What do you think?
Rate this book
Civic Gifts: Voluntarism and the Making of the American Nation-State
In Civic Gifts , Elisabeth S. Clemens takes a singular approach to probing the puzzle that is the United States. How, she asks, did a powerful state develop within an anti-statist political culture? How did a sense of shared nationhood develop despite the linguistic, religious, and ethnic differences among settlers and, eventually, citizens? Clemens reveals that an important piece of the answer to these questions can be found in the unexpected political uses of benevolence and philanthropy, practices of gift-giving and reciprocity that coexisted uneasily with the self-sufficient independence expected of liberal citizens Civic Gifts focuses on the power of gifts not only to mobilize communities throughout US history, but also to create new forms of solidarity among strangers. Clemens makes clear how, from the early Republic through the Second World War, reciprocity was an important tool for eliciting both the commitments and the capacities needed to face natural disasters, economic crises, and unprecedented national challenges. Encompassing a range of endeavors from the mobilized voluntarism of the Civil War, through Community Chests and the Red Cross to the FDR-driven rise of the March of Dimes, Clemens shows how voluntary efforts were repeatedly articulated with government projects. The legacy of these efforts is a state co-constituted with, as much as constrained by, civil society.
392 pages, Hardcover
Published April 21, 2020
3 people are currently reading
44 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
October 11, 2021
Although this book has its fair share of turgid, sociological theorizing, and although it lacks a coherent focus or thesis, I found myself underlining large parts of it. It is an original look at how American civic associations and charities, most especially the Red Cross, but also the progenitors of the United Way ("Community Chests" and "Charity Organization Societies") worked with, against, or alongside the government for most of their history.
As Clemens points out, the "Benevolent Empire" of Protestant reform organizations, formed in the 1810s and '20s, such as the American Bible Society, American Tract Society, and temperance groups, were means to unite various denominations under a common reformist banner, but they elicited outrage among traditional Democrats and Jackonsonians who thought they undermined personal independence and worked against the popular will expressed in government. The rise of the Democratic Party, in a sense, was a way to unite "the people" against these supposedly scheming associations.
The US Sanitary and Christian Commissions in the Civil War, lead by people like Henry Bellows, Josephine Shaw Lowell, Samuel Gridley Howe (who resigned from the USSC due to its tendency towards dependence), Louisa Schulyer, and Frederick Law Olmsted, provided both the model and the personnel for the next wave of benevolence after the war, such as the Union Leagues (Bellows), Charity Organization Societies (Lowe), state boards of charities (Howe), and the state charities aid association (Schulyer). Unlike the Benevolent Empire, these tended less towards personal change, and more towards relief, though with a strong moralistic tinge. The COSes tried to catalogue every relief beneficiary in the cities and ensure no one double-dipped. The YMCA then pioneered and helped spread the "campaign method" of fundraising in the 1890s. Chambers of Commerce, concerned about too many demands, began vetting and listing charities, like the COSes but for the donor side.
The federal charter of the Red Cross, given in 1900, tied it closely to the government, with the President himself servicing as ex officio chairman and the agency given rooms in the War Department building. This dependence was demonstrated when Teddy Roosevelt forced out the elderly Clara Barton from the organization she founded twenty years earlier. The assumption that government should have a say in such long-term charitable efforts manifest President Taft and others fought back against incorporating the Rockefeller Foundation with vague language in 1910. One commentator said he could imagine "the Trustees might determine to devote the fund at their disposal to the frustration of some politico-economic movement favored by large masses of people" (it incorporated the next year in NY).
After the mobilization of brand-new "Community Chests" into "War Chests" in World War I, business leaders found themselves at the helm of these new organizations and used them to control charities. They asked them to cut back on salaries, expand unpaid board members, and improve accounting, as well as to generally move towards direct relief instead of case work, and also, by default, to downplay their connection with members and their religious side. The fact that most money came from workplace drives gave businesses extra power (although the "Block Aid" movement in the Great Depression, which was based on neighborhoods, upset this strategy temporarily.)
The New Deal and the Social Security acts seemed to obviate the need for charity. Most of the private money switched to arts and culture, while the charities for the poor created what was known as the "rehabilitation thesis," arguing that their individualized methods both creating pathbreaking new models for government relief and also helped the hard-core "unemployables" which government couldn't or shouldn't help. Roosevelt with his March of Dimes and his rapprochement with the Red Cross managed, however, to reincorporate relief into a federal scheme. Meanwhile, much of government funds, despite Harry Hopkins attempts in 1933 to ban all funds through private charities, ended up in the growing "nonprofit sector" which served as a conduit for federal relief instead of an alternative to it. The use of government funds and the rules barring political activities in the tax code made these nonprofits more complacent, at least until later activists like Sierra Club LDF started up.
