Category International development

For the next while, we will be focusing on sustainable holidays. There are a lot of decisions/plans etc to make around the holidays, and not all decisions are easy, clear or straightforward. For today, we’re looking at holiday and year-end donations, although these guidelines apply to all year-round giving, as well.

If you are anything like me, your email inbox is getting overloaded with asks from various NGOs, political parties, faith groups etc, asking for a year-end donation (in addition to phone call asks for money etc.) Sometimes, it’s easy to sort out how to manage all of the requests, and sometimes it can get a bit muddy. So, today, we’re going to talk about some of the red flags and how to make sure that the projects you are donating to are deserving of your donation. In general, these will show up more often in really small organizations, but big organizations can have challenges, as well.

So, here’s a quick (but not exhaustive) list of things to check for before sending off a donation, using an email request (one of many) that I received recently as a case study (in this case asking for funds for an extremely large capital campaign, from a very small organization):

• Email received – Check how often the org emails me, and how often they are asking for $.
  • Answer: Only a handful of short emails per year, and all are asking for $.
  • Result: Fail
  • What to Look For: Regular communication and updates on programming etc, going well beyond asks for $.
• Website Check – After reading the email, I checked the website.
  • Answer: The website has not been maintained in any way. Basic pages are up, but most/all pages are basically empty, because the website has not been maintained. Given that the org is asking for donations for a very large capital campaign, this is very problematic. If the org can’t even maintain a basic website, how can they handle large sums of money? What does this gap say about their ability to run effective programming?
  • Result: Fail
  • What to Look For: Well designed website, appropriate for the size of the org and the projects being funded. Clear, concise info, easy to navigate.
• Overall Transparency and Financial Accountability: With the website and other checks, I’m also checking for accountability and transparency
  • Answer: There are no budgets, annual reports or any other transparency/accountability measures shown anywhere. It appears that funds received are not accounted for, to the public in any way.
  • Result: Fail
  • What to Look For: This piece is really important, and often undervalued in poorly run orgs. (Note: For orgs that are not registered to give tax receipts or acting as a charitable org etc, naturally, some of these rules are a bit different). This, in my opinion, is a significant red flag that funds should not be given.
• Contact info and Org Structure: In addition to the basic website info, I’m looking for easy ways to get in touch with senior leadership, board etc. to help ensure that the org is accountable to the public.
  • Answer: Nobody other than the Exec Director is listed on the website. Given that the website is poorly maintained, the board and others are not named, and the other issues, it does not give confidence that contacting the ED through the website would result in a meaningful and timely reply.
  • Result: Fail
  • What to Look For: Senior Leadership, staff, board etc named and with contact info (eg an email address associated with the org). Reasonable term limits etc are also important. Watch out to see if the same person(s) is in a senior position for 15-20+ years at a time, especially in a small org (instead of transitioning by 10-15 max) – as that’s a red flag for other challenges. The org is at high risk of not successfully managing the transition to the next director, and may end up closing down in the relatively near future, which has implications for your donor dollars.
• Others – This is not an exhaustive list, but is a good start for evaluating end or year (or anytime of the year) support for orgs (particularly small orgs) that might be asking for help, whether financial, volunteer time or other.

Summary: Naturally, in this case, I will not be sending a donation to this organization. I would advise them, if I were their consultant, to drop the large capital campaign and spend their time building up a well-designed website, developing a clear and consistent communications plan with a strong senior leadership team, ensuring that the basic work of transparency and accountability happens every year (eg annual reports, budgets etc), creating a meaningful fundraising plan with an appropriately sized donor base and so on. It’s much better to have a well-designed program in a smaller building than a huge building with poorly designed organizational structures. Ultimately, donors give to support impact first, not for a shiny new building.

………………………

Online Store: There are new, sustainable items being added to the online store every day! Check out the website for more details!

…………………….

How to Support Menno Adventures: All of the resources that we share here are free, and we do not charge for access to anything (except for consulting services, naturally.). If you find that these tools and resources are valuable, and would like to support this work, any donation, large or small, is greatly appreciated. Details on the website. Thank you!

