Consequently, I agree with Rockefeller in that charity brings harm if it is not meant to help the them have a better life that is not dependent on well-wishers. I believe that charity is necessary and beneficial to the needy only if it alleviates their ways of living through means meant to help them develop from charity-dependent to independent citizens capable of providing for themselves.
Donations that make the poor well-wishers dependent brings harm in a way that it promotes misuse of the poor by the charity organizations who obey every rule and direction of the charity organization in the bid to secure financial help. Discriminate charity is also evident to cause more harm as it is not aimed at helping the ‘supposed’ needy, but promote ethnicity and unfairness. Recently, charity organizations have been on the lookout as some have been promoting youth radicalization such as where the youth are obliged to undertake illegal rallies and campaigns only because by doing so, they are entitled to receive help for the ill-motivated charity institutions, which lead to increased harm than benefits to the society and those in need.
Charity is not a guaranteed source of fund for the poor; hence, the only way to guarantee the needy of a better life is by ensuring that the help they receive help them not to entirely depend on charity. Failure to help the needy be independent from charity pose a great danger because that means that any scenario leading to reduced charity funds will lead to ultimate suffering or even death to the needy. For example, if the charity organizations that give help to regions frequently characterized by drought, then that means all those depended on charity are in a great danger of starving. Additionally, it has been observed that charity may further lead to sluggishness among the poor and instead of improving their