Sam WattsResponding to the people we can relate to

There is a large mural in an area in Los Angeles where thousands of unhoused people can be found.  It identifies the area as Skid Row and lists the population as “Too Many”. Data collected in January 2024 indicates that the number of people who were experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles is 45,252. This number is by no means a complete portrait of the actual number of people who are unhoused. Having walked in the area, I can attest to the overwhelming evidence of squalor and human misery. Thousands of people exist on these streets not far from some of the most prestigious real estate on the west coast in one of the wealthiest countries in the world.

Meanwhile, as a consequence of the very recent tragedy of the well publicized LA fires, approximately 45,000 people have lost their residences and belongings. A few famous people are among the displaced but most of the people who were impacted by this calamity were middle class homeowners and renters in several suburban areas adjacent to the city of Los Angeles.

“Shouldn’t we feel emotionally wrecked when we see people who have been living on the streets for a long time?”

We’ve seen a huge outpouring of philanthropic activity in support of the people who have been victimized by these fires. This is perfectly appropriate. It is a philanthropic imperative. Online fundraising efforts have sprouted up all over North America. People have even been donating tons of used clothing, although I continue to be flabbergasted by how a major disaster causes people to give away things from the back of their closets –  like their old pants and Aunt Bessie’s housecoat!

Here come the questions. Why do we exhibit a philanthropic reflex in the face of one specific tragedy – but not another? Is the sudden, catastrophic loss of housing by 45,000 people more compelling than the perpetual tragic living conditions of 45,000 other people? Aren’t all human beings precious and valuable? Shouldn’t we feel emotionally wrecked when we see people who have been living on the streets for a long time? Why do we feel so deeply sympathetic towards middle-class folk who have been rendered destitute quite recently while largely ignoring an ongoing tragic reality of a similar magnitude?

“We are inclined to respond to the suffering of people we can relate to.”

Perhaps an explanation is that those of us who are inclined to give in response to perceived tragedies are vulnerable to philanthropic distortion because we are inclined to respond to the suffering of people we can relate to. It can be very difficult to fully understand an individual who lives under a tarpaulin and is struggling with addiction or mental health. It is far easier to feel a sense of kinship to a middle class individual that experienced the trauma of a fire that consumed everything that they owned. This is a distortion that is shared by governments.  There will undoubtedly be considerable sums invested to reconstruct the neighbourhoods of LA but these funds are unlikely to be allocated to address the enormous challenges of the poorest and most vulnerable citizens of LA – those who were already on the streets before the fires.

Let’s also be careful. This isn’t about equivalency. We ought to feel deeply compassionate for anyone who experiences the loss of their home and belongings. However, it is important to be aware of the potential distortions that filter into our philanthropic perceptions. More on the topic next month!

Sam Watts serves as the CEO of Welcome Hall Mission  www.welcomehallmission.com  He serves on several non-profit boards and is an appointed member of the National Housing Council of Canada.  He is the author of Good Work…Done Better www.goodworkdonebetter.com