CBC

This is a terrible week in Ontario, as we deal with the reality of a terrorist attack in London, along with more info regarding our history with residential schools. A family was targeted in an attack, seemingly only for being Muslim. There is absolutely shameful, and has no place in Canada. And yet, it happened regardless, seemingly fueled by some combination of anti-Asian racism, Islamophobia, and perhaps white supremacy – although details remain sketchy and unclear at this time.

Canada has, I believe, a reputation for being a safe and welcoming place. However, that has not always been our history (with First Nations, newcomers and others), and it is not always our present. That must be acknowledged, and we must work hard to face our problems, and do better. I will not, in any way, attempt to speak for the Muslim community, or pretend that I understand the pain and grief that they are going through at this stage. It is not my place to take others’ voice away – only to draw attention to what is going on, and offer ideas to consider as we, collectively, try to move forward to a more positive place.

“Muslims in Canada have become all too familiar with the violence of Islamophobia,” Mustafa Farooq, the council’s chief executive, said in a statement. “But this loss of a family, the loss of a child in our community because of Islamophobia — this is a sorrow that will run deep for a long time. But let that sorrow be the ground where we stand for justice, and stand for change.”

Washington Post

In brief, here are a few important things to consider, among many others, as we attempt to create a better future than the present we currently have:

• There is absolutely no place for white supremacy, racism, discrimination or anything else in Canada, or anywhere else. It still happens, and we all have an obligation to do better than claim “I’m not a racist.” Those of us that are white and/or privileged and/or male have an even greater responsibility – both to listen more to under-represented voices, as well as to use our position to speak truth to power, and ensure that change happens.
• The perpetuation of all types of negatively (from micro-aggressions to direct attacks) – whether grounded in faith/religion, tradition, skin colour, national identity or anything else – must end. That includes everything – whether it is an attack based on ethnicity, skin colour, what one is wearing (or not wearing), one’s religious identity, gender and sexuality identity or anything else.
• Many politicians, faith leaders and others are actively working to end systemic racism and discrimination, and that should be applauded. Others, however, are still promoting a “me first” world-view, in which others are attacked as an “easy way to get votes” instead of doing the hard work of building a more inclusive world. They must be held accountable, and absolutely not rewarded with votes, big salaries, or other encouragement.
• If our faith/faith leaders, community, politicians, internet circles, or anyone else, is telling us that others are “wrong” or “bad” for their faith, what they wear (or don’t wear), who they love, their gender identity, or anything else, we must reinterpret our faith, change the tone of our community and our piolitics, find better resources on the internet. If a faith group (or others), refuses to let go of hatred for and rejection of others (for any reason), find a more inclusive and welcoming community. We must have zero tolerance for hatred and discrimination, of any kind.

These attacks on others, for basic, protected characteristics (faith, ethnicity, gender, sexuality or anything else), must end. It’s time to go beyond being nice, passive Canadians, and stick our necks out (peacefully, of course), to support our neighbours, and build the Canada, in reality, as perfectly ideal as we imagine it to be.

More details (among the countless pages that have been already written on the internet, too many to list here):

• Muslim family ID’d in fatal truck attack in London, Ont., known for commitment to community – CBC
• ‘This was a terrorist attack’: Trudeau condemns London hit-and-run that left four Muslim family members dead CBC
• Four Muslim family members in Canada killed in ‘targeted’ attack, police say WP

LGBTQ2+ MINORITY STRESS IN THE WORKPLACE: HOW DISCRIMINATION HURTS HEALTH: Charity Village

As we continue with Pride Month, today’s focus is on LGBTQ2+ inclusion (or the lack of it) at work, specifically within non-profits and faith-based organizations. While others have much greater first hand experience and expertise on this issue, I have seen discrimination and other issues organizations that I have been connected with, and will be using the research that others have done to highlight areas in which critical changes are needed.

