big philanthropy

A survey of some context.

A compilation of interesting and insightful thinking from the last six of 13 recorded discussions so far this year about grantmaking and giving.

The author of a book on Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation talks to Michael E. Hartmann about Melinda French Gates’ grantmaking, as well as potential aggressive policy reforms of philanthropy and whether they could ever be cooperatively pursued by those of different worldviews.

The author of a book on Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation talks to Michael E. Hartmann about the reaction to his book, the degree to which the foundation is representative of establishment philanthropy in America, the recent announcement that the foundation will increase its spend-out rate, and what happened to the (once-)cooperative grantmaking relationship between Gates and Warren Buffett.

Now, in a moment of political backlash and financial scrutiny, those same institutions are asking everyday Americans to stand with them against proposals for increased oversight and higher excise taxes on their endowments. It’s a tough ask. Because the truth is most people haven’t seen that tax-incentivized wealth show up in meaningful ways—not in their neighborhoods, not in their schools, not in their civic life. When Big Philanthropy backed the wrong theory of change and cut itself off from the concerns of working-class Americans, it made a trade-off. And now the cost of that trade is coming due.

The Indiana University professor talks to Michael E. Hartmann about the challenges of interpreting survey data about trust in philanthropy and the nonprofit sector and, the historical “paradox of nonprofit trustworthiness,” and the relationship between civil society and the state writ large—as well as, writ smaller and looking ahead, that between exempt nonprofitdom and the tax system.

The Indiana University professor talks to Michael E. Hartmann about the degree to which trust, or lack of it, in wealth and the wealthy may or may not have played a role in the creation of Big Philanthropy at the beginning of the last century, through to the 1969 Tax Reform Act that essentially still structures the nonprofit sector, to today. He also discusses the growth of nonprofits in the urban context, as well as some ramifications of that growth.

He thought the best thing the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation could do was find a few good nonprofits that were doing sensible things, and bring them whatever help they needed.

The sociologist talks to Michael E. Hartmann about symbolic capitalists in general and in philanthropy and the nonprofit sector in particular, how they exacerbate a lot of problems, and why the growth in their numbers has been making things even worse.

Republican lawmakers are committed to nonprofit reform in 2025. That could spell challenges for the field.

Tevi Troy’s newest book tells stories about the relationships between presidents and corporate titans who became charitable givers—prominently including interesting and entertaining ones about Theodore Roosevelt and John D. Rockefeller, Sr., essentially a founder of establishment philanthropy in America.

The Substack writer talks to Michael E. Hartmann and Daniel P. Schmidt about the concept of a parallel polis to stand against progressive managerialism, whether such polei are political, whether there might already be one or the beginning of one in America, and how conservative philanthropy could and should support one.

The fourth in a series of five republished articles to mark our fifth anniversary.

Observations on The Chronicle of Philanthropy’s “The Commons” debate about whether philanthropy can bring America together.

Tim Schwab’s book on Gates is an education, and an opportunity to examine certain questions.

Labor journalist Hamilton Nolan’s new book on “the struggle for the soul of labor” takes progressive philanthropy to task for not prioritizing the promotion of America’s labor movement and makes an urgent plea for it to do more, and with more patience.

Looking to glean what the rise of DAFs means for our troubled voluntary sector and civil society in general.

Fundamental questions.

Is there a “Charity, Inc.” and if so, what could perhaps be done about it?

We see the tripartite—dependent—relationship between government, commercial interests, and nonprofits in the rise of institutional DAFs.

It has reconstituted the very system that Alexis de Tocqueville once famously lauded Americans for not having. Meaningful reform will be of the hatchet, not the scalpel variety.

It is difficult to even conceive of, much less construct, what might be a conservative version of Reiser’s and Dean’s More Perfect Bargain. Nevertheless, some conservatives should at least try, perhaps even, however warily, with unorthodox allies—which not all conservatives, especially the energetic populist ones, find automatically off-putting.

Looking at some of the edifices, atriums, and façades.

As tracked by Candid, of top 200 givers, 121 are left-of-center and 21 are right-of-center. All but two of top 20 are left-leaning.

On the newest InfluenceWatch podcast, Capital Research Center (CRC) research director Michael Watson talks to CRC senior fellow and Giving Review co-editor Michael E. Hartmann for 26 minutes about establishment philanthropy in America and some recent harsh reactions to and critiques of it.

The cutting critique of and stance against corporate America’s adoption of an extreme social-justice agenda in Vivek Ramaswamy’s new book could certainly, and perhaps should, be considered in the context of politicized charitable nonprofitdom, too.

“At a time when philanthropy faces mounting critiques,” the Council on Foundation’s new strategic plan proves it’s not up to the challenge of facing those critiques.

An outline of options.

Several could perhaps play Robert M. Hutchins’ role today. Any potential B. Carroll Reeces?

The risky confidence and nihilistic moral certainty of an intelligentsia.

If not, don’t. As an aspect of the French Revolution suggests, the old will be new again.