Bias against the Strong
After reading Liza Featherstones Essay, “Manna from Hell” I felt a strong sense of wonder strike me. The article focuses on the charitable giving and political influence of the Walton family, the heirs of Wal-Mart Stores founder Sam Walton. She brings a sense of social obligation to the reader, in which Wal-Mart is not meeting, according to her. She tells the reader of the evils of Wal-Mart’s philanthropy, privatized education, and of the anti-governmental practices found through the dispersion of the Walton’s Money. However, she never explains social obligation and justifies her scrutiny of the giving practices of the Walton heirs. Liza Featherstone describes Wal-Mart as having a terrible public image. She cites a report as evidence to the reader from the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP) that,” the recent increase in Wal-Mart and Walton philanthropy and noting its likely relationship to the company’s image problems.” (Featherstone, 508). This article correlates the amount given in a period time against the amount of public issues Wal-Mart is having. What Liza Featherstone misses is the correlation of business and giving. Business practices across the world have shown throughout time that it’s damage control for a business to take any negative attention off of them and put positive attention in its place. The article points out that Wal-Mart supports privatized education. “The Waltons’ motives for supporting the privatization of education seem… to be ideological, even idealistic, rather than an elaborate backdrop to a new money-making scheme.” (Featherstone, 512). The idea behind the Waltons’ funding for this education is to give an opportunity to kids where there isn’t one. They use a lot of ‘regimented recitation rather than critical or creative thinking.’(Featherstone, 511) There is no reason to assume that this learning style is better or worse. In this country's early education repetition of certain phrases was...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document