Global Citizenship and The Human Experience

      Does anyone know what Global Citizenship is? Would you consider yourself a Global Citizen? And why the heck is this thing called Global Citizenship important anyway? The Human Experience documents the travel of a group of friends searching for these answers. They travel across the globe in search of what it means to be a human and the commonalities between all of us, no matter what culture we come from or how old we are. This film discusses the value of human life among all of us and how human suffering is not a distinct characteristic of one group of people. Below is the trailer to the film (if you have Netflix and are interested enough to watch it, you can on there), please watch at least the trailer before you continue to read the rest of my post.

      A global citizen is someone who defines themselves first as a part of the human race, or a citizen of humanity, and then as a citizen of country, a county, or a town. Global citizenship supports the idea that in order to find peace, we must not only embrace the similarities between all of us, but we must also learn to understand others, support others, and accept others for the most beautiful thing about humans, our differences. The idea of global citizenship aids in breaking the boundaries between religious and cultural groups to promote equality, collaboration and understanding. Global citizenship helps to foster philanthropy on a global scale because when you can relate to the suffering of others, you are more likely to donate either time or money to people who are not close to you (emotionally or physically). Many of us find it difficult to understand the suffering of all of those hungry children in Africa or the uneducated children of Eastern Europe, but by realizing the commonalities among us as a race, we can use our personal experience with human suffering to help us understand the suffering of others. This does NOT, however, mean that donating to a local charity is condemned because the people in your area are part of humanity as well.

      I think that global citizenship drives my philanthropy. It hadn't been until I took a trip abroad, witnessing extreme global poverty first hand, that I had any conception of the terrible living conditions across the globe. After that I became passionate about international organizations aiming to end poverty and hunger. 

      Now let us revisit some questions one more time: (1) What does global citizenship mean to you?(2) Would you consider yourself a Global Citizen? and (3) Whether it be global citizenship or something else, what drives you to donate time/money?

Does Philanthropy Require Money?

On my way back from class the other day, I cut through the Old Union. I had been planning on heading to the gym, but I saw signs for an American Red Cross blood drive in one of the banquet rooms so I decided to head in there instead. The whole process took maybe a half hour total, and I was on my way. Very little time taken, and all I lost was a trip to the gym and some blood I didn’t know I could do without. 

I realize that the “I am a Philanthropist” video is something we discussed a while ago, but its broad definition of philanthropy has really stuck with me. When the woman mentioned participating in a bake sale, I was amazed that her actions were considered philanthropic. I was even more surprised by the boy who made cards for the elderly. How could these people be considered philanthropists? Doesn’t philanthropy require money? The video implies that it does not. If we look at the literal meaning of the word philanthropy, “love of humanity”, money is not stated as a factor. This video shows that philanthropy is a process of bettering the lives of others, but it is not necessarily a financial process. 

Which brings me back to donating blood. I found this video by Florida Blood Services (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9qshz2V2mg) about blood donation facts. I learned that a single donation of blood could save three lives, and just one teaspoon of blood could save a baby. It occurred to me that I could not donate ten dollars and raise the blood supply in hospitals. This was a type of philanthropy that could not be reproduced with money donations. The only way to help this cause was to donate my time and blood, resources I could easily give.

Blood donation may be unique in that it cannot be reproduced with a money donation, but is not the only type of philanthropy you can do for free. Volunteering time and talent are both excellent ways to help out without making a monetary donation. By doing these things, you allow an organization to complete tasks without having to use their budget to hire paid workers. In fact, if you volunteered for six hours at an organization that would normally have to pay a worker minimum wage, you are saving that organization over forty dollars, more than you might have donated monetarily. 

I realize this class is focused mainly on the process of informed monetary donations, and I do not mean to belittle the importance of that lesson in any way. There are many causes that cannot be helped without financial assistance. However I think the idea of fund-less philanthropy makes the capability of giving much more globally accessible. It is something that every one can take part in, whether you are Bill Gates or a broke college student. It means that everyone is capable of philanthropy, whatever their situation. 

