Are Charity Organisations just Prolonging the Suffering?

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Oscar Wilde wrote in his The Soul of Man under Socialism:

[People] find themselves surrounded by hideous poverty, by hideous ugliness, by hideous starvation. It is inevitable that they should be strongly moved by all this... Accordingly, with admirable though misdirected intentions, they very seriously and very sentimentally set themselves to the task of remedying the evils that they see. But their remedies do not cure the disease: they merely prolong it. Indeed, their remedies are part of the disease.

They try to solve the problem of poverty, for instance, by keeping the poor alive; or, in the case of a very advanced school, by amusing the poor.

But this is not a solution: it is an aggravation of the difficulty. The proper aim is to try and reconstruct society on such a basis that poverty will be impossible. And the altruistic virtues have really prevented the carrying out of this aim. Just as the worst slave-owners were those who were kind to their slaves, and so prevented the horror of the system being realised by those who suffered from it, and understood by those who contemplated it, so, in the present state of things in England, the people who do most harm are the people who try to do most good; and at last we have had the spectacle of men who have really studied the problem and know the life - educated men who live in the East End - coming forward and imploring the community to restrain its altruistic impulses of charity, benevolence, and the like. They do so on the ground that such charity degrades and demoralises. They are perfectly right. Charity creates a multitude of sins.

There is also this to be said. It is immoral to use private property in order to alleviate the horrible evils that result from the institution of private property.

Is Wilde right? Do we do more harm than good in giving money to the likes of Trócara? Are we really just helping to prop up criminal regimes, who might be overthrown if they did not get support for the charity organisations?
 


eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
Last x-mas people were fooling themselves, they were prepared to splurge in the knowledge that we 'have turned a corner', i hate to say this but i expect a rise in the number of suicides during the forthcoming winter months, the one thing always ignored during an economic crisis is the human cost.

The cynic in me is glad that this depresion will maybe shake the disenfranchised and the rest of society out of this consumer rat race of an existenct otherwise known as life
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Certainly, people seem to be taking a new perspective on life.
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
Certainly, people seem to be taking a new perspective on life.
To what end?

History has taught us that the greatest changes in human history are foisted upon us, by that i mean the factors of change aren't deliberatly engineered they are side effects.

If you know what i mean
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
87,215
No. Charitable donations may be misdirected or wasted, but even if this is the case for the majority of the funds that does not mean that the expenditure is not justified given the good which is done by the funds which do get through. The delivery mechanisms should be improved, rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
 

Radix

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2010
Messages
9,892
Oscar Wilde wrote in his The Soul of Man under Socialism:

[People] find themselves surrounded by hideous poverty, by hideous ugliness, by hideous starvation. It is inevitable that they should be strongly moved by all this... Accordingly, with admirable though misdirected intentions, they very seriously and very sentimentally set themselves to the task of remedying the evils that they see. But their remedies do not cure the disease: they merely prolong it. Indeed, their remedies are part of the disease.

They try to solve the problem of poverty, for instance, by keeping the poor alive; or, in the case of a very advanced school, by amusing the poor.

But this is not a solution: it is an aggravation of the difficulty. The proper aim is to try and reconstruct society on such a basis that poverty will be impossible. And the altruistic virtues have really prevented the carrying out of this aim. Just as the worst slave-owners were those who were kind to their slaves, and so prevented the horror of the system being realised by those who suffered from it, and understood by those who contemplated it, so, in the present state of things in England, the people who do most harm are the people who try to do most good; and at last we have had the spectacle of men who have really studied the problem and know the life - educated men who live in the East End - coming forward and imploring the community to restrain its altruistic impulses of charity, benevolence, and the like. They do so on the ground that such charity degrades and demoralises. They are perfectly right. Charity creates a multitude of sins.

There is also this to be said. It is immoral to use private property in order to alleviate the horrible evils that result from the institution of private property.

Is Wilde right? Do we do more harm than good in giving money to the likes of Trócara? Are we really just helping to prop up criminal regimes, who might be overthrown if they did not get support for the charity organisations?
Surprised at you Cael!

Is it not better to light a candle rather than curse the darkness?

Positivity suggest that if we want to make an omlette, then surely we must first break eggs.

