Public Action in a Private Place

Posted by The Happy Tutor

Philanthropy is private action in a public space (pdf) - Peter Karoff

Dumpster talk is rehearsal. The stakes are higher in the silence of The World We Want. When Carnival enters the Big House, will someone please, those of you in the red jackets parking cars, work slowly? We want the honored guests to at least get a whiff of The World We Want before they flee back to their own comfortable, comfortable places to settle our public business in private.

Wealth Bondage is public action in a private space. WB as Carnival enters the private spaces of power to undermine the walls that enclose the commons.

How other than with open conversation in a public space can we achive trust and transparency? How in a closed space could we ever create or preserve an open society?

Those who may feel that Peter Karoff is not listening or responding, please read the intro to his projected book, The World We Want. He is inside the firewall of Wealth Bondage Philanthropy, digging like mad. Note too that he has added, or caused to be added, to the TPI site the following line:

The World We Want blog articulates and advances a shared view of the world we want. What's your vision for a better world?

For a man without a persistent pseud, he is doing pretty well.

Comments

[Harry]

All your Karoff links go to the Digger pamphlet.

[tutor]

Thanks. Fixed.

[Tigg Montague]

Oprah! He's right about that and it's good to see people getting with the program.

[tutor]

Not quite sure about the Oprah allusion. You mean as talk show host? Here is the deal: Read the bios and ask whether any of them spend their time hanging around with losers. (Check out Peter Goldmark in google, a remarkable man who has led a life of service.) Or, the other way, around ask what we have accomplished in comparison to what they have accomplished. In their eyes they are Tribunes of the People, Stewards of the Commons, Fiduciaries in Service to the Commonweal. And they have as good a claim to that as anyone around, and far better a claim than many of their confederates to the philanthropic right. Normally, these important people meet in safe places where they will not be harassed by the great unwashed and the great unknowing. What Peter has done is to put that private world (of private action for the public good) on public display. While the gesture may look like glorifying the glorious, or an Oprah talk show, the result is far more ambiguous. "Outing" as much as glorifying. If you listen to the transcripts you can learn much about how the world of wealth and power works, but you have to listen as you would to a transcript of a novel by Henry James or Edith Wharton.

Go left from Peter Goldmark and Peggy Dulany and you find Tracy G. Left of her maybe Rick Cohen at http://www.ncrgp.org or Katherine Forrest at Commonweal Institute. After that you may be on your own with Dumpster Dwellers. Marginalized.

I am less interested in political positions within a democratic society than in maintaining an open space where we can hash out our differences in open debate.

That open space is now in peril. I think we need to join with anyone, right, left, libertarian or just plain reasonable or patriotic to preserve the checks and balances and open spaces of a liberal democracy. That agenda has lift and probably a plurality behind it, if properly understood. Also has money behind it, or could soon. I take that as a very hopeful sign, a resurgence of what is right and good. Yes, as T.V. noted I am a tepid liberal. John Locke and Gerrard Withstanley. Since liberal democracy is being subverted by corporate-style systems, in government and in business, let alone education, and everywhere else, and since right wing philanthropy too has been employed to push a cruel agenda, I do feel compelled to do whatever I can on behalf of a plain old Andrew Wyeth vision of America. I think lots of other people might feel the same if they understood what is being stolen from us in the name of Freedom.

I go back to the last question that Peter asked: "What plans or strategies would advance your vision?" The next question would be about budgets, timelines and other resources needed.

My hope is to connect the Dumpster World of the net with that of Peter and Tracy G., to help each funder articulate and advance her vision of The World We Want, but to do so in conversation and alliances with those who have more to give than money, like you, Harry, and the others in the crew here.

Can I bring it off? Sure, when the the Clown becomes King, in his dreams. But, but, but I do have a plan.... And would be happy to share it with Peter's friends. Actually, my plan is just to stir up a more diverse conversation and see if we can hash out a plan together. Otherwise, the rich bear it away, and the Dumpster Dwellers grouse.

