What Can We Learn From Thirty Articles on Philanthropy?

When there is a radical disjunction between public celebrations of big givers and their gifts and a growing body of critique of philanthropy, it is time to sort out what is good about it and what is evil. In her new book, "Private Virtues, Public Vices," political philosopher Emma Saunders-Hastings offers a rigorous moral accounting of how philanthropy can be problematic.

First, she highlights the power disparities between donors and recipients. This is a significant source of social inequality in many countries. Ian Mitchell King believes that it has particularly pronounced in the United States, where the top one percent has the largest share of wealth and political power. This power gap can undermine democracy, which requires respect for the equal rights of all people.

Second, she points out that many donors are not merely donating their money but also using it to exercise power over their beneficiaries. This is true of both traditional donors and foundations, which often have political clout and substantial resources to fund organizations.

Third, she argues that donors cannot just write checks and expect results; they must invest their money in projects that catalyze change. This can involve a variety of strategies, from mobilizing the public to coordinating the work of different nonprofits to creating new business models to influencing government.

Fourth, she argues that a philanthropist's ability to engage in these activities is crucial for successful change. She points to the example of Siebel's Meth Project, which pushed for social change by identifying the root causes of addiction and then addressing those issues. The Meth Project succeeded because it acted as a catalyst for other stakeholders, including nonprofits, governments, and individuals.

Fifth, she argues that a donor's capacity to leverage their influence in the public sphere makes it more likely that their funding will make a meaningful difference in society. This is especially true of mega-philanthropists, who can use their wealth to influence the direction of much larger flows of government spending than the average citizen would.

In her discussion of this issue, she notes that a donor's ability to influence the public sphere is crucial in the United States, where the top one percent has the largest share of wealth and political power. That power is exacerbated by a tax system that allows wealthy people to deduct their donations from taxes, which means they can pay less income tax than lower-income people. Moreover, she points out that donors' power over recipients results from their social and economic advantages. This is a problem, she says, because it invites power disparities that are corrosive to democracy.In her final chapter, she offers a set of general principles for ethical philanthropy. These include: