I've been saying for awhile that I couldn't see an alternative, really: the nonprofit sector would of necessity replace the American government as a key actor in a vast number of daily lives, with philanthropy becoming ever more important ... as the troubles roll in and the politicians roll out.
And along comes this forecast, from the Aug. 1, 2015 edition of The Economist, in a Lexington column titled "Living with inequality":
With a shrunken tax base [because the 1% in truth DO run things and therefore prevent equitable taxation], America [will] have to become comfortable with private individuals and foundations providing public goods without a backstop from government. Organisations like the Gates Foundation [will] become wholly responsible for funding areas where government is already pulling back, including medical research, infrastructure and higher education."
BTW: I've seen this with my clients for years ... and it's an accelerating trend.
"Non-profit organisations already account for 10% of all private employment, more than banking and construction combined. That share [will] increase further as non-profits [take] on responsibility for some of the welfare programmes provided by government. The state [will] be left funding those things that nobody else [wants] to pay for, like Social Security, and those where the idea of private ownership is troubling, such as the police and the armed forces."
The column concludes with this warning: "In an America that [gives] so much discretion to the very wealthy to shape society, it would be desirable to write campaign-finance rules that [reduce] their influence over elections."
Amen, sisters and brothers. In America, one person = one vote. This is still winnable. And just so you know, The Economist is NOT a liberal newspaper politically. It is, though, a very sensible newspaper economically.
------
Campaign finance reform IS the apocalyptic fight of our times.
Help cut the money strings in politics. Don't accept life as a hapless puppet, a slave of the 1%.
Even if you join twenty other causes during a lifetime of compassion, this particular one could have the greatest impact on the public good. Philanthropy: "the desire to promote the welfare of others." Antonym: selfish. Definition: the 1%.
My most recent gift: to the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR).
------
CCR has been around since the height of America's civil rights movement in the 1960s, the unmerciful struggle down in Mississippi. A CCR co-founder and advisor to Martin Luther King, Jr., William M. Kunstler, also defended the Chicago Seven, helping to bring the Vietnam War to a close.
Oh, you're those people....
These days, the Center for Constitutional Rights joyfully, righteously batters America's legal system, using law suits ... v. two administrations in the White House, the almighty NSA, Donald Rumsfeld for that matter.
Donor-dependent CCR has demanded (among other things) that the US government close Guantánamo and send the various vetted innocents who suffer there back to their families.
Have we won? Gawd, no! But CCR can get there ... with my help and your help.
With us @ its side, CCR WILL successfully defend the front lines of social justice.
The enemy is not weak. Accept that. It takes SO much commitment, time, action and gift-dependent financial firepower to win against powerful, fearful, cornered conservative interests.
CCR's Guantánamo campaign has consumed 13 years and counting. So no, it won't be a brief commitment. But your willingness to stick with it, come thick or thin, is what makes you admirable.
CCR is 100% donor-dependent, like Greenpeace. But few people know CCR exists, fighting in the courtroom for basic human rights since 1966.
------
Dibs on the movie rights.