[Tigg Montague]

The World We Want, by showcasing the work, wisdom and practical ideas of social entrepreneurs and others, will provide inspiration and guidance to many people who have never considered becoming actors in the charitable sector. We hope that the book will inspire a range of readers acrosss different generations, issue areas and vantage points. When we interviewed John Abele, Founder of Boston Scientific for The World We want he said, "This should be on Oprah!". We agree.

It's a who's who all right. Movers and shakers. I like that! John Abele, for example, hedges his bets wisely. The sobering effect of his realism on the more aggressive left wing tendencies of people like Steve Case should make this very powerful.

[Harry]

I don't have much in common with Tigg, but I'm currently as serious as it's possible for me to get about assisting this along. Ignore any carping and grousing you hear from behind the dumpster. I'm genuinely 55% positive on this.

[tutor]

Given that we couldn't get two people to show up in Central Park for a Carnival, it might be the best bet.

[tutor]

The link in Tiggs post shows the battleground. The right is blaming the mainstream foundations for doing what those who pay the pundits have done all along, orchestrate a pseudo-grassroots movement. The answer, it seems, is to facilitate a true grassroots movement. Let's hope that is what Pew, Ford, Soros, Abele, Karoff, Surdna and others conclude. There are plenty of unfunded and underfunded projects they might might consider. That is why I am reaching out to ask various people to submit a vision - and plan - for the World We Want. Can't hurt, and it can't be less futile than endlessly blogging.

[Harry]

I don't why T.V. calls you a tepid liberal. The temperament and views here would be called conservative in a society where "conservative" didn't mean angry, vindictive reactionary or crackpot, scheming royalist.

I agree that under the circumstances this is worth a good faith effort to assist. I don't think most of the people you've listed, for whom I've seldom had kind words, are altogether clueless or completelty caught up in mercenary self-advancement. There is much good that can be done. 55% positive progress is good enough right now.

[tutor]

You talking about the bloggers who have submitted their vision of The World We Want Blog? Or the figures Karoff has been interviewing?

[Harry]

The people Karoff has interviewed. It's easy to cultivate a two dimensional picture of them.

[tutor]

As they say "The perfect is the enemy of the good."
Hard to find higher caliber people, though I hope Peter will bring on a greater variety of figures, including activists, and "do-ers" as well as funders. He easily could. But then again this is supported by TPI which is a philanthropic consulting firm, so it should not be suprising that their immediate connenctions are among funders.

[Harry]

High caliber indeed, but let's not forget the value of good friends.

[tutor]

There are those who have power, those who don't. Those with wealth, power, and connections have chips to play; the others don't. Art can stand aside, in today's understanding of art, as effectively disengaged. But what interests me is the intersectio n of art and philosophy and the liberal arts and the true facts of wealth and power in our country, not just decrying it, but getting engaged with it, and trying to open up a new range of possibilities. Inside the walls of the safe places the wealthy too are prisoners, their possibilities are often much more limited than you might think. Much cannot be purchased, and not all good things can be battered for in the giving circles of the wealthy and well connected. As they rise they lose touch too. Hence Kings have always had Fools. Now, Harry, you are being introduced at court. You want to go back to the stables and talk to the horses? Or do you want to see if we can create something new inside WB?

[tutor]

Welcome to the court. We a Fool, an Advisor, a Diplomat, or you can go back to the stables. Churlishness has its own rewards. Like what?

[Harry]

Tutor, I am not a stranger to bigshots' initiatives. At this point, I am neither hooting in derision or cheerleading. My biggest concern is that their good intentions, as a group, will be held hostage by one of the bigshsots, or by whoever one of more of them nominate to ensure their interest isn't stomped.

Tutor, I've been to meetings and series of meetings where one person, by his willingness to make himself unpleasant or obstructive, was able to make the agenda punitive rather than humane. I want to forestall that, if possible, and if not, remind one of the people involved that he still has friends even if this doesn't work out.

