to be an argument against giving at all. Even if charity can't sure the disease, it must be better to treat the symptoms then do nothing.

It can't be morally right to, say, withhold medical aid from Africa, and say well I was waiting for economic reform here first. That's too late to save people dying today and tomorrow, but Oxfam can save those lives, and I doubt the people helped consider it to be cosmetic palliative.

Its up to individuals to help others however they can, giving practical help today doesn't have to mean abandoning deeper ideology for a better future.

aberfoyle said...

Charity as any endeavour involving capital is a business.And in the case of Oxfam and the like a very large business.

Consider every dollar donated 20cents goes to the recipient the rest to the organizing structure, wages and so forth of the charity.
Yes its heart wrenching seeing the abject misery of those African and other children.

The monies donated are for the humanitarian survival of those recipients, health food clothing and education.And the education is my biggest grip.I find it hypocritical that monies given for humanitarian needs is used for the purpose of educating these unfortunates,in a education system that is capitalist orientated and governed.

I dare say if they were to be taught the fundamentals of MARKS/ENGLES,they would receive no humanitarian aid.

ajohnstone said...

Charity does't appear to be even a short term cure according to Oxfam when they have launched a critique against food aid .

Simply put , as the blog tries to convey , there is no shortage of charity , no shortage of men and women happy and willing to expend energy and resources to attempt fixes for the failings of capitalism , but unless they do address the root cause , change the fundamentals , then its a never ending endeavour.

It is not about economic "reform" but economic "revolution"

Zero said...

@aber: I'm fairly sure there are worse aspects of schools related to capitalism than the fact that the vast majority teach nothing but bullshit on M+E. For example, the hierarchical structure, competition through grades and such, the glorifying of servility as 'respect for authority', etc. More or less, the entire structure reflects capitalism and breeds people ready to take part in it. Of course, it may well be better than nothing, or going out and begging, which is what many poor children get, but it's still shit, and there's no good reason that the choice should be between a bad option and a worse one. Charities and such tend to completely ignore this, hence programs to 'get every child into primary school', etc, because apparently unschoolers, free schools, etc, don't exist. This kind of thing also takes place in regards to social systems. So while I have nothing against giving to charity, I don't especially like charities, given the illusions they tend to perpetuate.

aberfoyle said...

Capitalism and its education structures are based on competition. Not for the betterment of human need, but for capitalist need of maintaining production for profit.

Whether you are a factory labourer or an office clerk, your education is geared towards you maintaining their profit system.And for all those who do, they are wage slaves, to the profit system.

Kirsty said...

Of course charity isn't invariably good, most religious charities for instance, or food aid if it suppresses local farmers. But you can't dismiss the whole concept because sometimes it doesn't work. There maybe some problems with education too, but I wouldn't want to deny people basic literacy or women contraction advice.