In my experience, some of what I have observed in organizations includes things like having a formal policy that states that the org “supports” or “believes in” only certain types of relationships (ie only straight relationships). This type of policy not only eliminates those who are actively in other relationships, it also removes their allies, who are forced to choose between a job vs supporting their LGBTQ2+ friends/family with integrity.

Similarly, and by extension, I am aware of limits on placing people in LGBTQ2+ relationships in overseas positions in the NGO world – as a blanket ban. I have heard it justified based on the idea that it may be either unsafe for the couple in certain geographical contexts, and/or opposed by local partners, or donors/constituents, who might be offended by the idea of working with/supporting an LGBTQ2+ staff person. I would like to challenge all of these.

1. Any international NGO with integrity knows that some positions or locations may be more or less safe than others, for a variety of reasons, and has a long list of safety policies in place to ensure the safety of workers. Others may have heard of something that I am not aware of, but I do not know of any cases in which a blanket ban is imposed on something, simply because it may not be safe in a particular geographical location. For example, if it may not be safe to travel as a single woman in a certain work placement, that would be noted in the position – but single women would not be banned from applying for positions anywhere else in the world. Likewise, travelling on certain passports may be unsafe in particular political contexts, but those passport holders are still welcome and encouraged to work somewhere that is safe for them.
2. With any NGO, as we work with our partners, we, naturally, aim to build up a positive relationship. At the same time, there are limits to what requests we will accommodate. For example, a peacebuilding org (eg a Menno org), will never, as far as I am aware, accept a request to support the military. It’s not who we are, and it’s not how we operate. Likewise, a request from a partner to only hire white staff, or only men, not women, for that office (as opposed to a visible minority or women) would not be accommodated, because any orgs that I am aware of do not tolerate open discrimination in their hiring policies, even if a partner requests it. As noted above, if it’s unsafe for a worker to be placed, safety policies are in place for that. However, when the work is safe for staff to do, and the reason for not placing someone is simply that partners want to discriminate, or do not support inclusion, NGOs do not accommodate the request – unless it’s related to related to LGBTQ2+ status, in which case it seems that, at least in some orgs, it’s still happening extensively.
3. The other reason that I have heard is that constituency/donors might be upset by inclusion, and therefore, the policies are in place in order to “not rock the boat.” As with #2, above, if active discrimination against others is the price to pay for a donation, is it really worth it? Are we seriously having hard conversations about this in our orgs, or simply accepting it as “the way we’ve always done it”?

So, we know that when orgs maintain discriminatory policies on LGBTQ2+ status, there are inconsistencies, and that they would not act in an equivalent manner on other matters of equality or discrimination. And, based on this report from Charity Village (along with common sense) we know that the harms caused are significant.

So, why are we, as NGOs and faith-based groups, holding on to discriminatory policies, that go against our overall values, are harmful to countless people, go against basic anti-discrimination laws, and simply have no place in a modern, inclusive organization?

Discrimination is never OK. I have heard, in some orgs (eg a generation or so ago), that change was coming very soon, and a bit of time was needed to ensure a smooth process. However, problems are still clearly prevalent, and so change has not happened, and the “grace period” that might have been requested decades ago is long finished.

So, what are we, as people connected to NGOs and faith-based groups doing with this info? How are we taking active steps to ensure full inclusion, instead of turning a blind eye and hoping nobody notices?

……………………………

Looking for sustainable, plant-based or zero-waste info or items? Check out the MennoAdventures website and online store!

CBC.ca

Some of you may remember hearing parts of his story several years ago. Now, Hassan Al Kontar has written a book about his experience, since he was welcomed into Canada as a refugee. I haven’t read the book yet, but it is on my e-reader, waiting for me to start (hopefully soon!)

Here is a bit of an update – and his perspective on what he has learned, as a refugee, and in a pandemic.

A group of volunteers, headed by Laurie Cooper of Whistler, B.C., learned about Al Kontar’s plight and organized on his behalf.