[tutor]

Peter's group is not an organized cabal, by any means. The firm he founded, TPI, works with a range of corporate foundations, family foundation, individual philanthropists, and community foundations. His questions are precisely those that make sense in a consulting capacity. They are all designed to get the donor to articulate and advance the donor's own conception of the World We Want. So, it will devolve into many specific and autonomous projects - which may be a critique of the whole notion. How do we get to a "we" when each funder is working independently? Perhaps one of the good things that could happen is that out of the book and online conversation, funders and activists will find out what one another are doing, and maybe find points where they can make common cause.

[Harry]

Tutor, I have the feeling we're talking about two entirely different things and from two completely different frames of reference. Rather than articulate my view of what's going on :-), I'm going to leave at this: if you think there's some way at some point that I can help, please feel free to call on me.

[tutor]

Harry, I agree about talking past one another, but that is the whole point of talking at all, to get past talking past one another. Please don't give up on it. Lets delineate the two frames of reference and see if we can bring them into conversation. This is important to me, since a) I am spending 20+ hours a week working on philanthropy, with Peter as one of the most important mentors and role models b) WB iis a parable of that and always has been (Morals Tutor, or clown, or Dungeon Master, to the rich, as opposed to their humble servant) c) Peter's project is the best chance, along with working with Tracy G, to connect resources with ideas.

The two frames of reference, Dumpster and Big House, are indeed different. But that has always been what the F I have been talking about here, and attempting to articulate and bridge, if only through the glass darkly. It is not easy. You have been a huge asset and ally.

You think it is hard? Imagine what it must be like for Karoff or for me. This is our livlihood. The stakes are not verbal only. Know what ostracized means? Getting tossed out with the Garbage.

Sucking up to wealth is a huge industry. Disciplining wealth is suicide. Yet, it has been done. Satire, clowns, carnival, the Beggars Opera, Socrates on the streets of Athens, Diogenes in his Barrel, Christ in the Temple.

I could maybe lose both sets of readers, along with my livelihood. Wouldn't be the first time in my life that I have be that alone intellectually, or out on rear end. But as A. Bartlett Gimammtti used to say with a smile, "A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do." Ended up with a heart attack himself sticking up for the another "green world." This undergound dialogue with Peter is about as deep as he or I can go, like two moles whose tunnels cross and recross under disputed ground. Likewise, I keep running into you underground, TV, V, Gerry, Jon.

Writing about wealth from outside is one thing. Writing about wealth and its vices from inside is another. Blogging would be a far more interesting and important social phenomenon if the insiders adopted masks and spoke in parable of what they know. (c.f. the resounding silence at The World We Want.) I am going to break that silence, disrupt it, and force a conversation - if possible. But, as I say, I may end up talking to only myself, and wondering what drives me to cut off both of my own legs. Doesn't matter, really. The ideas, the tradtions, go very deep and some of us are carriers of them. We are driven to develop them as a woman is driven to have and nurture children. That is the curse and the blessing. You accept real education at your own risk. The rest is the constant nattering of opportunists.

[Harry]

Tutor, I have a somewhat clearer picture, I believe, this morning. The current project is at the very beginning stages. The various people and players have been invited to consider their roles. It is still in a loose, flexible state. Peter Karoff's experience with good intentions that didn't work out is one of the guiding principles.

I often forget that your writing could cost you your job. When I remember, and consider it, I am very concerned. There is little I could to do help.

And now I have to consider how to assist with breaking the silence at the World We Want.

[tutor]

Let us just say that if you are going to be a clown, telling unwelcome truths in the court of kings, or in Candidia's conference room, your parables had best be oqaque and your jokes funny. Whether the cunning should teach the powerful or serve them is not really an open question. What people want and what they need are two different things. Marketing means giving the Ultra High Net Worth Indidivual what he or she wants. "The World We Want" to her specs.