A monopoly on charity

The usual response by command-and-control monopolists to the anxiety that they'll be outcompeted by the private sector:

The same journalist who wrote the recent Time cover story also authored a book savaging philanthropy as “an elite charade” that does more harm than good, a tool of injustice in a rigged system, a means of suppressing dissent, a way of disguising merciless taking by appearing to give back. He attributes to donors every imaginable motive -- vanity, cynical reputation laundering, undemocratic manipulation, drop-in-the-bucket cheapness -- except altruism and good faith. For these fashionable arguments the work was anointed a “book of the year” by the Washington Post, the New York Times, and NPR.

Other critics make the same arguments. Philanthropic giving is “an undemocratic exercise of power” which should be wielded only by the state, says Stanford’s resident philanthropy academic. Even well-intentioned charitable efforts must be shut down, say the new activists, because they undercut the revenue and authority of the federal government. Powerful interests ranging from elite media to Democrats running for president insist that only government officials should be allowed to improve public welfare and reform society.