The book barely discusses the rise of the United Way after 1949, or of the Community Action Agencies that arose out of the 1960s, but it points to the same struggle over government funding, centralization, and political action that bedeviled those groups. While the book doesn't give a clear thesis, it shows the continuity of struggles over private charity throughout American history, and how they have never been separate from politics.
As Clemens points out, the "Benevolent Empire" of Protestant reform organizations, formed in the 1810s and '20s, such as the American Bible Society, American Tract Society, and temperance groups, were means to unite various denominations under a common reformist banner, but they elicited outrage among traditional Democrats and Jackonsonians who thought they undermined personal independence and worked against the popular will expressed in government. The rise of the Democratic Party, in a sense, was a way to unite "the people" against these supposedly scheming associations.
The US Sanitary and Christian Commissions in the Civil War, lead by people like Henry Bellows, Josephine Shaw Lowell, Samuel Gridley Howe (who resigned from the USSC due to its tendency towards dependence), Louisa Schulyer, and Frederick Law Olmsted, provided both the model and the personnel for the next wave of benevolence after the war, such as the Union Leagues (Bellows), Charity Organization Societies (Lowe), state boards of charities (Howe), and the state charities aid association (Schulyer). Unlike the Benevolent Empire, these tended less towards personal change, and more towards relief, though with a strong moralistic tinge. The COSes tried to catalogue every relief beneficiary in the cities and ensure no one double-dipped. The YMCA then pioneered and helped spread the "campaign method" of fundraising in the 1890s. Chambers of Commerce, concerned about too many demands, began vetting and listing charities, like the COSes but for the donor side.
The federal charter of the Red Cross, given in 1900, tied it closely to the government, with the President himself servicing as ex officio chairman and the agency given rooms in the War Department building. This dependence was demonstrated when Teddy Roosevelt forced out the elderly Clara Barton from the organization she founded twenty years earlier. The assumption that government should have a say in such long-term charitable efforts manifest President Taft and others fought back against incorporating the Rockefeller Foundation with vague language in 1910. One commentator said he could imagine "the Trustees might determine to devote the fund at their disposal to the frustration of some politico-economic movement favored by large masses of people" (it incorporated the next year in NY).
After the mobilization of brand-new "Community Chests" into "War Chests" in World War I, business leaders found themselves at the helm of these new organizations and used them to control charities. They asked them to cut back on salaries, expand unpaid board members, and improve accounting, as well as to generally move towards direct relief instead of case work, and also, by default, to downplay their connection with members and their religious side. The fact that most money came from workplace drives gave businesses extra power (although the "Block Aid" movement in the Great Depression, which was based on neighborhoods, upset this strategy temporarily.)
The New Deal and the Social Security acts seemed to obviate the need for charity. Most of the private money switched to arts and culture, while the charities for the poor created what was known as the "rehabilitation thesis," arguing that their individualized methods both creating pathbreaking new models for government relief and also helped the hard-core "unemployables" which government couldn't or shouldn't help. Roosevelt with his March of Dimes and his rapprochement with the Red Cross managed, however, to reincorporate relief into a federal scheme. Meanwhile, much of government funds, despite Harry Hopkins attempts in 1933 to ban all funds through private charities, ended up in the growing "nonprofit sector" which served as a conduit for federal relief instead of an alternative to it. The use of government funds and the rules barring political activities in the tax code made these nonprofits more complacent, at least until later activists like Sierra Club LDF started up.
The book barely discusses the rise of the United Way after 1949, or of the Community Action Agencies that arose out of the 1960s, but it points to the same struggle over government funding, centralization, and political action that bedeviled those groups. While the book doesn't give a clear thesis, it shows the continuity of struggles over private charity throughout American history, and how they have never been separate from politics.
