February 19, 2008

So I just finished an article in the December 2007 issue of Alliance Magazine (unfortunately it’s not listed as a free article at http://www.alliancemagazine.org/free/ ), but it basically aired the frustrations of an organization obtaining a ‘philanthropic status’ and how ‘philanthropy’ should be embedded in a society (as in...enabling each society to define philanthropy for itself) rather than having it applied (as it has historically been done) as a globally accepted and understood classification of activity. 
 
 
The author offers that ‘even burial is very much a philanthropic event.’ 

I’m sorry….but unless the bereaved can:
 
 
A) Transparently measure the social impact of putting somebody in the grave;
B) Accept donations during the funeral and direct them to the local community foundation, or
C) Carry out the deceased person’s bequest  to benefit a local NPO,
 
 
Ain’t nothing philanthropic about a funeral. 
 
I say all this to support my belief that we must protect our philanthropy based-vernacular.  We can’t just throw words like ‘philanthropy’ around to describe conditions that really aren’t well….philanthropic. 

The word ‘philanthropy’ adds a certain degree of credibility to an organization’s activities.  It means that the organization’s intentions and actions are honest, measurable, and able to be supported by excruciatingly painful mounds of paperwork. 
 
Econ heads would be outraged if folks threw around terms like bull and bear markets to describe purchasing tendencies at the local produce stand.  
 
They protect their language….that way they can trust the institutions that use it.