A lot of embarrassed discussion has come out of the scandal this past week which many are calling CharityGate (慈善门), when five of the nineteen lower-income university students sponsored by an impromptu charity group consisting of twenty-two businesswomen in Xiangfan, Hubei province had their second year of funding cut as punishment for not expressing thanks to their benefactors.
Freelance blogger-pundit and senior news editor Chang Ping writes on his Tianya blog that ‘charity must not be about demands‘:
Judging from news reports, a year ago the organizer had arranged for 19 female female entrepreneurs to partner up and make the commitment to each year donate CNY1,000-3,000 to 22 impoverished university students. A commitment is at least a gentleman's agreement, and the amount of money is not large, the students most likely never have suspected that the donors would renege halfway through, and quite possibly rearranged their courses of study and lives based on this commitment. At present, only a quarter of the commitment has been honored, and now the entrepreneures want to cancel it. This reason of not having received thanks is really just a little far-fetched; and not just that, the students have been cast as “thankless” and “ruthless university students”, a typical public condemnation; with the chickens now killed to scared the monkeys, you can imagine what pressure the remaining funded students are under.
You can't say that these 5 university students have not erred, but as I see it, in this instance, the entrepreneures have made an even bigger mistake; not only have they increased the mental pressure on poor people already in deep need, but they've also distorted the meaning of philanthropy.
In China, charity is widely seen as an act of bestowing favor. The notion behind bestowing favor is not just to demonstrate one's own rank, but far too often also comes with the demand for the beneficiary to repay it. This only gives the beneficiary enormous mental pressure, even leaving them feeling humiliated; that's why there are stories like “Food Handed Out in Contempt.”
In efforts to resolve this conflict [between shame and need], Chinese in ancient times took two sides: one side emphasized “bestow the favor, but don't preach while you're at it”, and the other emphasized “you can accept the favor, just don't ever forget you did.” As those bestowing the favors were the ones also with power and influence, this is why we so often seen in books admonitions like “drink the water, just don't forget who dug the well.”
So to sum up what he learned from all this, he said that after having received help from others, the most important thing was not to give thanks to them, but to learn to be like them, and within the limits of what it is in his power to do, do his best to help those around him who were less fortunate than himself; like offering coal during winter, helping them when they needed it. Forming such a relay of love ensures that those who need love most will get as much as possible, and thusly repaying all of society might very well have been the original intention for those Americans who at the beginning had helped him.
From here he made a conclusion, that of the help his American friends gave him, the most important thing wasn't that this helped him to go on to become successful, but that it fostered compassion within him, made him a compassionate person. Helping people with no expectation of repayment, from then on this became a part of his personality. So he admonished that student about to go off to America: once you get to America, the most important thing you must do is to learn from American culture, especially what love is in American culture, and allow yourself to become a more perfect person, a person with compassion, and through your own actions, do your best to spread love, and through you let the love travel as far as possible.
Bullog blogger Liu Tianzhao takes a more direct approach to the subject with his post, ‘Avoid the awkwardness of philanthropy and open up civil society charity groups: the rotten subject nobody dares to write‘:
Though, for the donor organization to require the students to write reports on their schooling lives is completely justified. The donor has the right, prior to granting the funds, to put forth a few requirements, such as where the money is to be spent, or what level of performance the students are to attain——basically donors and charity organizations must all make use of these sorts of approaches to ensure that their money doesn't get abused, and to see the fruition of their original intention. But in this case in Xiangfan, the local union is not an independent charity organization, it's only just played the role of middleman. And this charity project took the ‘one-to-one’ approach, wherein those putting up the money and those receiving it must meet directly; as well, the “report on state of school life” letter must also be delivered to the donor in person.
Writing letters to the funding organization or to the funders themselves sounds like a small enough difference, but if one were to experience even a little of what it's like to be a charity recipient, one would see that the difference is in fact quite large. Writing letters directly to the donors implies they will be faced with an extremely unequal relationship, with what seems would be a forced, mandatory expression of feelings of appreciation. The later situation proves that this coerciveness is not just psychological pressure, but that it's part and parcel of the whole engagement. This would leave one with an extreme desire to get out, not perhaps of giving thanks itself, but of the forced requirement to do so.