[p2p-research] What is Tactical Philanthropy? | Tactical Philanthropy (& Imagine)

[Paul D. Fernhout]

This term "tactical philanthropy" came up in a CSMonitor article I linkd to 
about a week ago. Here is more on that idea, which may suggest approaches 
those interesting in improving community infrastructure in a p2p way.

From:
   "What is Tactical Philanthropy?"
http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/philosophy-and-perspectives-top/what-is-tactical-philanthropy
"""
   “Tactical philanthropy” is a phrase coined by our founder Sean 
Stannard-Stockton in 2006 in the book Mapping the New World of American 
Philanthropy.
   “Tactical philanthropy is an approach to philanthropy that positions 
donors as suppliers of support to agents of social impact. Support generally 
refers to provision of capital through grants and social investments, but 
also includes nonfinancial support. A tactical philanthropist expresses his 
or her interests through supporting a portfolio of organizations that are 
effectively producing social impact in areas about which the donor is 
passionate.”
   Tactical philanthropists are people who view their giving as a way to 
invest in organizations that are making a positive difference in the world.
   Philanthropy is not always practiced this way. Strategic philanthropy is 
an approach that positions donors as problem-solvers. While we all want to 
figure out solutions to the world’s problems, at Tactical Philanthropy 
Advisors we focus on helping our clients find and support great 
organizations that are good problem solvers. We believe it is often the 
nonprofit management teams – those with decades of experience in their 
chosen fields – that are best positioned to figure out what works.
   If you are looking for a consultant who can help you figure out the best 
way to keep kids in school, for example, we’re not the right advisor for 
you. But if you care about keeping kids in school and want to support a 
portfolio of outstanding nonprofit organizations that are deploying various 
programs to keep kids in school, we’re a great fit.
   We believe philanthropists have many tools at their disposal, aside from 
grantmaking: advocacy, funding media projects, and convening important 
stakeholders are all examples of important roles philanthropists can play. 
We can help you deploy these various tactics, but we do not claim expertise 
as social science researchers.
   Just as great for-profit investing is mostly about designing a solid 
financial plan and then building a portfolio that reflects ones goals, 
Tactical Philanthropy is about designing a great philanthropic plan and then 
building a portfolio of grantees that is aligned with your values. If you 
are looking for social science research consultants, we are not the firm for 
you. If you are looking for an advisor who can help you build a personalized 
approach to your giving and bring innovation, effectiveness and joy to your 
philanthropy, we’d love to help you.
"""

A related item linked from Sean Stannard-Stockton's twitter page:
   "Why Seth Godin Is Wrong (Updated)"
   http://causewired.com/2009/09/15/why-seth-godin-is-wrong/
"""
Online marketing guru Seth Godin takes aim at nonprofits in a widely-quoted 
blog post “The problem with non” today, a diatribe of sorts that repeats a 
meme that’s been active in American philanthropy circles for at least a 
decade: nonprofits are afraid of change. ... Undoubtedly, control and 
bureaucracy can be big problems with nonprofits, large and small. But does 
anyone now living believe that the most philanthropic nation in the history 
of the world should devolve its nonprofit and service sector into a 
crowd-sourced cyberlibertarian throw of the dice at utopia? Yes, $300 
billion annually is less than 2% of GDP – but it’s a vital 2% for those who 
rely on the services and support that nonprofits provide. I don’t – and I 
preach digital change to nonprofits every day. Change ain’t easy when the 
world keeps moving and you have the keep the lights on – ask the President.
"""

Anyway, lots of issues there raised from different perspectives about the 
way non-profits and new media are interacting. Of course, some here might 
like a "crowd-sourced cyberlibertarian throw of the dice at utopia" funded 
to the tune of US$300 billion a year. :-) And I'm all for turning over the 
money for compulsory schooling directly to parents to help promote aspects 
of that. :-)
http://www.pdfernhout.net/towards-a-post-scarcity-new-york-state-of-mind.html

But, in any case, interesting things to think about whatever parts one 
agrees with. In general, this shows how a conversation is going on right now 
about p2p-related issues in the non-profit realm.

