Tradition and Discovery in Philanthropy


Michael Polanyi observed that "an aggregate of individual initiatives can lead to the establishment of spontaneous order only if each takes into account in its action what the others have done in the same context before."1 Polanyi's assertion of the "inescapable need for a traditional framework" as a starting point for the voyage of creative discovery complements Ludwig von Mises' recognition of history "as a study of utmost practical importance."

Mises writes:

History deals with human action, that is, the actions performed by individuals and groups of individuals. It describes the conditions under which people lived and the way they reacted to these conditions. Its subject[s] are human judgments of value and the ends men aimed at guided by these judgments, the means men resorted to in order to attain the ends sought, and the outcome of their actions."

Establishing that human action is guided by the ideologies that men and women acquire through their environment, Mises affirms that these ideologies are not immutable: "They are products of the human mind and they change when new thoughts are added to the old stock of ideas or are substituted for discarded ideas."2

In seeking to articulate a rationale for the new philanthropic possibilities and practices now emerging, our research would be incomplete without an effort to understand the history of philanthropy and to portray "new order" philanthropy against its traditional backdrop.

Research may include:

  • Understanding the origins, rationale and present status of the Progressive "old order." What was the influence of corporate liberalism on the character of voluntary institutions formed or re-formed 1900-1929? Why and how did "old order" philanthropy promote the hierarchical, professionalized organization of voluntary organizations and promote the transfers of responsibility to more remote and centralized agencies, both private and governmental?

  • Tracing the changing emphasis of philanthropy and the voluntary agencies it supported during the 20th century: 1) as the primary provider of social services, 2) as the principal promoter of the transfer of social responsibility to more remote and compulsory agencies and adoption of the corollary conception of the continuing role of private organizations as supporting insignificant, leftover tasks, 3) as an agent of government as "contracting out" to voluntary agencies became fashionable, and 4) as a "partner" or collaborator with government. How might the new philanthropy be characterized?

  • Exploring the origins, rationale, historical precedent, and present status of the emerging "new order."

  • Compiling an inventory of examples of the "new order": the school choice movement, increasing patient involvement in their health maintenance and repair, the rapid re-growth of the mutual help movement, and the growing support for social security privatization.

1 Michael Polanyi, "The Manageability of Social Tasks," in The Logic of Liberty (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1998), 195-6.

2 Ludwig von Mises, Theory and History (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1957; reprint New Rochelle, NY: Arlington House, 1969), 159-60.

Back to top ^