Billionaires and the origin of ideas
There’s been quite a bit in the press recently about the initiative launched by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett to encourage other billionaires to donate half their wealth. The reports claim that nothing like this has ever happened before. That’s not quite true.
It’s worth taking a look back at history here. Almost 200 years ago, a weaver in Scotland joined forces with a few other men. They made the five (!!!) books they owned available to the general public and opened a lending library. When steam-powered looms came into use and the hand weavers were unable to compete, the family fell into poverty and emigrated to America.
His son Andrew benefited from the fact that a wealthy Philadelphian had opened his private library to interested working-class boys – they were allowed to borrow one book a week. Andrew educated himself as best he could and had a knack for spotting trends. He realised that steel would soon replace cast iron. He bought a blast furnace. As steel was needed in the mid-19th century to build the railway that would open up the American West, he became the richest man of his time.
In his essay „The Gospel of Wealth“, he set out some of his beliefs. For him, belief in progress and the advancement of humanity was a driving force and source of motivation. He was convinced that talented people would play a decisive role in driving humanity’s technical and economic progress. That they would also become wealthy in the process was, for him, a matter of course.
It was just as obvious to him that they should not keep this wealth to themselves. He considered it a disgrace for a person to die rich.
The usual options were out of the question for him.
– He regarded bequeathing money as a threat to the character of the heirs, who might not handle the wealth responsibly.
– He thought handing out money was pointless, as, in his view, many people would only use it for consumption rather than for personal development. That’s understandable. When I was reading about the donations on the plane, the person sitting next to me said: „They should give me some of that money.“ When I asked him what he’d do with the money, he replied, „Go to the beach and party… and have a few drinks.“ I see.
– He considered it nonsensical to bequeath money to the state, as this would not guarantee that the assets would be used wisely and in accordance with the donor’s wishes.
That left him with only one option
– To invest money during one’s lifetime in projects and causes that serve the welfare and progress of humanity.
Andrew Carnegie lived in accordance with his own convictions. Access to education was very important to him, and so, amongst other things, he funded the construction and furnishing of more than a thousand libraries. He also funded Carnegie Hall in New York. In total, during his lifetime, he donated more than 90 % of his enormous fortune to education and other charitable causes.
He became a national icon and inspired many others to follow in his footsteps – not least Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. So the idea isn’t all that new. It actually began with a weaver in Scotland who made all five of his books available for the common good and influenced a son who took up the cause and developed it further.
Funny, I saw the exact same photo on a Canadian photographer’s blog ( :
But I did it myself… in Downtown Manhattan.
Hmm, and how did he EARN the money?
Through the exploitation of other people’s labour. Through wage slavery.
There is no doubt that donating so much money is a noble thing to do, and a sensible one at that, so that it is not merely a way of easing one’s conscience; but, in order to raise the money, did he not first make countless people dependent on him, only to then offer them a helping hand?
The Gospel of Wealth? Without having read the book, I find that a rather un-Gospel-like statement…
Wasn’t Jesus a homeless rabbi who preached that it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven?
Here are my views on Carnegie in a little more detail
http://www.bennisblog.de/?p=1239
Hi, Benni
The link to your blog isn't working for me.
When it comes to gospel music, I think it’s important to note that „gospel“ itself is not a protected term that refers solely to matters of faith. It is the ‘Gospel of Jesus Christ’. The word ‘gospel’ itself simply means ‘good news’.
I’d say it’s better news when rich people put their money to good use than when they don’t.
As far as I can tell from Carnegie’s biography, he became rich by recognising opportunities – such as the need to build railways – and capitalising on them. As far as I can tell, he did so on fair terms for the people who worked for him.
Not everyone who becomes rich has automatically exploited others.
The letters in the New Testament do NOT call on the rich to give up all their wealth.
I think it is important that we do not get the idea here of turning Jesus’ teachings into a form of pseudo-communism.
The link works for me...
You can also just go to my blog. It’s the first post.
You’re right about gospel, of course, but the term has a tradition to which, I think, Carnegie is very deliberately alluding.
The ‘prosperity gospel’ has also been theologically justified by Calvin’s doctrine of double predestination, which forms the basis of Carnegie’s ‘self-made man’ attitude (even though he did not identify as a Christian).
Railway construction in America could only have taken place through exploitation. There was a saying at the time: „An Irishman buried under every sleeper“, because so many Irish immigrants died during the construction work.
It might not be directly linked to him, as he was only the producer, but perhaps it offers an insight into working conditions back then.
I do not wish to „transform“ the teachings of Jesus ‘into a form of pseudo-communism’; I believe that:
1. There are numerous „communist“ elements in Jesus’ teachings, which I do not need to interpret in a literal sense.
The community of shared possessions in the early Church in Jerusalem.
People are not required to do so because it is a VOLUNTARY community of shared resources. You cannot be forced to do so.
2. Class theory provides useful approaches to criticising injustice, which can be reconciled well with Christianity; see Liberation Theology (it must, of course, be non-violent)
Just two more thoughts. I find it very difficult to answer the question of who ultimately bears responsibility. Eighteen people lost their lives during the construction of the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco. Who was responsible: the workers themselves, because they’d chosen to work there? The owners of the company that employed them? Or the millions of people who wanted this bridge to be built?.
I find myself asking similar questions about railway construction in the USA…
In an infinitely complex world, it is rarely possible to find perfect forms – I find it fascinating and reassuring that the Gospel provides clear guidelines whilst allowing a great deal of freedom in how they are expressed. The church in Jerusalem was the ONLY church in the New Testament mentioned as having everything in common. This was clearly not the case with other churches, such as Corinth. God gives us plenty of scope to find our own way of expressing love. In one situation, it may be appropriate to sell everything; in another, it may be better to keep material possessions but share them with others – for example, living space.
I think it’s important that everyone does what they can. So, it’s not about how much I donate, for example, or which project I take on or where I get involved, but rather that I give what I can and do what lies within my capabilities and talents. If we all contribute a little, then we’ll make a difference. Many drops on a hot stone do indeed make a difference!
@Hannelore: I agree with that. Everyone can only do what they are capable of doing. We don’t need to compare ourselves with others, but „just“ ask ourselves whether we are living and acting within the limits of our own capabilities. I’m glad there are limitations. For example, I don’t concern myself with all the suffering in the world, but mostly focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan. That’s what I’m passionate about. That’s where I try to help.