The interviews revealed that the basic idea of charity is welcomed by the overwhelming majority of Russian businesspeople. Only one respondent flatly rejected charity in any form, on the grounds that providing for the needy is the state's responsibility and that charity feeds upon itself and fosters a lazy, expectant languor in recipients. The same reservations were expressed by at least five other respondents, but for the most part, respondents held negative perceptions not of charity in general, but of the particular modern-day-Russian manifestation of charity.

Foundations drew much of their ire. The survey revealed that the great majority of Russian businesspeople have had unfavorable experiences with foundations: in most cases, donations were either redirected from their legitimate purpose or simply pilfered. Also, businesspeople resent the portion of their donations that goes to the foundation's administrative services.

• "I flatly dismiss any charity through foundations, because I am not eager to keep up another army of bureaucrats sitting on these foundations.
• "We prefer not acting through charitable foundations, since actually these are intermediary agencies. They have their own managerial staffs living off them, therefore our donations for charity are being reduced, which we don't like. " Businesspeople believe that foundations, by acting in this manner, discredit the very idea of charity. In those instances where they are willing to donate, they prefer to do it directly.

Businesspeople have also expressed a strong desire that their charitable activities be publicly recognized, that they receive "a sort of moral gratitude for ... investing money in charity." They contend, however, that charitable giving is not perceived favorably in Russia, that it is taken as a kind of penance for the sins which inevitably accompany wealth.

• "It is not common to feel gratitude ... If someone shares [his money with someone else], he must have stolen it. The attitude is one of suspicion: [the donor] either expiates his sins or seeks to launder his money."
• "Any remittance of monev is regarded by state bodies as a disguised theft that is to be highlighted and exposed ... This is quite a problem of our state, of our ailing society. Over 75 years, this society has developed a tradition of suspecting mercenary motives in everything. But we can fairly satisfy our mercenary tendencies in other activities."

In addition to the prevailing negative image of the donor, survey results indicate that businesses' philanthropic uraes are further dampened by the attitude of those receiving aid. According to many of the respondents, the Russian mentality assumes that every poor person is entitled to charity, and that every rich person is responsible for bestowing this charity.

• "It is a common view that any poor man is entitled to charity, that poverty is a reason for charity ... In fact, a society in which the majority are potential recipients of charity is not a viable society. "
• The behavior of applicants for charity was described as "passive and aggressive at the same time," implying both a reluctance to take any personal efforts to surmount present difficulties and a conviction that somebody is obliged to help them.

Businesspeople expressed one final sentiment almost unanimously: the state was shirking its responsibilities and expecting private businesses to shoulder the burden of the nation's poor. Moreover, businesspeople expressed doubt as to whether the state was properly applying those charitable funds which happened to fall to its discretion.

• "Charity is nothing more than a minor sphere of social life,. To rely upon it and to raise it to the status of a national priority means to sort of officially allow the state not to perform its functions. "
• "If, on the pretext of cultural development or giving the masses access to genuine artistic values - .., I am to grant money for patching holes in ceilings, ... I cannot be sure that my money and the repaired ceilings will actually help raise the cultural level. It is more likely to help some municipal utilities service or somebody else to patch the holes in their budget."

Compassion for fellow men was unanimously regarded as the motivating force behind charity. When the question of motivation was posed with more specificity, the respondents answers generally fell into one of three categories: social responsibility, moral benefit, and monetary benefit

Respondents felt a social responsibility to engage in charity. They stressed that such charity was not merely alms to the poor, but was rather a way of providing opportunities for self-improvement, "to help a man so that he could get a start in life."

• "[B]usiness as such is not simply to make money and fill one's pockets. It is also an opportunity for promoting the advance of the country you live in; in our case, the point at issue is not advance, but just the need to overcome the current crisis.

Most respondents felt that they obtained a moral benefit from charitable giving. One respondent referred to charity as "a medicine for bitterness."

• "It is essential that people ... have human understanding of the need to support those who have found themselves in severe conditions ... When you have done something good, you understand this and feel happy. "
• "Many people do not understand the reasons for charity. For some businessmen it is a means of advertising, for others a tool of tax evasion. But the main thing is that charitv enables a man to preserve his human qualities despite all the hard work he is doing."

As the latter quote indicates, it would be a mistake to believe that businesspeople part with their money out of pure altruism. Business factors are far from insignificant. For a donor firm, charity means good advertising.

• "The central motive is naturally to win public recognition, to create a good image for the firm.... It is known from experience that charity -- sponsorship -- is one of the basic elements of a favorable image. "
• We certainly proceed from the expectation of future profits.... Of course, we are ready to help the needy, but we certainly expect to get some benefits for ourselves."

Sponsored by:
Center for Civil Society International

Return to the Civil Society Research and Opinion Home Page
This document is accessible from the CCSI's home page at: http://www.friends-partners.org/~ccsi/

Document written: 1995
Last updated: 3/13/97
Center for Civil Society International
For more information contact: [email protected]