Spectrum of Philanthropy

       So I want to discuss the varying ideas of the three books that we have read so far, including Pete Singer’s The Life You Can Save, the Salwen’s story in The Power of Half and Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen’s Giving 2.0. All these books have a different approach in giving and have different opinions on how philanthropists can help the world. Personally, all these books have affected me differently and have opened up my mind to the various possibilities of helping and giving. The order in which we read these books has an interesting transformation because of the authors’ different outlooks on philanthropy. It seems that it has created a spectrum of how people define philanthropy. On one end it’s radical (everyone should give money) and on the other end, anything you give no matter how big or how much time spent can make a difference.

Didn’t many of you feel almost “attacked” by Pete Singer as he piled on the guilt, that even if we gave a little we could still give more? I felt that his approach to convince an audience to give was a bit radical. There was truth in what he was saying and he had    lots of information in explaining poverty and how our contributions can help. However, he suggested that we should be giving away more of our income and when we don’t it’s frowned upon as he compares it to watching a child drown and not doing anything to help. A blog on Give Well.org (http://blog.givewell.org/2009/03/06/review-of-the-life-you-can-save-by-peter-singer/) explains how as a reader, Singer makes you feel uncomfortable and guilty for not helping children in need. Singer focused more on the money aspect of philanthropy and had the ideology that it was our obligation to give. To me, this took away the meaning of philanthropy because people should be giving out of the kindness of their hearts not because it’s their obligation.

The Salwen’s had a different approach to giving, they made the choice as a family to give away much of what they own. They proposed to their readers the idea that they should evaluate whichever organization they are going to donate to. They also had an influence of giving out of pure kindness and not because you had to. However, for many for us its hard to relate to the Salwens because we don’t have as much money as them to give away. So their approach was more of looking inside yourself to find the want of becoming a philanthropist to help those in need. They expressed how important it is to be involved in the act of giving, like when they went to Africa to watch how their money was helping instead of just giving away money (like Singer suggests).

In Giving 2.0 Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen goes further into expressing how people can give, she targets everyone in a positive manner, encouraging them to give by saying that any amount of time or money can make a difference. She provides different avenues for people who want to donate their time and reinforces how volunteering is an important part of philanthropy. She also appeals to less fortunate people by suggesting that they can use their talents to help nonprofits even if they cannot give that much money. Like the Salwens, she encourages philanthropists to look into nonprofits and how their money is making a difference, she makes this accessible through examples such as the Jolkona Foundation (you can look at it here:http://www.jolkona.org/) in which you will be updated on the cause or the child you are donating to.

So the transformation between these books went from Singer’s idea of people being obligated to give money, to the Salwens’ belief that they don’t need money and through evaluating nonprofits (to find the right one) they could go to the source and see how they are helping and now, to Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen’s idea that even the smallest donation and time contributed can make a big difference. Throughout reading these books I feel that their ideas have gradually gotten “softer” and I find myself agreeing more with the ideas in Giving 2.0 than those in The Life You Can Save because I believe that volunteering to help a cause is just as important as donating money, don’t you agree?

Like Gandhi Said, Be the Change

In Philanthropy, most of the discussion so far has centered around the moral ambiguity of philanthropy.  It is important to better understand how you as an individual feel about philanthropy, so you can “give better,” in a more effective and rewarding way; but if you enjoyed the Salwen book and like them, you’re itching to do more than muse on the nature of philanthropy for the moment, there are ways—cheap, easy, and yes, even fun ways—to give back.

As college students, we’re often strapped for cash, so the logical choice would be to donate time rather than money.  Getting so caught up in extracurriculars your grades suffer isn’t to be advised, but if you’re spending another hour mindlessly scrolling through Facebook, Tumblr, or Twitter, how could you be using that time more meaningfully?

Perhaps the most obvious way to donate our time is through volunteer work.  At Binghamton, there are 39 SA-chartered associations dedicated to service and another 17 religious organizations, including the American Red Cross, Hillel, Chabad, Circle K, and many others.  Even if you lack the time or motivation to become a member of another club, you can still participate in the events they sponsor, like a food or blood drive.  Joining a service group or attending its events is a cheap and relatively effortless way of doing and feeling good.

