Mainstreaming the Do-Gooder

A high school teacher for the past eight years in Brooklyn wrote about his life as a do-gooder. He said,

"I have found that endlessness of the battle is only a burden when I can no longer see other soldiers in my trench. It is the feeling of separation and solitary compassion that has, occasionally, worn me down." It is good to "remind the troops that we fight together for something larger than ourselves; we fight for each other."

This got me to thinking about how those who seek to bring the dream of the Declaration of Independence closer to reality are outside the mainstream of American culture. Serving as a volunteer, donating money, participating in the political process or having a career like teaching help others should be considered the highest of endeavors. Rather than feeling alone, do-gooders should feel that they are at the center of American society. If that were the case, this teacher would see others in the trenches.

His attitude is not an isolated case. Anyone who has sought to do good in whatever capacity is likely to have felt isolated. This goes for overburdened volunteers, teachers under attack by parents and school administrators for giving Johnny the grade he deserves and citizens attending town government meetings with only government officials present. Mother Teresa recognized that do-gooders are outside of the mainstream by citing a poem called "Anyway" in one of her books. "If you do good, people will accuse you of selfish and ulterior motives" and "the good you do will be forgotten tomorrow." Her remedy: "do good anyway."

Do-gooders are outcasts in American society for many reasons. First, as Larry King said when he interviewed me, "do-gooder" seems to be a bad word. A senior citizen from Monterey California, after reading my article about the need to rescue the term, told me that a do-gooder is a "busybody who thinks he knows best what is good for everybody." I have received similar reactions from across the country.

Second, a do-gooder is a change agent whether it be a person trying to make the life of someone confined to a nursing home a little better or someone seeking to influence federal legislation to deal with low quality health care for the poor. Change agents are seen as " troublemakers" by those in charge, perhaps as a tactic to keep them at bay. They are first ignored and then ridiculed; only embraced after the change itself becomes the status quo.

Third, the idea of doing good is viewed as antithetical to the essence of American culture---the pursuit of material gain. There seems to be something un-American about spending time worrying about others instead of making money.

These three reasons see do-gooders as victims. However, do-gooders themselves share much of the responsibility for placing themselves out of the mainstream.

First, too many aspiring do-gooders fail to deliver. These wanna-be's give speeches and write books about some societal problem but never walk the walk. They join too many boards, make promises they don't keep and give their money without demanding accountability. Some are outright fakes who use non-profit to avoid taxes or take government and nonprofit jobs but care little for the mission of the organization. Although most do gooders are genuine, the wanna-be's and fakes to give the entire group a bad name.

Second, too many do-gooders are self-righteous and uncompromising. They refuse to credit the insurance broker, who joins the Kiwanis club because she may be motivated in part by finding new clients, even though she spends considerable time fundraising for the organization. No do-gooder status for the college student who earns academic credit through community service; or for the father who coaches his son's baseball team or Bill Gates who gives billions in part to show he his a good guy. Businesses that do both good and bad things are ignored for the former and chided for the latter. Self-righteous and uncompromising do gooders want pure motive and total commitment.

Third, do-gooders who fail to go public about their efforts contribute to the problem because potential do-gooders are unaware just how many are out there. The only do-gooders whose efforts are made public are those who win awards for their superstar efforts. Such awards scare off potential do gooders who would make a limited commitment shaped by mixed motives. As a result ordinary do-gooders do not see people like themselves because other ordinary do-gooders avoid the limelight. They do not want to be ridiculed by the self-righteous and uncompromising for not doing enough or viewed as weird by everyone else.

For do-gooders to join the American mainstream will take some time. It can only begin if those who do good in a limited way and for mixed motives become more public. If they do, they will provide a role model for others. They will set higher standards to counter the wanna-be's and the fakes and a more realistic standard to quiet the self-righteous and uncompromising.

It must start with you as a do-gooder. Don't feel embarrassed if someone one calls you a do-gooder. Say, "thank you." "Say, I am a do-gooder and proud of it." It's not like they called you a nerd or brainiac. Is it?