Scottish Love in Action

I have been giving for a while to a charity called Scottish Love In Action (SLA). Despite its rather off-putting name, derived no doubt from its Christian religious background, learning about the charity and its works has taught me about a section of Indian Hindu society called the Dalits. This is a class or ‘caste’ of people who are considered ritually impure, unclean, ignorant and beneath contempt by mainstream Hindus. Dalits are thus condemned from birth to a life where the best the lucky ones can achieve is a ‘career’ cleaning toilets, sewers, rubbish dumps or other forms of degrading manual labour – the worst is a short life begging or slavery. Because such ‘uncleanliness’ is considered contagious Dalits are segregated and forced to live in the worst social conditions, and banned from access to schools, surgeries, religious buildings and other public social centres. To be a Dalit, and an orphaned or disabled child must be the cruellest roll of the dice that life can give. Most of the disadvantaged children looked after by SLA in their homes are Dalit children and the charity gives them safety and security, then dignity, self-respect and love.

I am happy to invest in SLA, because nobody should be disadvantaged through accident of birth. Learn more http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalits

Anonymity is the purest expression of altruism.

It was when I was a student that I first heard the adage that graffiti are the purest form of art. Graffiti are works art left anonymously in a public place for neither reward and nor recognition, so the artist is left untainted by the needs of self sustenance or critical acclaim. I have never accepted this assertion, neither then nor now. I do not consider exhortations to ‘Kick out the Tories’ or crude declarations of love to be particularly artful however well adorned, and the most famous exponent of this art form, Banksy, whist still unknown to many, now puts on exhibitions and has a reputation to protect. Nevertheless, the notion of linking purity with anonymity has stayed with me, this belief that any expression of human endeavour can be sullied by the need for reward or recognition by a wider society. It’s the fact that it is so counter-intuitive which makes it so appealing; we all yearn to be recognised as the great and successful people we are and earn the greatest of accolades that society can bestow on an individual: respect. Yet it is that comforting blanket of anonymity which grants you the freedom from being judged, and your leaves your motives pure.

I think this is why I find Pepandlove so appealing as a vehicle for donating money to charity. I have never been particularly comfortable with the more traditional ways by which we give money to charity. Anyone who works in an office will recognise the ‘list’ which comes round: ‘Hi, I’m doing a walk for charity, would you like to sponsor me?’ or similar. We sign our name because we don’t want to be judged, or just to get them out of our face, without sometimes even asking for which charity the money is being raised. This may be good for charities, but doesn’t really make us a charitable nation because the motives are all wrong. Much better is the notion of regular giving, where you decide to give a proportion of your income on a regular basis. You can at least freely think about which charity you want to support. But then you have to divulge so much information about yourself to set up the necessary financial transfers and apply for gift aid (a curious concept about which I may blog later), that you feel tied in. After all it is often a ‘cause’ you are supporting, rather than a specific charity.

But with Pepandlove once I have signed up and made a financial commitment I am free to give to whom I want, when I want. My beneficiaries don’t know who I am so I’m not put on a mailing list and I’m free to pick another charity next time without resubmitting all my details. I don’t even have to pick a charity – I can pick a cause, poverty for example, and Pepandlove will suggest a charity. This happened to me recently: Pepandlove suggested a small charity in which I might be interested and I discovered a small but very focussed charity doing good things. I made a small donation and got a very nice ‘thank you’ back again (through Pepandlove) with a link to an article showing how my donation will help – priceless!

Hello world

Hello World,

Pepandlove is a small experiment:

Using freely available (open source) technology is it possible to create something that encourages people to:
a) give more of their income to charity
b) learn more about the causes being addressed by charities so that they might become better citizens

Given the ever-expanding global reach of technology, the power of open source technology (thanks to the collaboration of thousands of socially inclined developers) and the current climate crisis now seems a good time to try such an experiment. With the experiment’s limited budget its success will lie in the commitment of its users- the extent to which people are willing to encourage one another to give, and the extent to which people are willing to share knowledge and foster learning.

Whilst the form that this experiment has taken is unique (as far as I know), its underlying concept isn’t. The idea that a system should exist to allow conscientious learned people to collaborate as a community in the spirit of good has been around for a while:

A letter from Albert Einstein to Sigmund Freud, 29 April, 1931

Dear Professor Freud,

I greatly admire your passion to ascertain the truth–a passion that has come to dominate all else in your thinking. You have shown with irresistible lucidity how inseparably the aggressive and destructive instincts are bound up in the human psyche with those of love and the lust for life. At the same time, your convincing arguments make manifest your deep devotion to the great goal of the internal and external liberation of man from the evils of war. This was the profound hope of all those who have been revered as moral and spiritual leaders beyond the limits of their own time and country, from Jesus to Goethe and Kant. Is it not significant that such men have been universally recognized as leaders, even though their desire to affect the course of human affairs was quite ineffective?

I am convinced that almost all great men who, because of their accomplishments, are recognized as leaders even of small groups share the same ideals. But they have little influence on the course of political events. It would almost appear that the very domain of human activity most crucial to the fate of nations is inescapably in the hands of wholly irresponsible political rulers.

Political leaders or governments owe their power either to the use of force or to their election by the masses. They cannot be regarded as representative of the superior moral or intellectual elements in a nation. In our time, the intellectual elite does not exercise any direct influence on the history of the world; the very fact of its division into many factions makes it impossible for its members to co-operate in the solution of today’s problems. Do you not share the feeling that a change could be brought about by a free association of men whose previous work and achievements offer a guarantee of their ability and integrity? Such a group of international scope, whose members would have to keep contact with each other through constant interchange of opinions, might gain a significant and wholesome moral influence on the solution of political problems if its own attitudes, backed by the signatures of its concurring members, were made public through the press. Such an association would, of course, suffer from all the defects that have so often led to degeneration in learned societies; the danger that such a degeneration may develop is, unfortunately, ever present in view of the imperfections of human nature. However, and despite those dangers, should we not make at least an attempt to form such an association in spite of all dangers? It seems to me nothing less than an imperative duty!

Once such an association of intellectuals–men of real stature–has come into being, it might then make an energetic effort to en-list religious groups in the fight against war. The association would give moral power for action to many personalities whose good intentions are today paralyzed by an attitude of painful resignation. I also believe that such an association of men, who are highly respected for their personal accomplishments, would provide important moral support to those elements in the League of Nations who actively support the great objective for which that institution was created.

I offer these suggestions to you, rather than to anyone else in the world, because your sense of reality is less clouded by wishful thinking than is the case with other people and since you combine the qualities of critical judgment, earnestness and responsibility.

Albert Einstein