Rip Capt Tom, a man whose actions to raise money for charity, while the government DELIBERATELY (imho) sought out the worst value for money it could find for healthcare provision so, I assume, it could fill the pockets of certain family members and old pals under the falsehood of expediency (it wasn’t), was indicative of what is wrong with this country. We shouldn’t really have known who Tom was, but it was nice that everyone did.
With the best of intentions those that raise money for charity merely elongate suffering, because they act to treat the results of societal illnesses and not the sources. It’s not that charity is itself bad, or that good people like Tom are not the very best of us (they are), and it’s not like good things are not achieved, just not enough. It’s that charity alleviates the government’s mandated responsibility to provide for the social world, and accordingly as charity shoulders these burdens, shrewd and nefarious MPs work ever harder to let them.
You might not realise it but that’s what those people in suits in that big building in London were elected for, to make the lives of the most in-need citizens better, not to steal the silverware and empty the fridge. If we all stopped supporting the idea of charity, and instead demanded of our leaders that they use the vast sums of wealth that we give them through income tax and Vat to actually do something about social issues, then we wouldn’t need to rely on the kindness of people to reach in their pockets outside supermarkets or sponsor uncle Bill to live in a bath of beans for half a day.
What a joy it would be to dispense with the self-aggrandising joggers who have been allowed to make themselves feel far too heroic about their exercise regime (a thing they’d do anyway, reality check, you’re actually doing it for you Brenda, you just want praised) by charitising it (made that word up), or in a fit of reason we could tax the rich fairly (not regressively, not progressively), wouldn’t that be mad as fudge, maybe they’d all stop loving and promoting charity at every opportunity (I wonder why they do that? Maybe somebody could ask well known tax avoider Gary Barlow…hmm). Whatever we do we mustn’t let every moral thing that ought to be done for those that need it done fall to charity, as charity is a symptom of a sick society, not the medicine that cures it, that’s government!
As for Pudsy…
The fact that a charity to help children get the objects they must have to live normal equal lives exists, at the same time that £37,000,000,000 has been wasted on dodgy projects that didn’t work and have not been scrutinized, is simply a failure of government priorities. That so many tax-allergic celebrities participate in this mechanism is an indication that they often prefer charity for the fact that it treats the symptoms of poverty and keeps the root cause (inequality) perpetually in place, since they are very much the beneficiaries of that situation continuing.
By supporting organised charities you actually prevent the solution, which is to demand of government that it do for society what it has been elected to do. This does not mean that charitable intention, nor kindness, is in any way a bad thing, just that it should not be your burden to bear TWICE at a time where many are struggling, and it leaves politicians free of this burden if you are so willing to carry it instead. You already pay the government to solve these issues, and if they don’t, then maybe you should ask why? I’m happy to pay my taxes if I help to provide to those that cannot provide for themselves, I’m not happy if my contribution to society pays to decorate the primary home of some git in a suit so they can get a higher rent for it while living in another property that I also pay towards the rent of.
I stole this perspective from the great Oscar Wilde, the book The Soul of Man.
pinkfloydpsw's Blog 
Leave a comment