February 3, 2024
Civic giving is a regular part of 21st-century American life. We are asked to give to our religious organizations, educational institutions, local sports, art museums, newspapers, hospitals, and more. So much so that we even dedicate an entire day to giving, “Giving Tuesday,” to do large-scale fundraising by using social media. But civic giving was not always as easy as clicking a few buttons online, and it certainly was not so normal to ask and give regularly. Elisabeth Clemens, Professor of Sociology at the University of Chicago, explains the journey of civic organizational entanglement in government and American daily life in her 2020 book, Civic Gifts: Voluntarism and the Making of the American Nation-State. This book has an ambitious purpose to historicize civic benevolence and volunteerism from the Early Republic to the Cold War, spanning a variety of economic downturns and wars. Clemens argues that civic giving has been present since the colonial era and has played a massive role in how the United States dealt with depressions and wartime mobilization, often taking center stage in fundraising and providing on-the-ground help. Civic Gifts, then, is a book with comprehensive evidence from all over the United States, descriptions of programs carried out by the Red Cross and similar organizations, and their evolving relationship with the federal and state governments.
Civic Gifts tells the tale of a nation that was in love with giving back to its community before it was even formed. For example, when Boston had to face economic consequences for the Boston Tea Party’s protest of throwing tea into the harbor, other colonies sent supplies to the Boston Committee. This trend continued after the nation was formed, and it gave reasons for concern to the Founding Fathers. Washington and Jefferson had legitimate concerns about voluntary associations leading to small minorities with an incredible amount of influence over public life. But, as these concerns grew, so did the importance of civic organizations in the public sphere. By the time the Civil War threw the entire nation into crisis, civic organizations on both sides rose to provide supplies, clothing, and food for the soldiers. Citizens thought of these contributions as evidence of their patriotism to their respective side’s cause. Civic giving also developed to be a state-to-state, industry-to-industry, or city-to-city custom, as evident after the 1871 Chicago Fire. Voluntary contributions helped Chicago restore itself to its original glory, and this is a favor that Chicago repaid to the rest of the country when needed.
Soon thereafter, in 1882, the American Red Cross was embedded in the Geneva Conventions and was given the responsibility to support the military and citizens in war zones. Fast forward to World War I, civic benevolence was such a huge part of the war effort that 60% of the funding came through voluntary donations and loans. This momentum continued to the Great Depression when the Red Cross officially collaborated with President Herbert Hoover. This collaboration was not the most successful, yet the federal government could not handle the Depression and then World War II alone, so the Red Cross and similar organizations entered the scene again. By the Cold War, a “strange hybrid political regime” had formed, combining volunteerism with governance and building an international image of the United States.
While this summary does not do justice to the extensive political, sociological, and economic history provided in this book by Clemens, we see a general trend in the growth and now oversaturation of civic organizations in the United States. Despite the fears of minority associations exercising influence over the public sphere or civic gifts leading to laziness and dependence, civic organizations grew and thrived across the country. Partly because of the need left unfulfilled by federal welfare and partly because people like giving back to society and will organize themselves to do so on a large scale.
Surprisingly enough, despite the prevalence of civic benevolence in this country, there is little scholarship on it. Some comparable titles to Civic Gifts include Gifts of Time and Money: The Role of Charity in America’s Communities edited by Arthur C. Brooks; Inventing the Nonprofit Sector and Other Essays on Philanthropy, Voluntarism, and Nonprofit Organizations edited by Peter Dobkin Hall; and Heart of the Nation: Volunteering and America's Civic Spirit By John M. Bridgeland. While these books do cover the impact of civic giving in our public sphere, none does it so comprehensively as Clemens, and neither do they connect the political, sociological, and economic impacts of civic organization. Thus, the biggest strength of Civic Gifts is the sheer amount of terrain it covers, both in time and space.
Students across the social sciences can benefit from this book. Chicagoans can understand how the most impactful university in the city, the University of Chicago, came to be because of civic giving and philanthropy. Non-profit organizations of today can learn a thing or two from the Red Cross’ work during the World Wars and the Depressions of the twentieth century. Political leaders can understand how local, state, and federal governments use such organizations to their advantage and just how complicated that association can get. Most importantly, this book is a home run for folks in social work, social welfare, and political sociology, effortlessly tying all those fields together and grounding them in quality historical research.
Civic Gift’s depth and breadth can also be taken as its weakness. This book is not accessible to a general reader who might be interested in learning about civic organizing. It is written in an academic style. It covers over 200 years of history. It provides new names, dates, places, and analysis on every single page. That can easily become overwhelming for a general reader. Further, Civic Gifts gives priority to the American Red Cross, and for good reason, as it is one of the largest civic giving organizations in the world. Yet, it does not pay much attention to organizations like Rotary International, which also have widespread domestic and international influence.
