I have just read a fascinating book by Anand Giridharadas
entitled Winners
Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World. His
thesis: that big-name, wealthy and corporate philanthropists, aided
and abetted by world 'thought leaders,' do much good in the world,
but the solutions they promote are also benefitting them while at the
same time protecting the status quo, i.e. the systems that are in
fact responsible for inequality, poverty, lack of opportunity, etc.
Hence, increased taxation and regulation are off the table.
Examples
abound of what this means in practical terms: charter schools instead
of ensuring proper funding for all schools through decent levels of
taxation; developing companies and apps like Uber or Lyft that
promote precarity and are strongly anti-union, all while touting
'greater consumer choice' and worker 'flexibility' but taking no responsibility for
their employees, whom they term 'independent contractors' and hence
not subject to minimum wage laws, labour legislation, etc.
These movers and shakers have a simple mantra: do good by doing well. In other words, my success is the world's success, a win-win situation.
Except that it isn't. In pursuing this very narrow filter for philanthropy, it is doing two things: misdirecting people away from the underlying causes of the problem, as previously stated, and undermining democracy by promoting the idea that business, not government, is the answer to the world's problems - a neoliberal's dream!
That government should get out of the way of business is, of course, nothing new, and is frequently found in the policies of the Trudeau government, from the leveraging of Infrastructure Bank funds to pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into foreign pharmaceuticals (think Sanofi and BioNtech) to set up shop in Canada.
But I digress.
One of the best illustrations of the corporate world's 'charitable' practices can be found in this excerpt from a book entitled Take the Money and Run, an indictment of the unholy relationship that exists between food banks and Walmart Canada:
For decades critics have identified Walmart Canada’s employment practices — characterized by inadequate wages with few benefits — as contributing to household food insecurity (HFI). Walmart Canada also opposes unionization drives which would result in higher wages and benefits through the collective bargaining process. In a remarkable example of image management, Walmart Canada now brands itself as an important ally in reducing HFI by entering a partnership with the major food bank association in Canada, Food Banks Canada (FBC).
Mastering the magician's art of misdirection, corporations like Walmart burnish their images and derive practical benefits such as the avoidance of costly disposal fees while the underlying causes of food insecurity go unaddressed:
Walmart Canada’s contribution to food banks, when placed against its history of anti-union activities and its effects upon their own workers and other workers’ well-being, is trivial. Its anti-union activities have a far greater impact upon HFI, and not for the good. Additionally, Walmart Canada and other similar corporations — through partnerships with CSOs such as FBC — go from villains to saviours, making dealing with the causes of HFI such as low wages and inadequate social assistance benefits more difficult. Such partnerships make it unlikely that HFI organizations such as Food Banks Canada will call for reducing HFI by raising minimum wages, promoting unionization and increasing corporate taxes on profitable corporations such as Walmart Canada to help restore the Canadian social safety net. In fact, the chair of the FBC’s board of directors of FBC is a vice-president of Walmart Canada.
The authors suggest that Food Banks Canada should make a better use of their resources:
Instead of embracing Walmart Canada as a partner, FBC and its affiliated food banks should highlight how unjust and unfair employment creates HFI and call for major reform of the employment market as a means of reducing HFI in Canada. They should also resist the role that corporate lobbying plays in maintaining low wages and poverty-inducing social assistance levels. Embracing corporations and polishing their images is not a solution to HFI in Canada.
Most of us, both as individuals and corporate entities, like to feel good about our philanthropic practices. But I leave the final word to Hamlet about the dangers of ignoring or minimizing the underlying causes of, in this case, the socio-economic diseases we seek to cure:
Lay not that flattering unction to your soul
….
It will but but skin and film the ulcerous place
Whiles rank corruption, mining all within,
Infects unseen.
that flattering unction to your soul
That not your trespass but my madness speaks.
It will but skin and film the ulcerous place,
Whiles rank corruption, mining all within,
Infects unseen.