Cooper dubbed herself Al Kontar’s “Canadian mom.” She crowdsourced money for him, helped him navigate the asylum system, lobbied the government and co-ordinated with air travellers around the world to hook him up with food, money and supplies — including, of course, his much beloved coffee.

“They restored my faith in humanity,” he said.

……………….

“That’s why my story is not only the Syrian war story. It’s also [about] a country called Canada and people called Canadians,” he said. “Because of them, I am now permanently safe.”

CBC

In addition to working on and speaking on refugee related issues, now that he is safely settled in Canada, Al Kontar has also spoken with the CBC of the impacts of the pandemic, and the related restrictions, especially as they started relatively soon after he had arrived in Canada.

The key to resilience and survival, he says, lies in having empathy for others. During the first couple of weeks of the pandemic, Al Kontar opened his door to find a bag of snacks that an anonymous person had left for him. He took this as an inspiration to volunteer at a food bank.

“If we are going to manage to beat this virus it’s through this kind of behaviour,” he said. (Bold mine)

CBC

It is imperative that we change our systems (including ending wars, actively and seriously addressing our climate crisis etc), so that people are never forced to flee their homes, and make difficult choices. At the same time, there remain countless reasons why people may want to – or need to – leave and resettle somewhere else. It is, without a doubt, our job to welcome others with open arms, every time. It is the right thing to do, and we need to find ways to be welcoming and inclusive, every time. 😀

More details:

• BBC Hassan al-Kontar: Who is the man trapped in an airport helping now?
• Globe: I was a Syrian refugee, trapped in an airport. Now, Canada is my home – and this is what that means to me

…………………………………..

Looking for zero-waste, plant-based or sustainable items? Check out the MennoAdventures online store! There are always lots of great deals to be found, with our many amazing partners! Happy browsing!

As with most things in life, we can not resolve problems until we fully, honestly admit the truth. Whether it’s the Middle East, COVID, the climate crisis, an inter-personal issue or anything else, we can’t fix what we don’t acknowledge. With honestly, hard work and determination to face problems head-on, we can create a better world. 💛

…………………………………………

Looking for zero-waste, plant-based or sustainable items? Check out the MennoAdventures online store! There are always lots of great deals to be found, with our many amazing partners! Happy browsing! 😀

The ways we do things, within and outside of the non-profit world, is constantly evolving. COVID, along with many other challenges, are forcing a reckoning on what our “new normal” will look like. In my opinion, one of our biggest shortfalls, in the NGO world, is the frequency with which organizations compete for donors/funds/projects – or start a new org instead of supporting an existing organization – when supporting/collaborating would be a much more appropriate choice.

We work in this field because we desire a better, fairer, more equitable world – but sometimes forget to make sure that our actual work methods follow the same high standards we set for our external projects. If we are working on a peacebuilding project, why can’t we make peace with another NGO and collaborate instead of competing?

Although based on the US (and written for the American context), Non-Profit Impact Pledge is one step in the right direction, and is just as applicable globally as within the US. The commitments have two parts: From NGOs and from Funders and Donors. Both are important, in their own way, to helping reshape the sector as a whole, and to creating more positive change in the world — which is so critically needed.

To our communities and all those who benefit from the work of nonprofits…,

Our country is at a turning point, and so is the nonprofit sector. The disparate economic and social fallout from COVID-19 and the widespread reckoning with racial justice have put a spotlight on many long-standing problems with philanthropy and with the way nonprofits work. We cannot avoid these problems any longer, nor do we wish for things to return “to normal.” Our old way of existence, and many of our sector’s past practices for collaborating with funders, donors and our communities (while often well-intentioned), are broken. Instead, we wish to create a new future for the nonprofit sector, for the good of all.

As our country starts down the long road toward recovery from a tumultuous 2020, demand for our services continues to grow, resources continue to shrink, and outmoded systems and ways of thinking seem determined to keep our impact small. It has never been more challenging to run and sustain an effective nonprofit organization, but it has also never been more important, and we will rise up in the face of these challenges.

