2008 Woodie Awards
The politics of philanthropy
Thinking beyond community service
Tyler Zimmer
Issue date: 4/19/07 Section: News/Features
Hardly anyone, regardless of political stripe, would seriously contest the idea that participating in community service or charity work is a commendable pursuit. We may disagree about how far our duty to help others in need extends, but, it is difficult to imagine someone not being praised for their decision to spend time or money "giving back."
A quick glance will reveal that Vanderbilt has substantial student participation in a wide array of different programs aimed at community service from Alternative Spring Break to Habitat for Humanity that seek to address myriad social problems. Yet what is interesting is that we typically do not think of these activities in terms of politics. That is to say, we tend to think of philanthropic pursuits such as ASB as a coming together of students under a common cause in a way that transcends the fray of political differences.
According to this approach, it's a virtue of philanthropic initiatives they identify as apolitical; in the name of the higher cause of helping others they avoid the divisive squabbling that colors the shouting matches and petty partisan disagreements that pervade the cable news landscape.
It is an interesting question how far our obligations or duties extend to help the poor and dispossessed. However, there is an even more pressing question underlying our consideration of inequality and social responsibility. That is, we must first confront the political question of why we find such inequality and social injustice in the first place.
For instance, consider a community service pursuit that provided after-school tutoring at an impoverished inner-city elementary school. While the services provided are certainly badly needed and make a difference for disadvantaged students, it would be a striking oversight to continue doing this work without ever considering the problems being addressed in terms of politics.
If we were diagnosing a medical problem, we wouldn't observe malignant symptoms and conclude that the only thing to be done was to find ways to ameliorate superficial and immediate effects caused, presumably, by some more internal or systemic pathogen. This isn't to say that there is nothing good about treating the external symptoms of deeper problems, but no amount of aspirin will rid the patient of an underlying illness.
A quick glance will reveal that Vanderbilt has substantial student participation in a wide array of different programs aimed at community service from Alternative Spring Break to Habitat for Humanity that seek to address myriad social problems. Yet what is interesting is that we typically do not think of these activities in terms of politics. That is to say, we tend to think of philanthropic pursuits such as ASB as a coming together of students under a common cause in a way that transcends the fray of political differences.
According to this approach, it's a virtue of philanthropic initiatives they identify as apolitical; in the name of the higher cause of helping others they avoid the divisive squabbling that colors the shouting matches and petty partisan disagreements that pervade the cable news landscape.
It is an interesting question how far our obligations or duties extend to help the poor and dispossessed. However, there is an even more pressing question underlying our consideration of inequality and social responsibility. That is, we must first confront the political question of why we find such inequality and social injustice in the first place.
For instance, consider a community service pursuit that provided after-school tutoring at an impoverished inner-city elementary school. While the services provided are certainly badly needed and make a difference for disadvantaged students, it would be a striking oversight to continue doing this work without ever considering the problems being addressed in terms of politics.
If we were diagnosing a medical problem, we wouldn't observe malignant symptoms and conclude that the only thing to be done was to find ways to ameliorate superficial and immediate effects caused, presumably, by some more internal or systemic pathogen. This isn't to say that there is nothing good about treating the external symptoms of deeper problems, but no amount of aspirin will rid the patient of an underlying illness.
Be the first to comment on this story