“The Ice Bucket Challenge should help make us aware of the political structures around us and the ways in which they are massively failing, but it shouldn’t be serve as an excuse not to be charitable,” writes economics PhD student Ben Labe.
In the opening scene of Quentin Tarantino’s directorial debut “Reservoir Dogs,” a soon-to-be accomplice to a bank robbery nicknamed Mr. Pink (played by Steve Buscemi) explains to his co-conspirators why he refuses to contribute to their diner waitress’ tip. “It’s for the birds…” says Mr. Pink stubbornly, “These ladies aren’t starving to death. They make minimum wage. When I worked for minimum wage, I wasn’t lucky enough to have a job that society deemed tip-worthy…It would appear that waitresses are just one of the many groups the government fucks in the ass on a regular basis. You show me a paper that says the government shouldn’t do that, and I’ll sign it. Put it to a vote, I’ll vote for it. But what I won’t do is play ball.”
♦◊♦
On Sunday, I was nominated to complete the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge, and on some level, I felt a lot like Mr. Pink.
The Ice Bucket Challenge relies on a gimmick. Instead of drumming up sympathy for the victims of ALS by appealing to our better natures, it feeds off of our narcissistic obsession with broadcasting ourselves on social media. Does it matter that dumping a bunch of ice water on our heads has nothing to do with the suffering of those with ALS and wastes a scarce natural resource? Not if it helps us wash away whatever societal guilt we’ve been feeling for the last few months.
That the Ice Bucket Challenge and other private philanthropic efforts are necessary in the richest country in the history of the world is something that should irk each of us.
|
The Ice Bucket Challenge provides a short-run solution to a long-run problem. In the last few weeks, it has been a phenomenal fundraising success, garnering around $80 million for the ALS Association. However, it has relied on a marketing tactic that will never work the same way again. It is possible, I guess, that someone at some point may come up with some act that people can challenge each other to perform that will manage to go viral, but dumping water on our own heads won’t be it. Like planking, cat-breading, and Tebowing before it, the whole thing will eventually go stale, and nobody will be interested in doubling their efforts. Viral internet phenomena have a natural expiration date; chronic diseases and the need to fund their persistent study do not.
Worst of all is that the Ice Bucket Challenge personalizes a problem that is essentially political. As Kate Redburn asks in an article published by Jacobin Magazine,
“Why does research money for this devastating disease need be raised through a silly challenge on YouTube?…Health and education are social rights that should be amply provided for by a democratic government, not left to the fancies of individual donors…Underneath their laudable aims and local successes, non-profits are beholden to the methods of funding which allow them to continue their work. It’s nearly impossible to challenge the unequal distribution of power and resources when your initiatives must be made palatable to ruling class philanthropists, whose wealth is a product of exploitation.”
In a just democracy, non-profits wouldn’t have to resort to gimmicky fundraising and billionaire bootlicking to be adequately resourced. People would fight hard for policies that promote the public good and destroy institutions that grant obscene amounts of power to a privileged few. The Ice Bucket Challenge wouldn’t have to exist in that world because we would all be contributing to ALS research already through a fair system of taxation and resource distribution.
♦◊♦
Despite all that, unlike Mr. Pink, however, I cannot in good conscience refuse to “play ball.” To do so would be too conveniently self-serving. I am also not a fan of the gratuity system, but that is partly because it benefits free-riders who end up paying less for services than the rest of us as they skimp on the tip. As John Maynard Keynes warned, we should be wary of those (especially among the privileged) whose ideologies seem to match up so neatly with their financial interests. We should be even more wary, I would add, when those people are ourselves.
That the Ice Bucket Challenge and other private philanthropic efforts are necessary in the richest country in the history of the world is something that should irk each of us. It should make us think more deeply about the kind of world that we want to live in and how we can best achieve it. It should challenge us to be aware of the political structures around us and the ways in which they are massively failing. But what it shouldn’t be is an excuse not to be charitable.
As a result of the Ice Bucket Challenge, I have donated an extra $100 to a worthy charity. You should, too.
Photo–Flickr/Anthony Quintano
The ALS gimmick is nothing compared to “PINK” everything for Breast Cancer yet there are very few articles against “PINK” everything. As the old saying goes “you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting something pink”. I did read a funny article about a year ago about the Susan G Gorman (spelling???) foundation. The CEO makes approx 6 million dollars a year. The author postulated that if the CEO reduced her salary to 1 million a year she personally could fund a lab and a team of 10 researchers forever. When asked about it the CEO stated the all to… Read more »
“A fair system of taxation and resource distribution.” If you are referring to the Fair Tax system, I am all for it. Otherwise it sounds like Socialism. Forced generosity is not true charity. How about abolishing government agencies that are not listed in the Enumerated Powers section of the Constitution? Or ones that violate the Bill Of Rights? Think of how much money that would free up.