How Is It Celebrities Are More Passionate About Their Causes Then Ever Before… Yet Are Somehow Doing Far Less To Help Them?

 

When I was six or seven I remember when 'We Are The World' was recording and how big a deal it was in order to raise awareness about the AIDS crisis which Reagan's administration was basically ignoring. More important then that was that the recording was there to raise money for it, stepping in where the government was clearly failing those who were suffering the most.

During their decade we had some of the most memorable charity based concerts in history: Live Aid, which I vaguely remember and Farm Aid, which I don't.  Every Labor Day weekend Jerry Lewis was doing a forty-eight hour telethon to help the victims of MS and every year for much of the eighties and nineties Billy Crystal, Whoopi Goldberg and Robin Williams would have Comic Relief where comedians and Hollywood types from all over would get together and do routines in order to raise money for whatever cause was prominent.

I don't know if celebrities were more genuine about their beliefs back then or if this was built out of some version of liberal guilt. What I do know is that there was something admirable about them being willing to give time and energy and using their platforms to raise money for a good cause far more then just to raise awareness of it. In fact during that period it was considered gauche by celebrities to use your platform at award speeches to draw attention to political causes (Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins at the Oscars were one of the biggest offenders) with the understanding that it was better to help either in subtle ways or direct, by using your platform to raise money for them.

In the 21^st century celebrities are more political then they ever were back there. And given how much the conservative revolution under Republicans has done much to erode, if not eradicate much of the safety net we had for so many of the downtrodden both here and abroad you'd think they'd be more willing to do something to raise money for these causes. Instead as we reach the middle of the second Trump administration the opposite has become the case. Celebrities are focused entirely on raising awareness but doing anything else is by and large, not their responsibility.

There are individuals who are exceptions, of course, and there are sometimes exceptions. We still have annual telethons for the victims of 9/11 and there are Red Nose Days for Breast Cancer on TV. But increasingly the celebrity culture when it comes to supporting major causes begins and ends with wearing a pin on an awards show or making a speech on social media.

Objectively I'm baffled as to why this has become the norm among the Hollywood left. At a certain level I get why the current generation of left does it: to them raising awareness is all they feel that they owe society with posts online and the occasional protest making them feel like they've done their part. At their core they practice the same selfishness doctrine that they mock those on the right who are loyal to Ayn Rand's philosophy: it's our job to point out the flaws in our system, it's society's job to step in and do the work. They've always argued the system is irrevocably broken and that it is the system's job to fix itself. They don't feel they owe society anything else then that.

But even if the Hollywood culture is effectively taking its cues from the millennial/Gen Z generation of left and they are so isolated from the general public because of their wealth and fame (both of which are legitimate possibilities) you'd think that they'd been willing to use their platform in order to do more than harangue people about their moral failures, which is now what passes for so many of them as 'raising awareness'.  This makes them look very much like they are rich and entitled but it also makes them look lazy.  It's though they feel their obligation to society is no more than the conservatives they spent most of their time haranguing. And since in the last decade they've argued that we are in a 'post-shame world' then their approach seems pointless.

It's almost as if the internet has led to a breakdown between both the left-leaning public and the celebrity. Those on the left demand, if not insist, that the average celebrity take a stand on causes that are important to them – ICE, defund the police, the rights of women and the LGBTQ+ community – and judge them for not saying anything even more harshly then taking the side of the right. This culture almost seems to have a delusion about how power works in our society and the role that we have in it.

Consider JK Rowling or Dave Chappelle. One is an author; one is an entertainer. Neither holds elected office or has the power to make, enforce or carry out laws. Their positions  towards the transgender community, regardless of what it is, has no effect on the policy of government in either America or the United Kingdom.  It might draw support in conservative circles but no politician has ever made policy based solely on what a public figure says in history.

Now turn it around. If either Chappelle or Rowling were to offer complete and full-throated support to the transgender community, would it change anything for that community? All the laws that were restricting them the day before would still be in place and Nigel Farage or Mike Johnson would not come running to their constituencies to reverse their positions because of it. That's not how the world works.

In either case I find it difficult to believe it would make a difference from those who are bullied and beaten most of their lives and face restrictions from the laws one bit if they changed their opinions. Can you really see if there was a meeting of an alliance of them in Mississippi and this came out? "Well the state has passed more restrictive laws in bathrooms and women's sports and three more of our members were beaten up in hate crimes. But things are sure gonna turn around now that Harry Potter's on our side!"

In 2026 just as in 1986 or 1996 celebrities don't have the power to introduce bills in Congress, sign laws or enforce them. What they can do – and I'd argue they should be doing – is using their platform to try and raise money to help all those who are suffering under this administration. And in the decade since Trump first won they've fundamentally failed that test.

Oh I grant you they'll show up at No Kings protests or anti-ICE protests and make dozens of social media protests a day about all of the horrible things that the administration is doing, has done or will do. But I can find that out if I look at the news or really anywhere.  John Oliver telling me how bad things are in America isn't giving a message any different then Rachel Maddow or Anderson Cooper are and I'd argue it helps less when a man whose one of the richest men in Hollywood comes to us once a week to tell us how much the wealthy and powerful are screwing the average citizen. It has done wonders for the career of John Oliver but it hasn't helped the average American or indeed anyone else in the world.