Are you for real with this thread?:cry:
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
To what end?

History has taught us that the greatest changes in human history are foisted upon us, by that i mean the factors of change aren't deliberatly engineered they are side effects.

If you know what i mean
Yes, Marx suggests that technology is the major influence in determining social structure. That has certainly been the case up till now. But, perhaps we can start to consciously take our own destiny into our own care.
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
No. Charitable donations may be misdirected or wasted, but even if this is the case for the majority of the funds that does not mean that the expenditure is not justified given the good which is done by the funds which do get through. The delivery mechanisms should be improved, rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
I think you misunderstand the OP, or else i do, the premise exists that as long as those at the bottom of society have a safety net, then they'll never achieve their true potiential, until we are faced with starvation we won't fight for ourselves.

Charity organisations for all the good they do, and i speak as someone who has had to lean on them prolong the day until the disenfranchised finally look for their share
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Surprised at you Cael!

Is it not better to light a candle rather than curse the darkness?

Positivity suggest that if we want to make an omlette, then surely we must first break eggs.

Are you for real with this thread?:cry:
I think its a very difficult question. If you see a hungry child, you would need to be a brute not to give it something to eat, if you could. But, at the same time, its unquestionably true that corrupt regimes all over the world use charity as a method of staying in power, i.e. of keeping the level of public anger just below the level where they would actually have to really do something. The same can be said in Ireland about the dole. One of the main advocates of the dole was Winston Churchill. He first wanted to castrate the unemployed, but when his party suggested that this was a bit extreme, he suggested the dole as a method of keeping unemployed men fixed in one place and to stop them from joining Revolutionary organisations. So, the dole is not there to help the unemployed. Just the opposite. Its there to metaphorically castrate them.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
No. Charitable donations may be misdirected or wasted, but even if this is the case for the majority of the funds that does not mean that the expenditure is not justified given the good which is done by the funds which do get through. The delivery mechanisms should be improved, rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Im certainly not suggesting that we should not help the poor. But are we helping them when we help to keep them docile and obedient? I would say not. Personally, I would prefer to give money to the likes of the Maoists in India than to Trócara.
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
Yes, Marx suggests that technology is the major influence in determining social structure. That has certainly been the case up till now. But, perhaps we can start to consciously take our own destiny into our own care.
Then maybe this depression will be the catalyst for a better society, little by little.
 

new jewell

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2009
Messages
407
Grab them by their hearts and their minds will follow....did'nt work,Grab them by their balls and their minds will follow...did'nt work...Grab them by their pockets and their minds will follow ..did'nt work.You see ,you have to grab them by their minds,..as the old maxim stated educate to agitate.There is a bigger campaign to allow Ireland vote in the x factor than an election,the left needs it's own red top media.Im not saying sink to their level just deal with it.
 
Joined
Sep 29, 2010
Messages
48
Oscar Wilde wrote in his The Soul of Man under Socialism:

[People] find themselves surrounded by hideous poverty, by hideous ugliness, by hideous starvation. It is inevitable that they should be strongly moved by all this... Accordingly, with admirable though misdirected intentions, they very seriously and very sentimentally set themselves to the task of remedying the evils that they see. But their remedies do not cure the disease: they merely prolong it. Indeed, their remedies are part of the disease.

They try to solve the problem of poverty, for instance, by keeping the poor alive; or, in the case of a very advanced school, by amusing the poor.

But this is not a solution: it is an aggravation of the difficulty. The proper aim is to try and reconstruct society on such a basis that poverty will be impossible. And the altruistic virtues have really prevented the carrying out of this aim. Just as the worst slave-owners were those who were kind to their slaves, and so prevented the horror of the system being realised by those who suffered from it, and understood by those who contemplated it, so, in the present state of things in England, the people who do most harm are the people who try to do most good; and at last we have had the spectacle of men who have really studied the problem and know the life - educated men who live in the East End - coming forward and imploring the community to restrain its altruistic impulses of charity, benevolence, and the like. They do so on the ground that such charity degrades and demoralises. They are perfectly right. Charity creates a multitude of sins.

There is also this to be said. It is immoral to use private property in order to alleviate the horrible evils that result from the institution of private property.

