On the broader topic of charity... Wouldn't the most charitable donations be given to organizations or persons with no connection to your own family or faith? Giving to your own church or to a medical organization researching a disease you have or the symphony or zoo you regularly visit is wonderful. Giving to some distant and non-personal charity, IMO, is more credit worthly. Charity in making the world a better place with no other benefit for yourself seems to be the highest form of giving. It needn't be money. Sometimes your time is the best gift to give. However, in Western culture there is a tradition of the nobility being expected to give back to the less well off (noblesse oblige). That is what the OP was asking. Carnegie built libraries, Rockefeller created the Rockefeller Foundation to promote the well-being of humanity. The OP listed several present examples of the wealthy giving back to the general well being, not just to charities that give the donor a direct benefit. It was in that spirit that I hope the question was asked and not that the "family" strongly financially supports the political party which promotes a decreased role of govenment in supporting the less fortunate with the burden to be taken up by private charities and organizations.
|