Human dignity should never be conditional to the generosity of billionaires

While completely agreeing with sentiment above, you title the piece ‘The Case Against Philanthropy.”

Philanthropy— last I checked — is a sentiment not limited to economic distinctions: anybody and everybody can be ‘lovers of humanity’ (the actual definition of the word), so I cannot judge the case to be made all that well…

The case you are really making is against the not-quite-similar but ancient notion of Noblesse Oblige, whereby the nobility with its various entitlements was held to have responsibilities as well. It was an attempted method of deflecting resentment, much as you describe in your piece, for the rapacious manner in which they collected their ‘entitlements.’

In reality, the case you are making — and with which I concur wholeheartedly — is against anything resembling a nobility in this country: Jeff Bezos is not the Duke of Amazon or the Earl of the Internet and therefore does not get to usurp the role of government — federal, state, county or municipal — in dealing with homelessness or any other widespread societal problem. In a similar instance to the homeless ‘philanthropy’ Bezos wants to leave the planet so he spends much much more on ‘Blue Origin’… a private space ‘agency’ (even the title is suspect). Why doesn’t he just pay more in taxes so we can fund NASA better? They’ve already left the planet several times and could do it again, likely for a lot less…