CharityVillage NewsWeek: Audience Opinions

News & Events

Path: Main Street : NewsWeek : Op/Ed : Audience Opinions

In a recent Globe and Mail column, Robert Fulford wonders whether we live in a time when displayed compassion has largely replaced compassionate action as a way to demonstrate that we are "good people." He says, "Compassion, in our time, is essentially a performance art," and points to public figures like Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and Preston Manning as skilled practitioners of "feelings displayed for show."
Is this view too cynical? Do most people speak more compassionately than they behave? Do our public leaders use compassionate rhetoric to get votes, and then act without compassion when elected?

It is not a bad thing-it's the new caring through the media but for whom??
I think we as nonprofits should grab on to these folks and entice them to including the word donor as they milk the media.!!!!! Lets face it their opportunity could be ours.
Terry Harber,Fundraiser, Toronto Intergenerational Partnerships

I belong to the school of thought that believes actions speak louder than words. That means, in the context of the query about compassion, that what counts are compassionate acts. It isn't so important therefore whether these acts are signalled ahead of time by rhetoric about compassion. What is disturbing is that those who make these promises can in no way be held to them.
If, as Fulford says, politicians are elected on the basis of such promises - and we need a way to assess how much weight these kinds of promises had in the electoral victory - then we could do something for compassion and the democratic process by insisting that those promises be kept. These ways may not be the usual ones, but unless we try them, we'll never know if the politicians would act if they knew it really mattered to us.
For instance, most of know that helping the homeless will mean diverting money that is earmarked for popular public works. Well, we need to say that. Currently, the issue is not framed as either/or which is reality and the usual reason that compassion is defeated but as an extra - for which the money just doesn't appear. We need to ask, in our newspaper columns what our political candidates are personally willing to give up if their ideas are not implemented. Even, as is likely, if no answers are provided to these questions, that in itself will surface the problem.
Saxon Harding

I believe those trying to win the public approval sometimes get caught up in rhetoric that pleases, without thinking through the logic and logistics of what they're saying. I think they are sometimes dismayed when, later on, they find they can't fulfill their promises because of politics, funding, social pressure, etc. Of course, in some instances there may be a conscious effort to deceive, but I'd hope that is rare. The old saying, "the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak," can explain much of these unfulfilled promises.

I think Mr Fulford is totally right. In the gallery of politicians holding a langage and acting otherwise we could add Paul Martin, Lucien Bouchard, Jean Chrétien...etc.
Even if I am an independentist, it is clear for me that the PQ government is expert in using deceiving and misleading language. An example ? The department responsible for social welfare is now named "employment and solidarity", while the basic amount for a person on welfare was 508 $ in 1988 and is now 490 $ !!! But even compassion is not enough if it is not doubled with congruous action. I strongly believe community organization and empowerment-oriented interventions are more appropriate than charity alone.
Am I wrong ? I think a lot of affluent people have no compassion for poor people. Otherwise, poverty would be much less important than it is. Cheerio !
Jean-Robert Primeau

All of us love to be recognized; hence, we look for opportunities for even our charity to be rewarded with praise. This practice calls into question our true motivations, which should be solely focused on the cause at hand, and not on the 'reward' we're likely to get for donating time/money/goods/services. As usual, one Person said it best:
"Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.
"So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do...and on the streets, to be honoured by men...But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."
-- Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew 6:1-4.
And shouldn't God's blessing be sufficient?
Margaret Blank

I have seen many public officials say one thing then do another. in our culture - North American Native, action speaks louder than words. However, like a bird with its two wings, you can not have one without the other. On one side you have actions and the other words. What helps that bird fly straight is the principles that bird lives by.
Personally, i think people (birds that do not fly straight) and politics do not mix for evident reasons. Reasons such as Ronald Reagan's 'Iranian arms sale'. The public is led to believe the man was not involved leaving Oli (sic) North as the scapegoat. Bill Clinton playing head games with the American people.
Since I am of a different culture, I ask why do people do such things? How can they live with themselves after covering up such acts of demoralized principles.
If man is to live and see another generation go on, then we need more people who can fly straight all the time. But the reality of people in power who fly straight is unlikely.
I'll close by saying, we the red man will continue to watch the white man slowly kill himself. We can only hope and pray that they do not kill everybody on this place we call mother earth.
Nya:weh gowa!
Carmen T

I don't think Fulford was being overly cynical. How much money do charitable organizations spend on developing a compassionate appearance through extravagant promotions as a matter of survival, because that is what is desired by many of their private and public sector funders? This is money that could be used instead to support the type of hands-on work that really benefits those in need. While I believe it is essential that non-profit organizations work to improve their accountability and efficiency, I fear that the constant pressure to move to a "business model" of management will lead increasingly to the type of superficial society that Fulford is warning us about.
Keenan Wellar, Executive Director, Special Needs Network (SNN)