That is why we take this pledge and double down on these 10 commitments to you, the people and communities we work with. We also ask our donors, funders and those who support the sector to make a similar set of commitments to us.

Together, we can create a better future for our sector, for the good of all.

NP Impact Pledge

Among the 10 commitments in the pledge, all are important in their own way, and all contribute to better organizations, which are better able to make positive contributions, both locally and globally. Here is one example.

Commitment 1
We will collaborate, not compete.
We recognize that we can do more good for our communities together than we can do alone. We will focus our efforts on making a specific contribution that only our organization can make, and when we encounter other organizations doing similar work, we commit to closely collaborating, partnering or merging with them rather than competing in an effort to maximize our collective impact. (Bold mine).

NP Impact Pledge

And, I would add – we commit to supporting others before staring a new NGO that is likely to compete with others, when supporting or joining is a more appropriate and sustainable choice for the sector as a whole.

Want to add your name to the pledge? Follow the link to sign up – and add your name, with others, to commit to a better NGO sector.

……………………

Looking for more NGO resources? Check the website for more info. Looking for more sustainability/zero-waste resources? Check out the online store!

Reference: Tracy Ebarb: National Director of the National Association of Nonprofit Organizations & Executives (NANOE) 

I recently came across this article (see link above, and it’s posted on the NGO section of my website, along with other resources) and wanted to share it here, as well. While much of it I agree with, I have a few small points of possible disagreement (although it may be a misinterpretation of wording, not content).

The real data from National Center on Charitable Statistics reveals that approximately 30% of nonprofits fail to exist after 10 years, and according to Forbes, over half of all nonprofits that are chartered are destined to fail or stall within a few years due to leadership issues and the lack of a strategic plan, among other things.

Nanoe

Within in the NGO world, there is a lot of great work being done. At the same time, the cycle above (new NGOs starting, failing, and opening up a spot for the next one to open and then fail) is a significant problem. In my experience, it’s a problem that is not being talked about enough, and I think we can change that. So, let’s talk. 🙂

Reason #1: Empty Optimism – or Pie in the Sky Dreams (without the proper ingredients to bake a pie)
I’ve seen some of the best, most needed (in my view), and earnest efforts falter and fail because the leaders simply did not accurately calculate the amount of support that would be available and the alliances and partnerships that they would need to support their humble beginnings. In other words – they lacked a sound business plan upon which to build a platform for success. The old saying ‘to fail to plan is to plan to fail’ is so very, very true. (Bold mine).

Nanoe

Many of the reasons given are clear, and I have no disagreement. Lack of strategic plans, failure to develop a strong organizational leadership team (outside of the founding CEO) and others are clearly top of the list for why countless small NGOs fail to make it through the first few years, and the transition to a new CEO. I have some disagreement with point #6:

Misplacing Priority #1 – or forgetting who the ‘real boss’ is
At the end of the day, for nonprofit organizations – Money is more important than Mission. Nonprofits exist to serve and to meet needs on a global scale, and we care deeply for the causes we embrace, often to the detriment of our funders. A successful nonprofit knows that their #1 Customer is their donors, period. Without the donors, there would be no impact, no people served, no mouths fed, no backs clothed. Those we serve are important, but if we really want to have an impact, we must take care of our donors first, we must make sure that our programs are designed to give our donors an opportunity to fulfill the goals they have for their philanthropy, and then constantly communicate to them the impact their dollars are having. And when it comes to taking care of donors, relationships, personal relationships are KING! No fancy CRM or automated gift response mechanism will ever trump a personal relationship.

Nanoe

I agree that NGOs need money to operate, and that NGOs need to be clear, open and transparent with donors about what they are doing, why they are doing it, and how the money is being spent. I do not agree, however, that as non-profits, we are here to serve the donors. Rather, the organization and the donors together are working together for greater good, and to serve the communities in which we work. We share a common goal, and are on the same time to reach our goals.

