Ask three different people what the word “philanthropy” means, and you’re likely to get three different answers. One might ask, what’s the difference? Why does it matter what definition is given to a word? I believe it does matter, and here’s why.
In many indigenous cultures, there is a belief that our breath is a representation of our spirit. For that reason, one is very careful about the words that are used. Words are both chosen and spoken carefully, because as they are spoken a life is breathed into them.
Even in modern U.S. culture, the power of words is illustrated daily as we see them used in various forms of media, from talk shows to opinion pages.
In other words, we take words seriously. They do matter.
Expressing love in diverse ways
In 1986, the Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP) established National Philanthropy Month in November of each year. At that time, the month was designed to honor those who exemplified the spirit of philanthropy, which AFP defined from its Greek roots as meaning “the love of mankind.” Today is National Philanthropy Day, and this year’s theme reflects that definition as well: “Change the World With a Giving Heart.”
I offer that at its very base, philanthropy continues to be the manner in which we all express our “love of humanity.” I further believe that the various definitions of philanthropy that are often used today are strategies for that expression, rather than the actual definition of the philosophy.
Words, you see, are powerful tools. They can unite or divide, heal or harm. For me, some of the current rhetoric that surrounds “philanthropy” feels divisive. There have been a number of articles presented that hold “charity is not philanthropy” – that charity is gifts from the heart, while philanthropy is the strategic investment of resources to address systemic causes of problems.
So what’s wrong with that definition, you may wonder? To that, I ask, why do we need to divide the many forms that express our love of humanity? Is there a hierarchy of forms of giving?
Similarly, in some quarters charity has become aligned with a “hand out” (a temporary bandage) rather than a “hand up” (true change). While I don’t necessarily believe that’s what is implied with the statement “charity is not philanthropy,” I do believe that many can take it that way. Once spoken, words have power beyond our control.
Philanthropy as the expression of our love for humanity is fully inclusive. It embraces all forms of giving—our time, talent and treasure—and can be descriptive and respectful of all traditions that shape those forms. I offer that charity, social venture philanthropy, “philanthrocapitalism,” mission-related investing, and all other forms of giving are philanthropy. The words are descriptions of the strategies we use to show our love.
Back to the roots...and away from divisiveness
The Wikipedia entry on “philanthropy” mentions that in ancient Greek culture, “philanthropia—loving what it is to be human—was thought to be the key to civilization.” Is it possible that is still the case? Is it possible if we got back to the roots of a word, we might begin a trek back to civil discourse and less divisiveness?
It is through the intentional combination of the philanthropy that comes from within communities with the giving that comes from outside sources that we are most strengthened as a society. Rather than debating definitions of philanthropy, we would do best to recognize, respect and protect all of its expressions.
(In fact, that belief is the root of everything we do at NCGives, where our tagline is Because Every Giver Matters, and Every Gift Counts.)
So, in the spirit of National Philanthropy Month, let us all go forward to “Change the World With a Giving Heart”...knowing that a giving heart is one thing all givers have in common, no matter how they are defined.
Comments