AIDS: The Philanthropic Black Hole

The Tsunami and September 11th. Both of these are undoubtedly great causes that are deserving of the donations they have received from philanthropies, corporations and individuals alike. But where is AIDS? Why does AIDS seem to be left off of the philanthropic map?

One huge difference exists between the AIDS epidemic and the Tsunami and September 11th. The damages left behind by the latter are definite. There is a clear beginning and end to both 9/11 and the tsunami. Eventually the infrastructure will be rebuilt, the people will return back to their jobs and homes, life will go on as normal, and the money will no longer be needed. This, however, does not apply to AIDS. The current situation requires a tremendous amount of money, and this tremendous amount of money in no way, shape, or form gives us any promise of a solution. There is no way to see when a solution will finally materialize, and when huge donations will no longer be required. Instead AIDS is a more of a black hole; an area where donors watch their money get endlessly sucked in, and see nothing immediately come out in return. Perhaps this is why AIDS is so often left off the agenda when it comes to philanthropy. Despite being the world’s biggest killer, it fails to turn up anything when searched on the majority of the major foundations websites. Why would a foundation choose to donate to a cause that fails to provide immediate results? Why put your money into something when your ego won't be stroked for doing so? Why put your money into something that will seemingly never end?

All of this begs a very important question. What is the agenda of these foundations and corporations with these huge sums of money? If they were altruistic and truly concerned with the good of mankind, then why not put your money towards something that, per day, terminally infects 5 times as many people as were killed on September 11th?