Introduction A great deal of political ideologists believe that “public services or goods that gain support from a majority of constituents will be provided by public agencies; those more controversial or preferred by only a minority will be provided by nonprofits” (Ott & Dicke, 2016). If this ideology is true, then nonprofits are in the business of serving the few, who in a majority of cases end up being societies that have a large population of with middle and lower-class constituents. Evidence shows us that charities, foundations, and philanthropies are the main concern of nonprofit organizations because nonprofit organizations in usual cases cannot maintain themselves without political engagement. Consequently, it is unrealistic to believe
…show more content…
This is causing an up-roar among a multitude of political groups as they believe this is an unfair advantage of making policy changes. Not only are philanthropist spending large amounts of their income on making policy changes, they are also partnering up directly with nonprofit organizations. Consequently, the billionaires can spend money to form a policy as they want it to be, and then fund the nonprofit organizations to provide services the way they see fit. Furthermore, this enables billionaires to sit back and relax while political parties and lobbyist argue over right and wrong while the billionaires still inevitable complete their …show more content…
Consequently, this competition makes it in a nonprofits best interest to partner up with either a wealthy individual or an organization that can provide the nonprofit the funds that they require to continue sustaining themselves. This inevitably leads to the detachment of nonprofits from the societies that they originally swore to serve. Eventually, over time, for a handful of organizations the priorities shift from bettering communities, to sustaining year-to-year. Political partnerships are what numerous organizations use to keep their heads above water. Whether these relationships are right or wrong simply depends on who is asking and what side of the public policy they
This is causing an up-roar among a multitude of political groups as they believe this is an unfair advantage of making policy changes. Not only are philanthropist spending large amounts of their income on making policy changes, they are also partnering up directly with nonprofit organizations. Consequently, the billionaires can spend money to form a policy as they want it to be, and then fund the nonprofit organizations to provide services the way they see fit. Furthermore, this enables billionaires to sit back and relax while political parties and lobbyist argue over right and wrong while the billionaires still inevitable complete their …show more content…
Consequently, this competition makes it in a nonprofits best interest to partner up with either a wealthy individual or an organization that can provide the nonprofit the funds that they require to continue sustaining themselves. This inevitably leads to the detachment of nonprofits from the societies that they originally swore to serve. Eventually, over time, for a handful of organizations the priorities shift from bettering communities, to sustaining year-to-year. Political partnerships are what numerous organizations use to keep their heads above water. Whether these relationships are right or wrong simply depends on who is asking and what side of the public policy they