To be very clear I'm not denying how horrible the world is today and that the problems we face don't need help. So I ask the question: in the nearly three years since the attacks of October 7^th what exactly have Hannah Einbinder or Mark Ruffalo or Susan Sarandon done to help the people of Gaza?

Take it at its most objective: if there is a crisis of the level that these celebrities are saying is happening in that section of the world, what exactly have those in Hollywood done to abate it? This isn't entirely a trick question: I'm fully aware that the only people who can bring about a resolution to this crisis are the Israeli government and Hamas and as recent news has told neither side seems to show any interest in doing so in the immediate future.  Multiple presidents and other governments  have tried to solve the problem of threading  this needle; I fail to see how a man whose last job was to play Tom Brandis in Task would be able to make a difference in foreign policy.

That's fine because it's not his job. That being said how on Earth is raising a stink on  a red carpet or passing petitions at foreign film festivals helping resolve the crisis? It doesn't even pass the stink test of 'raising awareness' anymore, we're all painfully aware of what's going on because people like Ruffalo will never stop reminding us of it. But there's nothing that people at the Golden Globes or Berlin Film Festival can do to influence Netanyahu or Hamas's leadership either and you'd think Ruffalo and his colleagues would have at the very least, realized this after three years of doing exactly that.

So if the people of Gaza are suffering so badly, if you'd wanted to do something constructive you could raise money for food and medicine and blankets and basic needs. You could have a mini-special somewhere or do a charity drive. God knows there are enough prominent people who care about this cause. And yet in nearly three years no one is willing to go that far beyond symbolic efforts that seem designed to draw attention to the presenters then to actually solve the problem.  (I won't name names.)

And that's basically how the celebrity culture is with every problem facing America today. Worse in more cases then I can count they seem more intent on shaming the people they see as responsible rather than doing anything to actively help. When John Leguizamo says on social media that if you're a Trump voter don't go to his films or buy his albums then he's throwing a tantrum on social media that costs him nothing. How would he know if that were to happen, by the way? Does he think that people show voter ID cards before going to see The Odyssey?

But that's keeping with a Hollywood and celebrity culture that is more about performance even in the raising awareness culture. Shouting "No one is illegal on stolen land' at the Grammys or cosplaying against the One Percent at the Met Gala doesn't help those who are being detained by ICE or those struggling to make ends meet. I'd actually argue those who celebrities claim to be 'supporting' are completely unaware of the 'stands' these men and woman are making.

Celebrities are less interested in giving back to those in need then taking away from it. You can make a speech at an awards show, you're not helping those in need, you're making it about you.  They're not even bothering to use their platforms to say to their fanbase to give money or charity to those suffering in places. I should know. I've seen hundreds of posts on social media pointing out 'the oppression of Israel', I've seen nothing arguing what they want us to do to help the people of Gaza. What would it cost them to put in a link to some kind of charity drive or food drive in all those words arguing of post-colonialism or Western oppression?

But that's basically the way both Hollywood and the left has become these days. These days those who raise money or work to give their fortune to causes are considered suspect because they are in a position to raise money or give their fortune. And those who make private efforts, whether in charity drives or Go Fund Me pages are praised not for their willingness to do the work for a worthy cause but instead held up as a sign of how the government has failed its job. It is the government and the government's responsibility alone to solve the problems of today and since they are corrupt and owned by the special interests they can't be trusted to do so.

I'm baffled by this culture among Hollywood in particular. Here are some of the richest and most famous people in the world, who if they were willing to do the work for a common cause their fans would gladly be willing to follow.  They know that the only way to solve these problems is through a combination of time, effort and money, something that the current generation has made it clear it doesn't want to give. But rather than use their platform to argue otherwise the vast majority spend their time and energy in complete agreement with their fans.

All of this just reminds me of the 21^st century equivalent of the public service announcements I remember growing up in the 1980s and 1990s. Celebrities would go on TV, speaking in favor of causes involving a Drug-Free America or AIDS or everything else. It might have had the same effect as those celebrities who made endorsements for Toyotas or Maytag but at least most people knew it was a lie. Now Mark Ruffalo or Billie Eilish makes speeches on red carpets that have the same level of sincerity as those long ago PSAs – and yet this exact same audience seems to believe it’s a genuine expression of sincerity and belief, despite never believing it when the same words come from elected officials.

Is that all celebrities feel they owe the causes they stand for these days? A post on Instagram and a hashtag? And what does it say that for so many teens and 20 something's that counts more then giving money to that same cause? I honestly don't have an answer.

What I do know is that I'll accept that these celebrities are serious about what they stand for when they get together to record an album in which not only will they not be paid but all the proceeds will be giving to that cause. It might not be as instantly validating as a social media post but trust me the people who need will appreciate it far more.