Connie

In the beginning of this week, after all the chaos of the blizzard subsided, we held our long-awaited debate on America's Top Philanthropists. Each of the five groups represented one philanthropist; on the panel were Jane Addams, Andrew Carnegie, John Rockefeller, Julius Rosenwald and Black Elk. We developed opening statements for our respective philanthropists and created "hard-hitting" questions directed at our opponents.

Jane Addams was a favorable philanthropist because she immersed herself in the poor neighborhoods and allowed herself to truly understand the root of the problem (of poverty). Some people viewed Rosenwald as a man before his time because he strove to help African Americans. Some people also liked Rosenwald’s and Carnegie’s philosophies of giving and making a difference when alive. I think The Kaplan Fund was a good example of good intentions gone wrong when money and expectations were put in the hands of younger generations. Also, some argued that Carnegie’s “ladders upon which the aspiring can rise” was placed a little too high off the ground by only building libraries in communities where they could afford to maintain them. Others argued that Carnegie’s method made the communities more connected with the libraries because they had to invest their own money and efforts into them. Rockefeller, another popular philanthropist, was favored because he hired experts to take care of his organizations in efforts to ensure that they were successful. Black Elk, though the least popular in class, valued giving as a way to express one’s humanity and membership in the community.

We also had the pleasure of receiving advice from Terri Freeman and Angela Hackley from the Community Foundation National Capital Region. One of the obstacles our class is going to face is deciding who to help, and who to turn down. Most likely, all the organizations will have honorable causes and missions, making our decision difficult. Terri and Angela stressed the importance of finding a group with strength. Not necessarily strength in its application, but strength in its organization. Do people in the organization talk to each other? How is the power distributed among colleagues? Are its goals and missions lucid and understandable? Can we make an impact this way? Dr. Grimm added that it is a balance between the head and the heart that we must find.