Specific characteristics of human depth-related projects make them more challenging as well as more important for philanthropic cooperation.
Doing good isn’t easy.
It’s certainly not as easy as it frequently seems. Donating to good causes doesn’t necessarily lead to a better world, especially if the main drive is little more than a warm feeling. This is not infrequently the case with surface-level empathy-driven ‘doing good.’
Unfortunately, a warm feeling as the sole driver of doing good may easily lead to a negative balance. If the do-gooder is steeped in one (sub)culture and the recipient in another, things can quickly lead to paradoxical effects. The money then gets into the wrong hands, heightening corruption for instance, or worse, unknowingly breaking down cultural assets.
From my time as a young physician in a third-world setting, I share relevant experiences. That didn’t make me a bad person, nor does it make others into ‘bad people’ who try to help with the best intentions ― even if these intentions turn out wrong.
A big however, however.
One needs to keep thinking.
A warm heart must be combined with a rational mind. Otherwise, it’s dangerous. This is especially the case when ‘depth’ is involved, which frequently happens when transgressing (sub)cultures. The more they are mutually distinct, the bigger the challenges.
Nevertheless, keep the warmth…
in combination with science and professionality.
In bringing together this threesome lies a huge challenge ― no intrinsic contradiction. Each of the three is needed to make the other two realistic. One can see them as three subcultures (in any case, frequently behaving this way) that need to be combined in one profound synthesis.
Just imagine two of them without the third, and take as an example any not strictly technological philanthropic project. Then bring back the third, and you may notice the strength it creates.
This is so more than anything in the case of in-depth philanthropy. I dare say AureLisa is an example domain, hopefully soon in both ways.
Going for the end goal
With a profound philanthropic end goal, the road toward it may be varied, including capital from various sources ― from crowd-funding and grants to venture and purely philanthropic.
This needs the end goal to be extremely clear ― even so, stormy weather is ahead. An additional challenge is that combining ‘profound’ and ‘clear’ makes things even more challenging. It just needs to be done, probably being the most crucial aspect of the endeavor.
You may have noticed this term in the subtitle. Surely, ‘help’ is also an applicable term, and gratitude is always beautiful. ‘Cooperation’ reveals there is no serious philanthropy without serious mutual responsibility, especially in-depth. I hope this text has already helped you to see why.
At the same time, in-depth philanthropy is specifically recommendable if it can keep projects more grassroots. I think social media – at least partly – are telling examples. Several social media could have made a more human-friendly (and less egotistical) impact by having more philanthropic roots.
The philanthropist wants a better world. It is the recipient’s responsibility to help make it so ― not letting mere ego stand in the way. A ‘friend of humanity’ should be precisely that, nothing less.
Asking for a donation may then be a joy for all involved.