[Vision2020] The Charitable-Industrial Complex

[Art Deco]

  [image: The New York Times] <http://www.nytimes.com/>

------------------------------
July 26, 2013
The Charitable-Industrial Complex By PETER BUFFETT

I HAD spent much of my life writing music for commercials, film and
television and knew little about the world of philanthropy as practiced by
the very wealthy until what I call the big bang happened in 2006. That
year, my father, Warren Buffett, made good on his commitment to give nearly
all of his accumulated wealth back to society. In addition to making
several large donations, he added generously to the three foundations that
my parents had created years earlier, one for each of their children to
run.

Early on in our philanthropic journey, my wife and I became aware of
something I started to call Philanthropic Colonialism. I noticed that a
donor had the urge to “save the day” in some fashion. People (including me)
who had very little knowledge of a particular place would think that they
could solve a local problem. Whether it involved farming methods, education
practices, job training or business development, over and over I would hear
people discuss transplanting what worked in one setting directly into
another with little regard for culture, geography or societal norms.

Often the results of our decisions had unintended consequences;
distributing condoms to stop the spread of AIDS in a brothel area ended up
creating a higher price for unprotected sex.

But now I think something even more damaging is going on.

Because of who my father is, I’ve been able to occupy some seats I never
expected to sit in. Inside any important philanthropy meeting, you witness
heads of state meeting with investment managers and corporate leaders. All
are searching for answers with their right hand to problems that others in
the room have created with their left. There are plenty of statistics that
tell us that inequality is continually rising. At the same time, according
to the Urban Institute, the nonprofit sector has been steadily growing.
Between 2001 and 2011, the number of nonprofits increased 25 percent. Their
growth rate now exceeds that of both the business and government sectors.
It’s a massive business, with approximately $316
billion<http://www.cnbc.com/id/100831257>given away in 2012 in the
United States alone and more than 9.4 million
employed.

Philanthropy has become the “it” vehicle to level the playing field and has
generated a growing number of gatherings, workshops and affinity groups.

As more lives and communities are destroyed by the system that creates vast
amounts of wealth for the few, the more heroic it sounds to “give back.”
It’s what I would call “conscience laundering” — feeling better about
accumulating more than any one person could possibly need to live on by
sprinkling a little around as an act of charity.

But this just keeps the existing structure of inequality in place. The rich
sleep better at night, while others get just enough to keep the pot from
boiling over. Nearly every time someone feels better by doing good, on the
other side of the world (or street), someone else is further locked into a
system that will not allow the true flourishing of his or her nature or the
opportunity to live a joyful and fulfilled life.

And with more business-minded folks getting into the act, business
principles are trumpeted as an important element to add to the
philanthropic sector. I now hear people ask, “what’s the R.O.I.?” when it
comes to alleviating human suffering, as if return on investment were the
only measure of success. Microlending and financial literacy (now I’m going
to upset people who are wonderful folks and a few dear friends) — what is
this really about? People will certainly learn how to integrate into our
system of debt and repayment with interest. People will rise above making
$2 a day to enter our world of goods and services so they can buy more. But
doesn’t all this just feed the beast?

I’m really not calling for an end to capitalism; I’m calling for humanism.

Often I hear people say, “if only they had what we have” (clean water,
access to health products and free markets, better education, safer living
conditions). Yes, these are all important. But no “charitable” (I hate that
word) intervention can solve any of these issues. It can only kick the can
down the road.

My wife and I know we don’t have the answers, but we do know how to listen.
As we learn, we will continue to support conditions for systemic change.

It’s time for a new operating system. Not a 2.0 or a 3.0, but something
built from the ground up. New code.

What we have is a crisis of imagination. Albert Einstein said that you
cannot solve a problem with the same mind-set that created it. Foundation
dollars should be the best “risk capital” out there.

There are people working hard at showing examples of other ways to live in
a functioning society that truly creates greater prosperity for all (and I
don’t mean more people getting to have more stuff).

Money should be spent trying out concepts that shatter current structures
and systems that have turned much of the world into one vast market. Is
progress really Wi-Fi on every street corner? No. It’s when no 13-year-old
girl on the planet gets sold for sex. But as long as most folks are patting
themselves on the back for charitable acts, we’ve got a perpetual poverty
machine.

It’s an old story; we really need a new one.

Peter Buffett <http://www.peterbuffett.com/> is a composer and a chairman
of the NoVo Foundation <http://www.novofoundation.org/>.


-- 
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
art.deco.studios at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130727/cf77e039/attachment.html>