Here is the author’s summary, along with the items earlier in the article (Nanoe) of the primary reasons NGOs fail:

• Not Having a Qualified Leader.
• No Website Or Poorly Designed Website.
• Poor Planning and Record Keeping
• Poor Accounting and Money Management
• Marketing Only to Large Donors and Not Thinking Smaller Donors are Just As Important
• Nonprofit Doesn’t Mean Tax Exempt.
• Ultimately, the real reason nonprofits fail is because they shouldn’t have existed in the first place. (Bold mine).

One that I would add (perhaps as a subset of leadership or money management) is the expectation that goods and services (rent, IT support, computers, staff time, experts/consultants, advertising, pro bono work etc etc) are somehow automatically “owed” to the org, by virtue of the fact that the org is trying to do something good or is a registered non-profit. Volunteer recruitment is important, but does not substitute for a budget to cover the basic costs of running an organization and paying for the goods, services and skills that you need to get the job done. If you don’t have the money (or a plan to get money) to pay for any of the basic items or staff that are required to run an organization, you don’t have a viable plan yet.

And, further to his first point(s), I would emphasize that failure to plan (essentially variations on “I have never run an NGO and have no idea how to do it. I have a different full-time job, no strategic plans, no website and no money, but I’m sure that if I just start, everyone will hand me money, computers, a building and their expertise for free and it will all work out, because I’m such a nice person and I have a nice goal…”) is one of the most common mistakes I’ve seen. Failure to plan also includes lack of plans for how to successfully hand over the project from the founding CEO, in a reasonable time frame. (Considering starting a new NGO? Start at the end with your planning: Do you have a viable plan to hand the org to a new CEO in 10-15 years?)

On a related note, failure to seriously support other existing orgs that are already working in the same space (before starting a new org), is one of the biggest failures that I have come across.

For those of you in the non-profit world, do you have anything to add? Any adjustments you would make to the list?

2020 was not the year that any of us were expecting, when the year began. A global pandemic forced a radical reset of how the world operates, in countless ways. Some of those changes were relatively easy – such as office workers switching to more remote meetings, with less travel for in person work. Other changes were much more difficult – in addition to the catastrophic death toll that results from any pandemic or other major crisis. Some of these changes, however, have resulted in a significant – if temporary – reduction in our emissions. Contrary to the frequently asked question – “When will things go back to the way they were?” – we were, globally, on a trajectory that was not sustainable. Therefore, we should, instead, be asking “How can we come out of this pandemic to something better than what we had before?” (as many people are already doing).

• Covid Took a Bite From U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2020: NYT
• BBC News – Climate change: US emissions in 2020 in biggest fall since WWII
• Amid 2020’s gloom, there are reasons to be hopeful about the climate in 2021 Guardian
• InsideClimate News: Many Scientists Now Say Global Warming Could Stop Relatively Quickly After Emissions Go to Zero.
• InsideClimate News: Many Scientists Now Say Global Warming Could Stop Relatively Quickly After Emissions Go to Zero.
• Lloyd’s market to quit fossil fuel insurance by 2030: Guardian

What does coming out of this to a new, better normal look like? What changes do we need to keep? What new changes will we still need to make? There is not the space here to allow for a comprehensive answer, but there are a few key pieces to highlight:

• We must continue with the significant, rapid reduction in emissions that we saw during this pandemic. The rapid pace of change that happened showed that change is possible, where there is a will. Now, we need to maintain the momentum of these changes, without the catastrophic pressure that comes from a global pandemic. Globally, we all need to act fast, without waiting for others who might be further behind in this process.
• A Universal Basic Income is essential, for many reasons, and should be implemented as soon as possible.
• Multi-party systems, with proportional representation, seemed to fair better (based on research that others have done), and also are key to reducing polarization and misinformation campaigns. Countries that still have First-Past-The-Post or other non-proportional systems should put serious effort into switching as soon as possible.
• Food and travel/transportation are big areas of emissions, both of which we have significant control over in our daily lives. Changes are critical – and will need to go beyond what is easy or comfortable at times.