Is Wilde right? Do we do more harm than good in giving money to the likes of Trócara? Are we really just helping to prop up criminal regimes, who might be overthrown if they did not get support for the charity organisations?
Wilde was wrong. Charity would not be needed but for the multitude of sins. Capitalism, control of means of production, reliance on wage labour, etc.
The primacy of profit in our way of life corrupts, and attracts the corrupt.
People who are born disadvantage in this system generally remain disadvantaged.

Today charity comes under the banner of civil society, separate from the state in theory but not in Ireland thanks to FF. Funding controls and 'partnership' (2002) has institutionalised civil society and now the state dictates what 'your' community needs, effectively gagging any challenge to social policies. Civil society/charity identifies the gapping hole (or blatant neglect) in government policies, generally being, unregulated clientelistic greed.

Claiming our future 30 Oct RDS.
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
87,215
I think you misunderstand the OP, or else i do, the premise exists that as long as those at the bottom of society have a safety net, then they'll never achieve their true potiential, until we are faced with starvation we won't fight for ourselves.

Charity organisations for all the good they do, and i speak as someone who has had to lean on them prolong the day until the disenfranchised finally look for their share
I don't know how you could confirm or refute that hypothesis, and I would certainly not want to remove a safety net until I was certain that the result would not be that people would simply hit the ground hard rather than sprout wings and save themselves, to stretch the metaphor.
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
87,215
Im certainly not suggesting that we should not help the poor. But are we helping them when we help to keep them docile and obedient? I would say not. Personally, I would prefer to give money to the likes of the Maoists in India than to Trócara.
How does Trócara keep people 'docile and obedient'?
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
How does Trócara keep people 'docile and obedient'?
By offering them the false hope that their situation might improve within capitalism. Capitalism needs a vast army of impoverished workers for it to survive - and they are it.
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
How does Trócara keep people 'docile and obedient'?
Differant reality, Trócara deals with Afircans in desperate need, life or death. Cael, imo is talking about the dole, it's all relative.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Differant reality, Trócara deals with Afircans in desperate need, life or death. Cael, imo is talking about the dole, it's all relative.
I'm talking about all of it really. When I read that section from Wilde, it struck me as having an undeniable truth. But, in relation to the dole, there are 500,000 people on the dole in Ireland. Its certain that if the dole wasnt there, this half a million people would stop this rogue government in its tracks and start to do things properly in this country.
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
I'm talking about all of it really. When I read that section from Wilde, it struck me as having an undeniable truth. But, in relation to the dole, there are 500,000 people on the dole in Ireland. Its certain that if the dole wasnt there, this half a million people would stop this rogue government in its tracks and start to do things properly in this country.
Well we may still get to find out. A soon as the IMF come in.

It's obvious that the only people willing to sacrifice anything are the unemployed, the sick, the middle income earners, mortgage holders, private and public sector workers. FF and their beneficiaries, the HSE and FAS mandarins the quango appointees the senators etc etc have only their own interest at heart.

Let them cut and cut some more they'll only manage to cut the working class into a corner, it's not until then will we see who'll triumph, the masses or the privillaged few, the bolsevicks as well you know Cael didn't gain political ground from the status quo, it wasn't until the poor were faced with a fight or die scenario that lenin grab their imagination and harnessed their raw power
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Well we may still get to find out. A soon as the IMF come in.

It's obvious that the only people willing to sacrifice anything are the unemployed, the sick, the middle income earners, mortgage holders, private and public sector workers. FF and their beneficiaries, the HSE and FAS mandarins the quango appointees the senators etc etc have only their own interest at heart.

Let them cut and cut some more they'll only manage to cut the working class into a corner, it's not until then will we see who'll triumph, the masses or the privillaged few, the bolsevicks as well you know Cael didn't gain political ground from the status quo, it wasn't until the poor were faced with a fight or die scenario that lenin grab their imagination and harnessed their raw power
Yes, you are right there. But, I suspect that the EU will not allow anything too drastic to happen - otherwise Revolution could spread from Ireland. The trick for the ruling class will be to cut and cut, but to stop cutting just before they have driven the people to open revolt.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top