Opinion

UW loves charity, as long as it isn’t hard

Americans are good at many things. We know how to devote as little energy as possible to driving while we’re on the phone with friends updating them about our kickass weekend. We can order a grande nonfat no-whip white chocolate mocha without a hint of irony. We can look like model citizens by liking groups on Facebook that we really know nothing about in between rounds of Farmville. We also excel at raising awareness about important issues, like AIDS, that we can totally cure if enough people wear a plastic bracelet.

Being on a liberal college campus, we have hundreds of opportunities to join clubs, hear speakers and support causes. We are bombarded with ways to get involved and make a difference. There are petitions to sign, rallies to attend, and e-mail lists to get on for any cause you could imagine. Some causes have even become campus-wide. There have been hugely successful charity events that have raised awareness on issues that may have been neglected. Occasionally, money has even been raised. But the question to consider is: why do students feel compelled to become involved in the first place?

Earlier this semester, the comedian Christian Lander came to the Union with his “Stuff White People Like” Tour. One of his gags was that white people like raising awareness about problems but letting other people deal with actually solving them. He said charity events featured white people doing things they already like, such as having dinners, participating in runs or selling T-shirts, but with the added bonus of feeling satisfied that they had made a difference. While this was a comedic tour specifically targeted at whites, many of the things he said were not exclusive to any particular race and rang true for this campus as a whole. Students have thrown dance parties, held bake sales and organized concerts under the guise of charity events. While these events have been successful, they are not the most cost-effective way to raise money. While it is fun to get something in return for a donation, it leads one to wonder if students are more motivated by the incentives or the causes themselves.

Are we inclined to buy a T-shirt if we know some of the proceeds go to a humanitarian cause because we want to do something good, or because we want the self-satisfaction of having done our part by buying ourselves something?

Take the Crazylegs Run as an example. For the past 29 years students have been involved in this Madisonian tradition, which had a record of 20,450 participants this past year. Among those who ran were members of 255 Fun and Fitness Teams that were comprised of co-workers, families or people supporting a common cause. Teams ran for friends with MS, loved ones lost to cancer or neighbors with diabetes. Their T-shirts trumpeted inspiring messages and memorials. Yet not a penny went to their causes: all the proceeds went to support UW Athletics. There is nothing wrong with raising money for the university, but it leads one to wonder what those Fun and Fitness Teams accomplished. They could feel satisfied that they honored those close to them, but no money was directly raised to go to cancer research; no donations were collected for hospitals. They raised awareness, but for potentially selfish reasons.

Another example of campuswide charity work was the reaction to the earthquake in Haiti. Different groups raised over $10,000 through varied events, and while their efforts led to a successful initiative, some events seemed to be designed to get a large number of participants instead of to have a large impact. Renting a space and hiring a DJ for the dance party may have encouraged more participation, but it also cost money that could’ve been donated directly to the cause. One could argue that students wouldn’t have gotten involved at all if it weren’t for events like these, but maybe that means that we are not supporting causes that students could actually become passionate about.

It is difficult to determine what motivates students to get involved with issues. Volunteer work is seen as a good resume builder, and students can often be guilt-tripped into giving away their spare change, but those things aren’t taken into account when determining how successful a charity event went.

Students can feel the satisfaction of having done a good thing while really putting in minimal effort, and that is unfair to the people who actually care about the causes and are in it for more than recognition. On this campus and in this country we are trying to find simple solutions to huge problems, and we will fail every time if that is our plan of attack.

Allegra Dimperio ([email protected]) is a freshman intending to major in journalism.

Have a thought? We welcome your input, but please be polite and stay on topic wherever possible. Your comment may be deleted if it is inappropriately off topic or promotional or if it is unnecessarily rude or contains personal attacks. We may delete comments for other reasons as well. Just keep it simple and focus on your points as respectfully as possible.

We allow and encourage comments employing satire, wit and irony to make points. Do not flag comments just because you disagree. Flagged comments will be immunized from further flagging unless they stray far from the guidelines and do not add to the discussion. Before flagging a comment you think is offensive, consider your time might be better spent rebutting it than censoring it.

blog comments powered by Disqus

9 older comments

user-pic

Excellently put.

user-pic

Give me one million dollars so I never have to work again, and I will volunteer until I’m 65. It’s impossible to expect people to donate their time and money ALL of the time. Our society it just too damn busy.

user-pic

This is absolutely stupid. The best way to get people involved in charity is to make it entertaining and fun. Not only will they make more money, they will be able to give people more information about the cause because they might actually be paying attention. Ms. Humanitarian here has a very naive view of how to help a cause.

“Are we inclined to buy a T-shirt if we know some of the proceeds go to a humanitarian cause because we want to do something good, or because we want the self-satisfaction of having done our part by buying ourselves something?”

Maybe the problem is that we’re all taught that “doing something good” means sacrificing for the needs of others rather than pursuing our own lives and happiness. This sets up a continual conflict between doing what is actually good for one’s life and being “moral” according to conventional wisdom. This impossible contradiction leads people to feel guilty.

The truth is that pursuing one’s self-interest and happiness is not only “doing something good,” it is the essence of being a moral person. Buying something for yourself (assuming you can afford it and it is a value to you) is profoundly moral. It represents the virtues of productivity, pride and achievement (among others). Giving away your values to some nameless “humanitarian” cause to alleviate your guilt represents the opposite of virtue.

We should praise those who spend their time and money what matters most to them, be it athletics or a nice-looking T-shirt. We should praise those who work hard to make their own lives the best they can be for themselves. We should hold them up as an example and say, “look, they are doing something good.”

user-pic

Jim, I think you are too hardwired to your opinions. Contrary to you, I think being selfish is not the best way of life. Nor is it even the most efficient. As humans, our greatest joy comes from being in service to others.

D: | :D

Allegra, your column raises a personal question that I’m sure you’ve asked yourself when it comes to charity/volunteer work: Am I doing this for the cause? Or, am I doing this because I like to know I’m doing something good?

That’s a very difficult question to answer.

But I think I have solution to that quandary, which is, Regardless of your motives, the act remains.

To put it another way: Who cares about the motives? Altruism — that might not have otherwise been achieved — is being achieved. The elusive question of the true motivation is secondary.

It’s a bit odd to claim that those who argue for self-interest are “hardwired” (even though they give lengthy arguments for their views) and then claim that altruism is an unqualified good that should be pursued without regard to reason or motive. Who is “hardwired?”

user-pic

No, I did not mean to imply that altruism should be pursued without regard to reason or motive. Ideally, you help people because you care for them.

But I think the question of whether one did something for another or for himself is too tricky to suss out. Everyone I talk to has a very difficult time figuring out what their real motives are when it comes charity/volunteering. How can anyone tell?

Does the distinction even exist?

So my point is that, don’t worry so much about that can of worms. The important thing is that altruism has been achieved.

user-pic

I laugh at Greek fundraisers, in particular. Self-righteous sororities and fraternities work to raise a few lousy hundred dollars when their parents fork over thousands a year in membership dues. They drink, party, and get stupid in the name of charity. I wouldn’t even mention it because they have a lot of fun but so many of them feel so damn good about themselves! It’s ridiculous how much pride they have in raising $200 during a kegger.

user-pic

“I laugh at Greek fundraisers…”

Your ignorance is suffocating. Greek fundraisers raise more money on this campus than any other student organization. Clearly you are just stating your bias against Greeks because you don’t know any of the facts. How can you fault them for having a good time while being charitable? Its the exact same ignorance of the author of this article. Why don’t you try doing some good for this campus or community before you start talking down other groups’ accomplishments.

Donate