Moving into a better 2021 – and beyond – means living within our planetary boundaries, not taking more than our fair share and living simply, in balance with our global neighbours and with the earth. (Photo Credit)

NOTE: The Facebook boycott is still ongoing. Please share widely in your circles, and subscribe to newsletter updates on the website to stay up to date on what is happening at Menno Adventures! 🙂

There are more philanthropists than ever before. Each year they give tens of billions to charitable causes. So how come inequality keeps rising? 

Guardian

A long read, but well worth it. Not saying that I absolutely agree with every detail (specifically around the role of the non-profit world), but the general idea that I want to pull out from here is this:

Regardless of whether the ultra-wealthy occassionally use their wealth for something that happens to benefit the rest of the world, that doesn’t justify the massive wealth imbalance that allows them to be so “generous.” If CEOs and others paid their fair share in taxes, if corporations truly paid the true cost of their operations (including cleaning up pollution), if companies capped CEOs salaries (including benefits) at something reasonable and paid all staff a living wage with good benefits, if we rethink the relationship between how public goods benefit private profit, the ultra-wealthy would have a lot less money to “donate.” Likewise, at that point, we would have a lot less concern that the interests of a handful of individuals are displacing the work of government and civil society.

Here’s a bit of context to help understand what we are up against…

To understand how rich billionaires really are, use this calculator. (Guardian) (See below)

How Long Does It Take Tech CEOs to Earn Your Salary? Here

Extreme wealth inequality has a variety of negative impacts, even when some of that wealth happens to be used for things that some people see value in, as the opposite is also true. Just as someone can buy a policy or change that someone might like, someone else can just as easily buy off a government to get a policy that people strongly oppose

Yet the priorities of plutocracy, rule by the rich, and democracy, rule by the people, often differ. The personal choices of the rich do not closely match the spending choices of democratically elected governments. A major research study from 2013 revealed that the richest 1% of Americans are considerably more rightwing than the public as a whole on issues of taxation, economic regulation and especially welfare programmes for the poor. Many of the richest 0.1% – individuals worth more than $40m – want to cut social security and healthcare. They are less supportive of a minimum wage than the rest of the population. They favour decreased government regulation of big corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wall Street and the City of London. (Bold mine.)

Here

And also…

The common assumption that philanthropy automatically results in a redistribution of money is wrong. A lot of elite philanthropy is about elite causes. Rather than making the world a better place, it largely reinforces the world as it is. Philanthropy very often favours the rich – and no one holds philanthropists to account for it.

Here

And one more quote…

Philanthropy is always an expression of power. Giving often depends on the personal whims of super-rich individuals. Sometimes these coincide with the priorities of society, but at other times they contradict or undermine them. Increasingly, questions have begun to be raised about the impact these mega-donations are having upon the priorities of society.

There are a number of tensions inherent in the relationship between philanthropy and democracy. For all the huge benefits modern philanthropy can bring, the sheer scale of contemporary giving can skew spending in areas such as education and healthcare, to the extent that it can overwhelm the priorities of democratically elected governments and local authorities.

Here

To be clear, this is not, in any way, suggesting that non-profits, civil society or good governance are futile. Rather, it is the opposite – they are so critically important that they can not be risked to appease the personal whims of the ultra-wealthy. A better system is possible, if everyone truly pays their fair share. 🙂

I saw a quote on social media few days ago, and am sharing it here. While I was searching for that one, I came across a couple of others, that I am sharing as well. Happy Monday!

These quotes are relevant in all of the areas that we talk about here – development, food, sustainability and others. As we all deal with this pandemic, and the climate crisis, our collective failure to listen to experts – who have been calling for massive changes to prevent a climate crisis for decades – can not be ignored. Changes to our choices – individually and collectively – need to be radically rethought, so that we come out of this pandemic with a Green New Deal (in various forms, locally and globally), with related changes to how we live, work, eat, use energy, get from place to place and support each other collectively, among others.

And a couple more…

………….

Donations to support this work are graciously accepted. Details on the website. Thank you for your support!