>
>
> Is not self-promotion what many self-styled champions of civil rights do?
yes.
> Not to mention those who make a comfortable living by speaking and writing
> against them?
yes.
Singleing-out Dees creates a deceptive illusion that his
> practices are an exception rather than the rule.
yes, dees is a part of a larger tendency. but dees makes a helluva a lot more money doing this than most, probobly because he is white, AND is a helluva lot less shameless than most civil rights pimps.
> In these days, the shibboleths and costumes of the past struggles have
> become mere marketing gimmicks to sell the moral and intellectual commodity
> produced by an army of college educated symbol manipulators.
largely, yes.
Most
> nonprofits use the services of professional fundraisers or telemarketers
> whose charitable sales pitch benefit mainly their own profits.
quite true.
>
> Charity, social movements, moral entrepreneurship and kindred "warm glow"
> or "grievance manufacturing" enterprises in this country are for the most
> part a sham to milk the gullible people with excess resources and the need
> of buying a clean conscience by chipping in a few bucks for "worthy"
> causes.
yes...
This is, in fact, a modern version of medieveal "merit making" -
> the practice of the wealthy supporting hordes of professional beggars to
> "make merits" and earn social respectability and a place in heaven.
no doubt.
>
> The real change can be achieved not by feel-good philanthropy but by a fat
> progressive tax and government programs, to which nonprofits can no doubt
> be valuable partners.
>
I think social democracy is dead. anyway, we still had this problem, if a less evolved versionn, when we had a more progressive tax and government programs. time for something new...
chris niles
>