The Trump administration’s escalating campaign against civil society has prominently targeted philanthropy, with the Open Society Foundations (OSF), founded by George Soros, facing unprecedented legal threats. Without presenting evidence, the Justice Department has launched investigations into OSF for alleged crimes ranging from arson to supporting terrorism—a move OSF condemns as a politically motivated attack to silence dissent. This assault mirrors tactics used by authoritarian regimes like those of Vladimir Putin and Viktor Orbán, who have systematically dismantled civil society by labeling foreign NGOs as „undesirable” or „foreign agents.” The administration’s broader pattern of intimidating critics—from universities to media outlets—highlights a dangerous convergence of political power aimed at stifling independent voices and undermining the foundational pluralism of American democracy.
Philanthropy has long played a dual role in American society: as a catalyst for social progress and a subject of critique over its influence and accountability. From the pioneering work of the Garland Fund, which helped lay the legal groundwork for the civil rights movement, to the Aaron Diamond Foundation’s critical funding of AIDS research when government response was lacking, private foundations have addressed gaps in public policy. However, they have also faced criticism for enabling wealthy donors to shape public agendas without democratic oversight. Today, foundations span the ideological spectrum, with conservative entities like the Bradley and Olin foundations driving school vouchers and shaping the federal judiciary, while progressive funders like OSF have supported movements against mass incarceration. Despite their impact, foundations remain risk-averse relative to grassroots movements, and their reliance on large endowments raises concerns about the democratic vitality of civil society institutions dependent on their funding.
The philanthropic sector is undergoing significant transformation, driven by internal critiques and external pressures. A new generation of leaders—such as OSF’s Binaifer Nowrojee and the Mellon Foundation’s Elizabeth Alexander—is steering foundations toward greater focus on inequality, racial justice, and inclusive public history. Donors like MacKenzie Scott are revolutionizing giving through large, no-strings-attached grants, while others face scrutiny over minimal payouts, as seen with Elon Musk’s foundation. Simultaneously, foundations are grappling with calls to increase spending rates, democratize decision-making, and diversify funding models to reduce vulnerability. The sector’s independence is now under direct threat, as the Trump administration weaponizes tax-exempt status to punish organizations like the Ford Foundation, which Vice President J.D. Vance has vilified as a „cancer on American society.”
In an era of government retrenchment and political intimidation, foundations cannot replace public funding—their total giving is a fraction of the federal budget—but they can amplify advocacy and mitigate harm. The creation of OSF’s Emma Lazarus Fund in the 1990s demonstrates how strategic philanthropy can restore public benefits through legal aid and advocacy, as it did for immigrants facing welfare cuts. Facing existential threats, over 3,700 civil society organizations have united to defend democratic principles, signaling a resilient, if embattled, front. As lawyer Bryan Stevenson asserted, the choice between tax-exempt silence and taxed truth-telling underscores the high stakes for philanthropy in preserving civil society against authoritarian encroachment.
Ez a cikk a Neural News AI (V1) verziójával készült.
Forrás: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2026/02/12/trumps-attack-on-philanthropy-neier-lamarche/.