MobileRead Forums - View Single Post - Seriousness US/Europe Cultural Divide -- Musings

Xenophon · 04-12-2009, 03:30 PM

Some of the earlier threads here got me thinking about the "cultural divide" that seems apparent between (some of) our US and (some of) our European members. This divide shows up in many areas -- for example the degree to which we expect the government to do something vs. individual action.

With the idea of this divide marinating in the back of my mind, I ran across reference to a book that is an underrated classic: Andrew Carnegie's Gospel of Wealth. And it suddenly struck me: Carnegie's approach to charity is a perfect exemplar of the difference in attitudes! I'm speaking here of what he says one should do, but not necessarily of his explanation of why you should do it.

For those who don't already know, Andrew Carnegie set the standard for private charitable giving in the US. After a classic rags-to-riches story (from penniless immigrant to richest man in the world in under 50 years), he then gave away more than 95% of his fortune! But that's not all -- he deliberately structured his giving to lead to a number of interesting goals:
("quotations" in the following are really my paraphrases, NOT direct quotes from the man himself!)

Most donations from Carnegie were matching funds. "You raise money for your library/church-organ/whatever, and I'll match what you raise." He felt that people valued what they worked for, so he almost never gave outright gifts that would fully fund something.
He deliberately chose charities that would be "in your face" challenges to the other business-people, tycoons, and rich socialites of his day. "My concert hall in Pittsburgh is bigger, plusher, and has better acoustics than anything you have in New York! And it has subsidized tickets for the less-than-wealthy, too." Or, "Nice museum you have here. Too bad you don't have a great collection of <dinosaur-bones/Egyptian artifacts/whatever>" Not because he was showing off (or at least mostly not), but rather to induce other wealthy people to pony up money for similar institutions in their cities. For example, the American Museum of Natural History in New York already existed, but Carnegie's example with his museum in Pittsburgh got the wealthy NY-ers to support the AMNH to a much greater degree than before ("We can't have the most important city in the nation out-done by a dirty, industrial, provincial city like Pittsburgh..."). In fact, that "we can't be outdone by Pittsburgh" thing actually worked wonders. Here in "da 'Burgh" we got museums, libraries, a world-class symphony, and all sorts of other cultural institutions. And dozens of other US cities got the same... because their wealthy industrialists couldn't stand the idea of "being outdone by Pittsburgh!" Carnegie was a sharp guy.
He heavily emphasized education and opportunity for all. There are thousands of Carnegie libraries around the world (not all with his name on them). After the tycoons of New York declined to pay for a free public library system, Carnegie shamed them by donating the then-unheard-of sum of $60 million to found the New York Public Library system. His donation paid for all the land and all the buildings. Then he rubbed their noses in it until they paid for the books.
More education and opportunity for all: Carnegie felt that the universities of his time were overly focussed on liberal arts educations for the upper crust (think "Ivy-league" here). So he started a school of his own, aimed partly at teaching the children of the workers so they could do better than their parents, and partly at research in science and technology that would provide useful economic impact. Carnegie-Mellon University is now at the very top of the rankings in Computer Science: a three-and-a-half-way tie with MIT and Stanford -- the and-a-half is Berkeley (sometimes). It's a top-tier science, technology, and engineering school as well. (Don't ask how we wound up with a top-rated Drama school, and darned good architecture and design schools -- it's a mystery to me!)
Carnegie deliberately set out to extend the impact of his example by writing The Gospel of Wealth. He sent copies to all the "captains of industry" of his day, and spent quite a bit of time exhorting them to follow his lead. Most didn't go as far as he did, but a short list of the results includes: A.W.Mellon giving his art collection as the core of the National Gallery; the Ford Foundation; the Mellon Foundation(s); the Field Museum in Chicago... A huge fraction of the large charitable foundations in the US were started because Carnegie jawboned his peers into charitable activity. The founders or early major funders of all the listed institutions specifically cite Carnegie as their inspiration. The list here is just off the top of my head (no research).

It's also interesting to note what Carnegie didn't do -- he didn't use his clout in Washington to get the government involved in these charities.

In the modern day, Warren Buffet (an investor you may have heard of) convinced this guy called Bill Gates to read The Gospel of Wealth -- sent him a copy and insisted on meeting to discuss it personally. Gates credits it with the idea to form the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, quit Microsoft, and go into the charity business for the rest of his life. And Buffet just donated several billion dollars of his fortune to said foundation.

But the Gospel of Wealth isn't just aimed at the ultra-wealthy. It's really aimed at all of us. Carnegie's charitable example became the epitome of what we all should do -- even when he's not cited by name. Of course you donate to a wide variety of charities. Of course you volunteer time to help with disaster relief/literacy/soup kitchens/international aid/whatever-floats-your-boat. It's not just neighborly, it's what Americans are supposed to do.

I suggest that a read through the book may help to illuminate some of the American side of this particular cultural gap.

Xenophon (who has blathered on, far far too much on this topic).

P.S. I'm not sure I'm intending to endorse Carnegie's reasoning behind the actions he recommends in his book. And I'm pretty sure I'm not endorsing his business practices (more on that in another post). But the actions he wants you to take really describe an American ideal to a T (in the area of charity).