If you’re already in a club you think can make a difference, consider what its members could offer.  A sports team could donate its old equipment to a local youth team or hold a fundraiser, like a charity tournament, to buy new equipment.  Members of an art club can volunteer at an elementary school to help children paint a mural, or musicians or an acting troupe could perform at an assembly.  An academic group, like the Chemistry Club, might offer free tutoring at the high school.

            Want to make a difference without going through the University?  No problem: a quick Google search will reveal a multitude of worthy local organizations needing volunteers, including the ASPCA, Lourdes Hospital, senior citizens’ programs, The Discovery Center museum, the United Way of Broome County, food pantries, and others.

            They say charity begins in the home, and while working in a soup kitchen in the Southern Tier is a lot less glamorous than flying half way around the world to build a school for orphans, every little thing counts.  It’s trite, but it’s also true, and if you volunteer, even just a bit, you’re making the world a better place.  There’s no shame in doing so here in Binghamton instead of a third world country.  Is making a child’s day brighter somehow less good because it’s here and not somewhere else?  When most of us think of “home,” it’s not the city of Vestal.  But this town plays host to us for the better part of a year.  We live here.  We’re an integral part of the community.  We can better this part of the world, so why don’t we?

Getting the little kiddos involved

As many of you probably are, I am so happy that Salwen's work is not the same as Singers'. It would have been a little difficult to read about what I NEED to do and how I am basically intentionally hurting those who are less fortunate (although I do believe I am doing great things, clearly from Singer's standard, I am not.) Generally I enjoyed this weeks assigned reading and there were so many things that stood out to me. One thing that particularly caught my attention was the section entitled "Hannah's take: Helping Small Kids Start Volunteering".  Out of all the chapters and subsections in this book I personally believed that this subsection is very important for the simple fact that children are our future, and as cliche as it may sound, it is very true. First and foremost I believe that it is very important to teach kids from their young age the importance of service and giving. Like sponges, kids absorb what they see and what they are taught when they are young so it is very crucial to open their eyes inform and teach them about the many things that are going on out of sight that they can help fix. When I was young, I was enrolled in a community center in which I would assist in feeding the homeless on thanksgiving, and conducting different drives during Christmas. The exposure that I received from this community center was tremendous because it helped shape my passion to give back. I notice that my little siblings have not had this exposure, and in turn, have no thoughts or passion to give back like I do. I actually notice this with many kids who live in my neighborhood (particularly my building). They have no interest in volunteering. But the problem goes beyond these kids. Some parents do not value volunteering and have never volunteered in their lives. With this being said, if the parents are not involved or weigh volunteering heavily; what steps should we take to inform these kids? Not all schools teach the importance of service, so how should we approach something like this (trying to teach kids how to volunteer/get them involved)? Is this even important to anyone else?

Tweet of the Week Decision

     Going into this class, I felt that issues regarding children were most important to me. Therefore, when I found out that I had $44 to donate to the nonprofit organization of my choice, I immediately considered the Make-A-Wish Foundation. While I did further research into the organization, I found many impressive statistics and touching videos that showed the great difference they are making. However, I could not push the facts about Africa presented by Singer in The Life You Can Save out of my mind. This led me to take my search for an organization in an entirely different direction. After evaluating several charities that work in Africa only to find that they had received subpar ratings on Charity Navigator, I came across The Hunger Project in The Power of Half. Upon looking into this organization more, I was incredibly impressed. The Hunger Project strives not to merely solve problems temporarily, but rather to empower the communities they work in and encourage self reliance through projects that will have long term benefits. Rather than simply deciding what they feel the community should have, leaders of The Hunger Project work with members of the villages to find out what they really need. Additionally, The Hunger Project makes female empowerment a central part of their mission, assuring that women are key members in each decision making process to dispel the patriarchy in these areas. Although you all have some idea of the work this nonprofit does from The Power of Half, I suggest checking out their website at http://www.thp.org/, particularly the What We Do section, including the Intro Video located in the Program Overview. They are truly doing great work that goes above and beyond just offering a quick, temporary fix to hunger. Because they encourage independence over reliance, I will be donating the $44 to The Hunger Project.