Apparently, some of the
people's major problem with Steve Jobs is that he is not philanthropic
enough. I don't understand these people
at all. If you look at some of the recent newspaper articles (links: 1, 2, 3), they insinuate a kind of general disappointment that Steve Jobs in spite
of having $8.3 billion dollars has not publicly donated anything to the
not-so-fortunate ones. The tone of the
articles you will find is that of unmistakable whine and gossip as it heavily draws inspiration
from the literary style of mediocre tabloid : "Ya know? He earned so
much and never gave anything. What's he going to do with all the money? Jeez,
how much does one need? Anyway, he is a genius, though." They take extra
care to point out that Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Mark Zuckerberg have donated their wealth.
I am not interested in
having any opinion on what Steve Jobs should have done with his excess wealth.
But, what I am amused about is how we have the audacity to presume that
we are somehow entitled to demand philanthropy from people. Why are we thinking
he should donate some money? Just because we allowed him to get rich? Just
because his fellow rich people like Bill
gates and Warren Buffet are doing it? That brings to the most interesting part
of this phenomena. Most of us don't even know what Bill Gates is doing with all
the charity any more than their commercials that interrupt youtube videos once
in a while. Most of us don't even care how much or what charity is being done,
what is the cause, who are the beneficiaries, and how effective is it? All we
are interested in knowing is whether a rich dude is giving something back or
not. It's all too idle, folks. Let me help you recreate the thought process in our brains:
"hmm … he made a
ton of money … huh?"
"does he do any
charity ? "
"oh he does …
that's so sweet and humane to give it back"
And the analysis stops
right there and the mind playfully meanders to curves on the pretty lady who is improving
the ugly façade of the opposite Subway Sandwich Store by 890%. At best, we are just
happy to know that someone is donating something to an arbitrary cause that apparently
assists anonymous people who are allegedly poor. That is the maximum vagueness
with which we care about the philanthropy of the super-rich. And yet, we want
Mr. Steve Jobs to indulge us lest he fall prey to our instantaneous moral
judgments. Doesn't this behavior seem a little queer to you?
Both Bill Gates and
Steve Jobs are great personal heroes of mine and not just because of their charity.
They have led a life of passion, doing things that they care about and changed
the landscape of our society in incredible ways and it's really unfair to compare
two of the classiest entrepreneurs of our generation based on what they choose
to do with their bank balance. Why can't we handle two awesome people? Why must there be a comparison always? In fact, I don't require any of my heroes to do
any charity. My rule for a hero: "Charity: Optional".
The very concept of
charity is itself very interesting - especially because the motives behind it
are not that obvious. I sincerely admire
what the likes of Bill Gates are doing because he not only gave the money but
also gets to carefully oversee the effort and I feel that is awesome. For those who cannot monitor to that detail, even if a lot of us care about
doing something in the world, many studies also repeatedly question the
effectiveness of charity. For example, Linda Polman in her book "The Crisis Caravan: What's wrong with the Humanitarian Aid" explains how the grassroots delivery of charity is extremely
compromised because of the rampant theft and corruption among the warlords in a
poverty-stricken areas like Somalia and Haiti. She also provokes us to question
the aid organizations and their ability to do what they claim. May be a whole
bunch of us are donating just to feel good and not bother if there is any real
change. Not surprisingly, much of that money ends up in political campaigns rather any
serious social changes. All this should evoke a serious debate on the idea of
charity itself. Just blindly thinking
that charity is an absolute awesome deed is one of debatable myths of our
generation. Also, who says that charity must come in certain forms like giving
aid to the impoverished? Never forget that one of the main engines of
corruption, theft and exploitation in the global economic network relies on middle
class's ambition and consumerism itself. So, if you can help the middle-class
understand the ecological footprints because of their lifestyle - that's great
charity too, according to me. Why?, the rapid rise of cell phone industry is funding a civil war in Congo - the bloodiest since world war 2. When we change our smart-ass phones
every 2 months, we got blood on our hands. As you can see, how the economics is tied to exploitation is more
complex than you think. We have got to be careful when we wax judgmental on
other people.
Here was a guy who
relentlessly created one of the iconic and charming companies of our generation
blending beauty with technology. He propelled our species to quickly evolve from
being a soda-sipping primate to a gizmo-groping primate. He helped
disrupt and revitalize established industries like
music, cell-phone, PC, computer animation, gaming etc. with magnificent technology and tasteful product
design there by, creating millions of jobs and billions of dollars worth of
wealth creation. And somehow, that's not enough service to humanity? Is this
how we are treating our geniuses?
Of course, I never
bought any of the apple products. And, for 2 major reasons:
(1) the incorrigible
behavior of my fellow chappies who couldn't have an adult conversation without
mentioning their latest apple gadget repeatedly pricked my tender heart with
fears of belonging to the phoniest club on the planet that considered shopping
and swiping a credit-card as an achievement in life; (2) the products were
mercilessly priced for a modest graduate school stipend paycheck. Yet, Steve
Jobs is one of my greatest heroes for he spent his life reinventing
himself to create one innovation after
another. All in all, here's your
takeaway point: If my life can teach something, it's that you can be inspired
without spending a dime.
R.I.P., Mr. Steve Jobs.
FLAWSOPHY salutes you.
Posts
