In 1983, as mayor of Burlington, Vermont, Bernie Sanders took the stage before the United Way, and admitted “I don’t believe in charities.” Although this position appears diametrically opposed to my opinion from which the title to this diary is drawn, the Senator was absolutely right — later explaining “Most of them were conservative Republicans busy cutting services to low-income people. Then they go collect nickels and dimes, mostly from working people, and congratulate each other on their generosity. I find that hypocritical.”

Sanders has a great ability for summarizing the flaws of the world as it is. Charity must never be an excuse for governmental neglect of its basic function ensuring the social contract. To the extent that nonprofit work facilitates government complacency or persuades the privileged that the masses are adequately tended, that form of charity is undeniably regressive. We are periodically reminded of this danger when prominent Republican figures call for the elimination of social programs in favor or charitable relief.

International charity carries its own dangers of unintended consequences and misplaced motives. From the New York Times:

Sometimes, volunteering even causes real harm. Research in South Africa and elsewhere has found that “orphan tourism” — in which visitors volunteer as caregivers for children whose parents died or otherwise can’t support them — has become so popular that some orphanages operate more like opportunistic businesses than charities, intentionally subjecting children to poor conditions in order to entice unsuspecting volunteers to donate more money.

From the Guardian:

Voluntourism almost always involves a group of idealistic and privileged travelers who have vastly different socio-economic statuses vis–à–vis those they serve. They often enter these communities with little or no understanding of the locals' history, culture, and ways of life. All that is understood is the poverty and the presumed neediness of the community, and for the purposes of volunteering, that seems to be enough. In my own experiences – also highlighted by the author of the article – this has led to condescending and superficial relationships that transform the (usually western) volunteer into a benevolent giver and the community members into the ever grateful receivers of charity. It makes for an extremely uncomfortable dynamic in which one begins to wonder if these trips are designed more for the spiritual fulfillment of the volunteer rather than the alleviation of poverty.

In the world we have, charity is a flawed system we adopt to assuage the failures of government to work for the common good. I think many progressives recognize that system, and practice some healthy skepticism of nonprofit efficacy.

Still, my statement of belief in charity as an ethical goal and the implication of Bernie Sanders’ disbelief may both be correct. The best possible world we could imagine and the best possible government (except for all the others) would still fail to respond to human needs with equal innovation and precision to a nonprofit, simply given political inertia. A representative democracy may certainly protect the rights of a minority, but a majority will always be slow to meet the needs of the rest. Progressives should be rightfully skeptical of charity, but also accept its basic good.