September 22, 1998
Mr.Carl Juneau, Assistant Director
of Charities Division of the Revenue Canada.
400 Cumberland Street, 5th Floor
Ottawa, ON K1A 0L5
AN OFFICIAL COMPLAINT
In 1988 I and my former mixed family were brought to Canada almost against our will and without my/ our consent in that regard. How it has happened you will learn from the submitted documents for your attention and actions.But before you will be able to do it yourself I am explaining "what has been done to me/us by that charitable institution-the United Church of Canada." I am a man who was deliberately and prolongly persecuted-tortured by the Communist system with its famous "KGB and PUNITIVE ME- DICINE" for my official protest against an occupation of Czechoslovakia by the Warsaw Pact countries on August 21 of 1968, as well as for my active fighting for the violated human rights of needy Jewish people, who suffered from the Soviet anti-Semites under the criminal leadership of communist regime. Nevertheless that I was born in a perfect condition and without a hereditary chronicle diseases but the Communist criminals during 20 years of physically and mentally abusing my body almost succeeded in ruining my health.Therefore, after many years of denial in exit visas by the Kremlin, when I had legally immigrated to the West and what have been done with the only purpose: to expose and to bring those my perpetrators-torturers to Justice and make them to pay for my ruined health as well as for all those sufferings and pain they have inflicted upon me. In 1988 in Rome I have asked the Federal government of Canada to grant me the status of politically persecuted person but my request was ignored. When the World Council of Churches has found the above mentioned sponsor, I've asked the WCC to famil- iarize me with their obligations towards us.Frankly speaking, I have demanded to show me the Master- Sponsorship agreement but I was denied of seeing such an important legal document. And when I re- fused to accept that prospective church as our sponsor, then I was intimidated by the WCC that all of us will simply die from starvation on the Rome&rsqu;fs streets if I/we will not go to Canada.During that short meeting through an interpreter I was orally assured by the Director of the Rome&rsqu;fs office of WCC Miss P.Hutchings that the United Church of Canada will provide me/our family with all possible protection and support.They will ask on my behalf the Federal government of Canada for an additional financial help and services,as I was destroyed by the Soviet KGB. But in reality,after having been brought into Canada I was exploited for material reasons, deprived of my/our insured for $9000.00 US belongings, intimidated, blackmailed, abused mentally and physically, threatened with death threats because of my intent to sue the UCC for damages inflicted upon me/us.I was harmed in every possible ways by them. Twice during last ten years e.g. April 1993 and August 1996 I was forced to run for my safety outside of Canada and twice as much I was forcibly deported back into an extremely hostile and very dangerous for me land. During requested and inspired by the Federal government of Canada my de- tentions in Europe I was physically beaten, robbed of my retroactive CPP payment i.e. $5000.00 US, put into the Haarlem prison in the Netherlands in 1996, humiliated and caused unlimited harm. As a result of such a grave mistreatment by so many parties I have became a severely disable man with diagnosis the major chronic depression.As result of all of the above said I have lost my family and was put into a total destitution and misery by such an immoral but an extremely greedy charitable institution.Therefore as the true victim of the United Church of Canada I urge the Revenue of Canada to rescind the non-profit status granted to that Church."It is very painful,harmful and troubling for me their victim to see that the "Church," whose identity centers on exploitation, greedy self-enrichment, involvement into a pro-communist political activities (e.g.boycotting the USA because of Helms-Bur- ton Act towards the Castro&rsqu;fs communist Cuba) should be used tax-exempt status." By the rules of law any charitable non-governmental and non-profitable organization strictly forbidden to be involved in any sort of political activities."The UCC is far from being the charitable institution committed to be a raw model but to the contrary, they've drowned into a fraud, abuse of authority, greediness,rotten corruption, cover-up and what is in a total contradiction in regard to their legal status." "As their vic- tim I have the right to question the Revenue of Canada decision allowing this "Church" the benefits afforded to legitimate non-profit,non-political,non-governmental charitable institutions and urging you to revoke their license what allows that "Church" to issue a tax-deductible receipts for a prospective but deceived donors in solicitation from them funds under a pretense of care for the needy people." This status does not belong to the United Church of Canada and that particular institution shouldn't be safeguarded as a bona fide charity.
Yours very truly,
Mr.Lars-Ivar Andersson. Disable victim of the United Church and the Federal government of Canada. Member of the International Association of Former Soviet Political Prisoners and Victims of Communist Regime.Membership No.210