04-12-2009, 03:30 PM	#1
Xenophon curmudgeon Posts: 1,487 Karma: 5748190 Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Redwood City, CA USA Device: Kobo Aura HD, (ex)nook, (ex)PRS-700, (ex)PRS-500	US/Europe Cultural Divide -- Musings Some of the earlier threads here got me thinking about the "cultural divide" that seems apparent between (some of) our US and (some of) our European members. This divide shows up in many areas -- for example the degree to which we expect the government to do something vs. individual action. With the idea of this divide marinating in the back of my mind, I ran across reference to a book that is an underrated classic: Andrew Carnegie's Gospel of Wealth. And it suddenly struck me: Carnegie's approach to charity is a perfect exemplar of the difference in attitudes! I'm speaking here of what he says one should do, but not necessarily of his explanation of why you should do it. For those who don't already know, Andrew Carnegie set the standard for private charitable giving in the US. After a classic rags-to-riches story (from penniless immigrant to richest man in the world in under 50 years), he then gave away more than 95% of his fortune! But that's not all -- he deliberately structured his giving to lead to a number of interesting goals: ("quotations" in the following are really my paraphrases, NOT direct quotes from the man himself!) Most donations from Carnegie were matching funds. "You raise money for your library/church-organ/whatever, and I'll match what you raise." He felt that people valued what they worked for, so he almost never gave outright gifts that would fully fund something. He deliberately chose charities that would be "in your face" challenges to the other business-people, tycoons, and rich socialites of his day. "My concert hall in Pittsburgh is bigger, plusher, and has better acoustics than anything you have in New York! And it has subsidized tickets for the less-than-wealthy, too." Or, "Nice museum you have here. Too bad you don't have a great collection of <dinosaur-bones/Egyptian artifacts/whatever>" Not because he was showing off (or at least mostly not), but rather to induce other wealthy people to pony up money for similar institutions in their cities. For example, the American Museum of Natural History in New York already existed, but Carnegie's example with his museum in Pittsburgh got the wealthy NY-ers to support the AMNH to a much greater degree than before ("We can't have the most important city in the nation out-done by a dirty, industrial, provincial city like Pittsburgh..."). In fact, that "we can't be outdone by Pittsburgh" thing actually worked wonders. Here in "da 'Burgh" we got museums, libraries, a world-class symphony, and all sorts of other cultural institutions. And dozens of other US cities got the same... because their wealthy industrialists couldn't stand the idea of "being outdone by Pittsburgh!" Carnegie was a sharp guy. He heavily emphasized education and opportunity for all. There are thousands of Carnegie libraries around the world (not all with his name on them). After the tycoons of New York declined to pay for a free public library system, Carnegie shamed them by donating the then-unheard-of sum of $60 million to found the New York Public Library system. His donation paid for all the land and all the buildings. Then he rubbed their noses in it until they paid for the books. More education and opportunity for all: Carnegie felt that the universities of his time were overly focussed on liberal arts educations for the upper crust (think "Ivy-league" here). So he started a school of his own, aimed partly at teaching the children of the workers so they could do better than their parents, and partly at research in science and technology that would provide useful economic impact. Carnegie-Mellon University is now at the very top of the rankings in Computer Science: a three-and-a-half-way tie with MIT and Stanford -- the and-a-half is Berkeley (sometimes). It's a top-tier science, technology, and engineering school as well. (Don't ask how we wound up with a top-rated Drama school, and darned good architecture and design schools -- it's a mystery to me!) Carnegie deliberately set out to extend the impact of his example by writing The Gospel of Wealth. He sent copies to all the "captains of industry" of his day, and spent quite a bit of time exhorting them to follow his lead. Most didn't go as far as he did, but a short list of the results includes: A.W.Mellon giving his art collection as the core of the National Gallery; the Ford Foundation; the Mellon Foundation(s); the Field Museum in Chicago... A huge fraction of the large charitable foundations in the US were started because Carnegie jawboned his peers into charitable activity. The founders or early major funders of all the listed institutions specifically cite Carnegie as their inspiration. The list here is just off the top of my head (no research). It's also interesting to note what Carnegie didn't do -- he didn't use his clout in Washington to get the government involved in these charities. In the modern day, Warren Buffet (an investor you may have heard of) convinced this guy called Bill Gates to read The Gospel of Wealth -- sent him a copy and insisted on meeting to discuss it personally. Gates credits it with the idea to form the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, quit Microsoft, and go into the charity business for the rest of his life. And Buffet just donated several billion dollars of his fortune to said foundation. But the Gospel of Wealth isn't just aimed at the ultra-wealthy. It's really aimed at all of us. Carnegie's charitable example became the epitome of what we all should do -- even when he's not cited by name. Of course you donate to a wide variety of charities. Of course you volunteer time to help with disaster relief/literacy/soup kitchens/international aid/whatever-floats-your-boat. It's not just neighborly, it's what Americans are supposed to do. I suggest that a read through the book may help to illuminate some of the American side of this particular cultural gap. Xenophon (who has blathered on, far far too much on this topic). P.S. I'm not sure I'm intending to endorse Carnegie's reasoning behind the actions he recommends in his book. And I'm pretty sure I'm not endorsing his business practices (more on that in another post). But the actions he wants you to take really describe an American ideal to a T (in the area of charity).