|
kulsumkhatun997
| Dołączył: 05 Mar 2024 |
| Posty: 1 |
|
|
|
 Wysłany: Wto Mar 05, 2024 08:57 |
|
 |
 |
|
|
When one is interested in studying philanthropy sociologically, it is usual to find different references to its causes and effects. Some variants to which the analysis of philanthropy can be subject are: historical, economic, political and cultural. Indeed, for as long as we can remember, humanity has had philanthropic expressions that are expressed in various ways. Today the practice of philanthropy is universal and generosity is inherent to every human being but it acquires different tones and ranges according to the social groups at a certain historical moment. In the first tendencies towards civilization, if philanthropy had not existed in human groups, they simply would not have survived. Brotherhood among Men has resulted in various episodes in human history. However, the ways in which philanthropy is presented as a social expression that has community effects and benefits, adopts particularities and historical features. There is a great difference between the history of philanthropy in the West and that of the East, which in turn is divided into at least three more regions impregnated with different visions and religious traditions. As can be seen, there are manifestations of generosity at all times, such as a relationship of Man to Man, support for the needy, solidarity and altruism: in the West they range from the Greek academy and lyceum, through Roman patronage and the tithe of Christian charity and the creation of the trust figure; to today's large donor foundations in any of their variants: independent, business, community or family.
For example, England at the Phone Number List beginning of the 17th century became one of the first nations to legally regulate philanthropy with the Statute of Charitable Uses (dating from 1601). But the approach was perhaps not as humanitarian as one might see at first glance, but rather made clear the need to organize assistance to very poor groups. In France in the 18th century, before the revolution, the philanthropic efforts of the nobles sought to “cleanse” the streets and public squares of the poor and the needy and all those proto-men isolated from progress that made the landscape not in accordance with chivalric ideals. In Latin America, the fusion of some domestic practices with the Catholic tradition and national and regional particularities outlined multiple forms of expression of generosity where one was the predominant institution: The Catholic Church. In Mexico due to its dispute between liberals and conservatives, federalists and centralists; created a new philanthropic institution: the Welfare State that inhibited citizen participation. In the United States, its very accelerated process of industrialization in the 19th century implied decades later the creation of a philanthropic sector that, in addition to its solidarity work and exoneration of regrets for the lucrative plunder carried out by various businessmen when creating their emporiums.
served to counteract the power political of the public sector that did not allow them to do business, which resulted in greater participation of civil society that, together with the Protestant tradition, strengthened, on the one hand, the appropriation of the community sphere by the ordinary citizen, and on the other , finance their own philanthropic organizations, preserve and develop them. But what role do business foundations play in creating a culture of generosity? Without a doubt, the foundation is a historical institutional expression that has been modified throughout the 20th century and so far in the 21st century. Above we pointed out that the possibilities of studying philanthropy could go down a good number of paths. One of the most fre, or any other type of donor institution, has to do with its public utility, which is based on allocating private resources to public purposes. It is not that the foundational work consists of “regulating money”, but rather of contributing to creating conditions of economic takeoff for certain social groups. Whoever believes that philanthropy does not solve poverty is seeing only part of the social effects of poverty and therefore identifies the generous act as assistance and subtracts its value as a generator of activities to satisfy social needs. If, indeed, they are partially correct, it does not solve poverty, but that is not its mission.
|
|
|
