By LENECIA LEWIS (VF '10-'11; Esperanza, Common Justice)
As a VERA Fellow, I spent most of last semester dissecting the idea of a not for profit organization. During that time I focused a lot on philanthropy and was often reminded about the newness of the title social entrepreneur. The term is always loosely defined, but is widely agreed to describe a new kind of philanthropist. One who is thought to consider the business of non-profits as more than just charitable giving. But despite the broad nature of the definition, the term is mostly used to describe a particular type of individual.
Usually a recent college graduate, the social entrepreneur has been inspired by an eye-opening trip to (insert developing country name here). Fired up by the “injustice of it all”, the social entrepreneur gathers and commands a youth advocate army. Weapons of choice include: a Cannon EOS 40D camera, an acoustic guitar, and an active account on all social media outlets. Most often the social entrepreneur will become the creator of a symbolic, yet trendy, line of apparel or jewelry. Their philosophy: “Save the world, look cool doing it”*.
Having spent the past four years entrenched in the world of the social entrepreneur, I know this profile very well. Imagine my surprise when this exact term was used to describe none other than our own Herb Sturz.
In a panel interview about his book A Kind of Genius, Sam Roberts commented that Sturz is the epitome of a social entrepreneur and has been for the past 50 years. Far longer than the term itself has been in use. Naturally this was difficult for me to reconcile. But certainly Sturz’s approach to social injustice was to go way above and beyond charitable giving. So of course Roberts has to be correct. Right? Which must mean that the way in which social entrepreneurs have been popularly categorized is fairly meaningless. Right? If indeed Herb Sturz and the above described character are both of the same breed, then what does this mean about the way we separate and categorize efforts to solve social justice issues?
Initially, I wanted to post about the evolution of the non-profit sector. From charitable giving all the way up to philanthrocapitalism (a neologism that deserves its own post entirely). My intention was to place Herb Sturz somewhere along this evolutionary spectrum. It seems, however, that the spectrum is merely cosmetic. That each form of ‘new and improved philanthropy’ is merely a way to modernize and advertise the efforts of those involved.
Curiosity has gotten the best of me. Now that you have read about Sturz’s work in New York, and before you begin your work at your own non-profit agency, I would like to know how you see it: How do you understand the role of the social entrepreneur? Are they truly the new and improved face of philanthropy?
*Point of reference, Blake Mycoskie of “TOMS Shoes”.
