Response to Thoreau’s Philanthropy ideas

Argument based on Thoreau’s Ideas on Philanthropy

Walden, a famous book written by Henry D. Thoreau, is one of the best books ever written in American History. In its Economy chapter, Thoreau described some of the common ways to show charity in the mid 1800�s. He also showed his new ideas of philanthropy and charity. He believed that philanthropy and charity at his time would only help the poor to a little extent in a short period of time or even harmful to the poor. I believe that “philanthropy is not love for one’s fellow-man in the broadest sense”. Philanthropy is limited, and people can not break this limit by money, time or their efforts. As a nation of freedom, American has seen many generous people who donate their time and money into charities. People want to help others by their good nature, but we are always limited by our own misunderstandings of what others need. In Walden, Thoreau was persuaded by his townsmen to support some of the poor families in the town to show his charity. Even today, we can always see people urging others to show their kindness by donating time and money to the poor. The federal government also encourages people to be humane by deducting the property or money they have donated to charities from their incomes and lower their taxes. Many philanthropists came to the poor “with the conscious design of doing good”. They have a good intention to help the poor. They would satisfy their needs by giving them food, clothes and money. In return the poor should appreciate and praise them for their deeds.

All these money and efforts will only make the poor “unhesitatingly preferred to remain poor”. A good intention to help could be more destructive than doing nothing at all, Thoreau explained the idea through an interesting story of Phaeton and the sun.

“A man is not a good man to me because he will feed me if I should be starving, or warm me if I should be freezing, or pull me out of a ditch if I should ever fall into one.” There should be a distinction between right and wrong. Following others being humane foolishly is even more evil than not doing it. The best way to be philanthropy is to be humane to the people who deserve it, and give them what they deserve. “Be sure that you give the poor the aid they most need, though it be your example which leaves them far behind”. We should think it over from the point of the poor before doing it. We often make mistakes on this issue, but giving out money is always wrong. I heard a story from a worker at a restaurant in Berkeley about a homeless who was able to earn more than ten dollars every day on the street begging. Many people gave some money to this guy, but he spent all the money buying cigarettes. The boss of the restaurant had offered him a job once and he declined it immediately. He was begging not because he lost the ability to work. And I believe he did not deserve all the sympathy people gave him.

People tend to boast their kindness by saying how much money they have donated to charities, but it is “the virtue which is greatly overrated by mankind” as Thoreau stated. Philanthropy has become a tool in the selfish hands of the rich to show their “kindness to poor” and even a tool to acquire more wealth. I have seen many people are using the charity vehicle to evade income taxes.

Even after more than one hundred years, Thoreau’s ideas are still very convincing. He supported his ideas with examples, questions and explanations effectively. For instance, he started the topic of philanthropy by confessing his weakness of “indulged very little in philanthropic enterprises”. A good start could grab the attention of all the readers so that he could finish his ideas afterwards.

“You must have a genius for charity as well as for anything else”. Being humane is not simply giving out money. The ultimate form of a man’s charity is not a partial and transitory act, which costs him nothing and of which he is unconscious. A real philanthropist has to help the poor in their “best estate, when most worthy to be helped”.

Thus one of the good ways to help the poor is driving them out of poor instead of giving them money, and keeping them poor. The current welfare system in the United States is not a helpful system to the poor, but a destructive one. It is a drag to the development of the whole society. Whether an idler or homeless works or not, he can always get a paycheck each month which is enough to cover all his expenses, so why does he have to work? If I were him, I would rather stay on the street instead of working. We can reorganize the system and spend the money on job training instead of food stamps. We can find him a suitable job in the society. If he does not want to work, he will not get any payment from the government which will force him to get a job finally. This process will be beneficial to the whole society.

On the other hand, we shall never abandon the people who do need the help. Before we give out money, clothes or property, we should take a closer look first. There are many single moms in this society who need help. They have to feed the children by themselves and need the help from us. However, there are people who would like to have more children only because each extra child could become an extra amount of money on their welfare paychecks. They could not afford to feed or educate the children because they would spend the money for themselves. Shall we give out our money to this kind of people? The best way to curb poverty is to find out the lack of a person and restore it. Anesthetics will only relieve your pain for a short time, but it will never cure your disease.

In one word, I believe that we shall never help the poor by giving out money or food. We shall help them by finding out the causes of poverty and restore them.

Leave a Reply