Overall, Civic Gifts: Voluntarism and the Making of the American Nation-State traces the beginnings and evolution of civic benevolence and associations in the United States in connection with the government and major world conflicts. It is a highly informative book that introduces a reader to the world of civic benevolence and its deep impacts on our political system. While a bit dense to read, it is a worthy task to understand how our public sphere gets shaped by voluntary associations and charity, especially since society and government are still battling with how much help can be given out without making a person “lazy” or dependent on the giver.
Civic Gifts tells the tale of a nation that was in love with giving back to its community before it was even formed. For example, when Boston had to face economic consequences for the Boston Tea Party’s protest of throwing tea into the harbor, other colonies sent supplies to the Boston Committee. This trend continued after the nation was formed, and it gave reasons for concern to the Founding Fathers. Washington and Jefferson had legitimate concerns about voluntary associations leading to small minorities with an incredible amount of influence over public life. But, as these concerns grew, so did the importance of civic organizations in the public sphere. By the time the Civil War threw the entire nation into crisis, civic organizations on both sides rose to provide supplies, clothing, and food for the soldiers. Citizens thought of these contributions as evidence of their patriotism to their respective side’s cause. Civic giving also developed to be a state-to-state, industry-to-industry, or city-to-city custom, as evident after the 1871 Chicago Fire. Voluntary contributions helped Chicago restore itself to its original glory, and this is a favor that Chicago repaid to the rest of the country when needed.
Soon thereafter, in 1882, the American Red Cross was embedded in the Geneva Conventions and was given the responsibility to support the military and citizens in war zones. Fast forward to World War I, civic benevolence was such a huge part of the war effort that 60% of the funding came through voluntary donations and loans. This momentum continued to the Great Depression when the Red Cross officially collaborated with President Herbert Hoover. This collaboration was not the most successful, yet the federal government could not handle the Depression and then World War II alone, so the Red Cross and similar organizations entered the scene again. By the Cold War, a “strange hybrid political regime” had formed, combining volunteerism with governance and building an international image of the United States.
While this summary does not do justice to the extensive political, sociological, and economic history provided in this book by Clemens, we see a general trend in the growth and now oversaturation of civic organizations in the United States. Despite the fears of minority associations exercising influence over the public sphere or civic gifts leading to laziness and dependence, civic organizations grew and thrived across the country. Partly because of the need left unfulfilled by federal welfare and partly because people like giving back to society and will organize themselves to do so on a large scale.
Surprisingly enough, despite the prevalence of civic benevolence in this country, there is little scholarship on it. Some comparable titles to Civic Gifts include Gifts of Time and Money: The Role of Charity in America’s Communities edited by Arthur C. Brooks; Inventing the Nonprofit Sector and Other Essays on Philanthropy, Voluntarism, and Nonprofit Organizations edited by Peter Dobkin Hall; and Heart of the Nation: Volunteering and America's Civic Spirit By John M. Bridgeland. While these books do cover the impact of civic giving in our public sphere, none does it so comprehensively as Clemens, and neither do they connect the political, sociological, and economic impacts of civic organization. Thus, the biggest strength of Civic Gifts is the sheer amount of terrain it covers, both in time and space.
Students across the social sciences can benefit from this book. Chicagoans can understand how the most impactful university in the city, the University of Chicago, came to be because of civic giving and philanthropy. Non-profit organizations of today can learn a thing or two from the Red Cross’ work during the World Wars and the Depressions of the twentieth century. Political leaders can understand how local, state, and federal governments use such organizations to their advantage and just how complicated that association can get. Most importantly, this book is a home run for folks in social work, social welfare, and political sociology, effortlessly tying all those fields together and grounding them in quality historical research.
Civic Gift’s depth and breadth can also be taken as its weakness. This book is not accessible to a general reader who might be interested in learning about civic organizing. It is written in an academic style. It covers over 200 years of history. It provides new names, dates, places, and analysis on every single page. That can easily become overwhelming for a general reader. Further, Civic Gifts gives priority to the American Red Cross, and for good reason, as it is one of the largest civic giving organizations in the world. Yet, it does not pay much attention to organizations like Rotary International, which also have widespread domestic and international influence.
Overall, Civic Gifts: Voluntarism and the Making of the American Nation-State traces the beginnings and evolution of civic benevolence and associations in the United States in connection with the government and major world conflicts. It is a highly informative book that introduces a reader to the world of civic benevolence and its deep impacts on our political system. While a bit dense to read, it is a worthy task to understand how our public sphere gets shaped by voluntary associations and charity, especially since society and government are still battling with how much help can be given out without making a person “lazy” or dependent on the giver.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews