The tragedy of American compassion

American Compassion

Olasky's the Tragedy of American Compassion

In his book the Tragedy of American Compassion, Marvin Olasky bemoans the current state of charity and poverty relief in the United States, comparing it to what he considers the far more effective aid offered in earlier centuries through organizations other than the state and federal governments. The "effective help" that he calls for in great detail throughout the book basically consists of providing relief that allows individuals and families to support themselves as much as possible, and in fact demands that they do so. This was one of the key features of relief efforts and organizations before the various government entities of the United States collectively and individually became involved in providing poverty relief. Simple charity -- the giving of money, food, clothing, and other necessities -- without any expectation that the individuals receiving the charity contribute what they are able to the community does not actually provide lasting or effective assistance, and this is part of the problem that Olasky identifies in the modern U.S. concept and practice of compassion and charity.

Religion, specifically and predominantly Christianity in United States history, played a hugely vital role in providing the type of effective help that Olansky identifies. Charity and poverty were seen as primarily if not entirely a moral and spiritual issue, and therefore not a matter that the government(s) should or reasonably could become involved in. Poverty relief was a moral incumbent on the wealth (or at least, on the wealthy that subscribed to that moral theory), but it was also necessary for the recipients of charity to demonstrate and uphold the same morality. It was considered immoral, for example, to give money to alcoholics no matter how great their need, as it was likely to go to drink rather than to providing the actual needs of the individual.

Pauperism was avoided by demanding that anyone able-bodied and mentally competent would be engaged in work, and if there was truly no paying job available for them they would still perform other manual labor for the charity organization in exchange for food and other necessities. No one, then would become a lifelong pauper, but would instead be able to eventually pull themselves out of poverty and again begin contributing fully to the community they were a part of. "Welfare" in the modern conception of the term would have been considered absolutely immoral, not to mention ill advised for purely practical and pragmatic. Not only was it not government's job to provide assistance for the needy, as the government was generally expected to refrain from engaging in moral and spiritual issues, but the providing of un-refereed cash assistance to individuals regardless of their ability to work for indefinite periods of time was considered counter-productive and something that would perpetuate poverty.