By the way, also from the CSMonitor, from this week:
http://features.csmonitor.com/economyrebuild/2009/09/15/economic-scene-afghanistan-will-cost-us-more-than-iraq/
"""
For the first time, the war in Afghanistan in the next budget year will cost 
Americans more than the war in Iraq. By the end of the next fiscal year, 
which starts Oct. 1, the total military budget costs for both wars will have 
exceeded $1 trillion. That’s more than the cost of the Vietnam War, 
adjusting for inflation, or any other US war except World War II ($3.2 
trillion in 2007 dollars). A trillion dollars is hard to imagine. Think of 
it this way: If you had an expense account good for $1 million a day, it 
would take 2,935 years to spend $1.071 trillion, which is the actual 
estimate for the wars’ price tag by Travis Sharp of the Center for Arms 
Control and Non-Proliferation in Washington. He reckons the two conflicts 
will have cost the typical American family of four roughly $13,000 by next 
year. ... Costs and utilization of healthcare and other veterans’ benefits 
are running about 30 percent higher than she and coauthor Joseph Stiglitz, a 
Columbia University Nobel Prize economist, estimated in their 2008 New York 
Times bestseller, “The Three Trillion Dollar War.” Adding in some social 
costs (such as families caring for the disabled and a diminished labor 
force), the two economists put a “moderate-realistic” price tag on the two 
wars of $5 trillion.
"""

Imagine for one moment that after 9/11/200 (or 9/11/1973) the USA had been 
able to look itself in the mirror, and had decided to spend US$5 trillion of 
the money to be incurred on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in a different 
way, to promote mutual security and prosperity globally. (And some people at 
the time did say the war costs would be in that neighborhood, not a 
"cakewalk".) So, imagine the USA picked, say, our Michel Bauwens to spend 
the money globally for building a new sustainable society with a central 
theme of p2p. :-) And imagine President Bush had told Michel to spend that 
money all in thirty years. I'd suggest Michel (or anyone) would have been 
hard pressed by the relentless pace of needing to come up with a place to 
spend US$500 million dollars each and every day on p2p for thirty years. :-) 
I'm sure he would try though. :-)

And every day on this list, for thirty years, we could nag him, day in, day 
out, "Michel, have you spent that US$500 million today? No? Get back to 
work!" :-)

I suggest Michel, like anybody, might collapse under the strain. :-( He 
might then decide, every day, for thirty years, to just pick a thousand 
names out of a telephone book, give them each half a million US dollars and 
a printed flier on p2p, and hope for the best. :-) In one year, that would 
be 365,000 people that Michel had given MacArthur Foundation level P2P 
"Genius Awards" to -- just random people off the street even. Just out of 
hope a few might do good things. :-)

It's even been outlined on TV in the 1950s:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Millionaire
"The Millionaire is a television drama anthology series that aired on CBS 
from January 19, 1955 to June 8, 1960, originally sponsored by 
Colgate-Palmolive.. The series explored the ways unexpected wealth changed 
life for better or for worse. The show became a five-season hit, thanks in 
large part to a twist that also made it a bit of a cult classic in the years 
that followed its life in the so-called "Golden Era" of U.S. television. The 
show centered around the stories of unknown people who were given, seemingly 
out of nowhere, one million dollars from a benefactor who insisted they 
never know him – with one memorable exception."

And, for all that money spent differently, there would be more that four 
thousand US families who would still have their loved one alive, and more 
than 30,000 US families that would still have their loved one physically 
whole, and more than probably 300,000 US families that would still have 
their loved one mentally whole, and maybe millions of Iraqi families that 
would still have their loved ones and still be living in their homes.
   http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_casualties.htm
I'd suggest, overall, we'd even all be much better off, even if Michel just 
burned the money every day, out of desperation.

Anyway, we can try to imagine it, and it is not that unrealistic, because, 
the USA also just spent trillions on a bailout, and no doubt it could afford 
to spend trillions for self-renewal, even now.

And foundations have tens of trillions of US dollars coming in over the next 
few decades to spend on good works. A flow into foundations of US$55 
trillion is expected over the next 25 years according to this:
   "Is Open Source the Answer To Giving?"
   http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/20/1313223

All they have to do is start sending Michel checks for US$500 million every 
day. :-) I'm sure he'd be willing to try to to keep up with the torrent for 
a while. :-) Kind of like playing "SimCity" with the "cheat" amount of 
money. :-)

And, if Michel decided to take a year-and-a-half sabbatical, he could fund 
this with the money he'd otherwise have to spend during that time:
   "A Solar Grand Plan"
   http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan
"A massive switch from coal, oil, natural gas and nuclear power plants to 
solar power plants could supply 69 percent of the U.S.’s electricity and 35 
percent of its total energy by 2050. ... But $420 billion in subsidies from 
2011 to 2050 would be required to fund the infrastructure and make it 
cost-competitive. ..."

Anyway, if there is one good thing to come out of the wars the US launched 
in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is to show that all our global problems stem 
more from ideology and a lack of imagination, than from a lack of resources 
(financial or otherwise).

Or, humorously, this is a simulation of the leadership we need: :-)
   "President George W. Bush singing John Lennon's Imagine"
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOEhQXUS_ws&NR=1

The original version:
   "John Lennon - Imagine"
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GAHFrLAxzM

So, anyway, we might hope to see more "tactical philanthropy" in a p2p 
direction in the future. :-) It's not that hard to imagine. :-)

--Paul Fernhout
http://www.pdfernhout.net/