In looking after our own interests we would be wise to do no harm — no harm to others — or to the local or global ecology. "Looking after number one" doesn't sound so logically compelling if we examine its precipitous relationship and compatibility with war, global health problems, imperiled human rights, social inequality, and environmental degradation.
From the broadest perspective, personal and social-environmental investments are not mutually exclusive but, rather, they can be seen as synergistically compatible. Surely, compassionate consideration of the larger whole can complement — rather than conflict with — our own real needs. Helping others can be seen as helping ourselves when we recognize mutual earth-friendly goals. Supporting each other's efforts to live fully — yet do no harm — enhances our individual freedom and well-being from all sides.
Philanthropy that includes ourselves but proactively attends to the ongoing needs of others will require that we outgrow blind self-seeking behavior as well as questionable means to accomplish a desired end. Philanthropy — both global and local — can take many forms and develop on many levels of our collective consciousness. However, it must be focused by the individual and collective heart — with institutional involvement — but not institutional dependence or subservitude. Right livelihood — as conscience and compassion directs — allows us all to fulfill our unique potential more easily by doing no harm along the way.
Google the words accompanying links if any links are on the blink. I am not responding to email at the current time while I work on other projects.
The issues I document are not really "dated" or "old school" in that they chronicle the kinds of campus struggles that can and do still
happen today and will likely continue in the future. The technology has changed faster than the attitudes and
mentality behind our education programs, policies, and practices.