Last week, Forbes published a glowing piece about the philanthropy of MacKenzie Scott (the ex-wife of Jeff Bezos), who “gave away more than anyone else on Earth in 2025” and is “the third-biggest philanthropist of all-time”.
“Amid a furious political backlash around diversity, equity and inclusion, MacKenzie Scott has stepped up for her principles,” begins the article. But what do those “principles” look like in practice? Forbes does touch on some of Scott’s interests – including “Gender Justice” – but today I wanted to do my own little dive into what exactly she’s funded (which may horrify readers).
Like many other philanthropists, Scott is signed up to the “Giving Pledge”, “a promise by the world’s wealthiest philanthropists to give the majority of their wealth to charitable causes in their lifetime or wills”. Founded in 2010 by Bill Gates, Melinda French Gates and Warren Buffett, it all sounds very nice on the surface. That’s until you start examining what “philanthropy” looks like in practice. Scott’s is about as woke as it gets, as you can see from the areas she funded in 2020 through her philanthropic organisation, Yield:
Without further ado, here are 20 grants Scott has funded, with their descriptions (taken from the Yield website):
$1,000,000 to Familia: Trans Queer Liberation Movement (2022)
Familia: Movimiento Para La Liberación Trans y Queer (Familia:TQLM) works at the local and national levels to achieve the collective liberation of trans, queer, and gender non-conforming Latinxs through community building, organising,
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Probably a great example of the cliche that some people have a great deal more money than sense
The tyrany of the minority. Mrs Scott probably could have lifted millions out of poverty. Instead she chose to do something for trans people. I would imagine the number of trans people hardly comes anywhere near those living in abject poverty. But it’s her money, her choice.
A masterclass in how to waste money I guess. But I suppose it’s hers, she can do what she wants with it. Most of it will just go into grifter’s pockets, but hey ho.
What did she actually do to earn her wealth that didn’t involve laying on her back.
Got a team of lawyers in who drafted a killer pre-nup, by the looks of it.
I don’t suppose she’s at risk of missing any meals.
Just picking a third-world country at random: Is Rwanda a better place this year because of her gifts? Is California?
Looking at her ‘worthy causes,’ the world would be a better place if she’d have set fire to her money.
No building of clean water facilities in the 3rd world, then. No helping the 3rd world poor to grow crops build businesses etc. I mean those might actually help ordianry normal people get out of poverty,
She is a poster child for let’s call it what it is. Wank Wealth. an apt description for the donations of money from which these bored, idiots gain self pleasure.
Agreed. There are so many genuinely useful things this money could be used for.
But her choice to use it as she wants to.
Gosh – what does all this money add up to?!
is it pledges or hard cash?
Poor Jeff, imagine having to listen to all this over breakfast.
Not any more – he’s got a brand new wife who seems less preoccupied with ‘saving the world’ https://www.instyle.com/lauren-sanchez-jeff-bezos-fiance-11760570
At first contemplation, private philanthropy seems preferable to state philanthropy. But one could argue both are equally immoral. State philanthropy is wrong because it coerces money from people and funnels it to things that they don’t support and have little real choice about. Private philanthropy is wrong because the capacity to do work and to do things with resources is a gift and paying people to engage in providing services that nobody would be prepared to pay for with their own money is a waste of that gift.
Her ex seems to be more fixated on the climate hoax bandwagon. All the worthy causes that could benefit from such eye-watering vast sums of money. Same could be said of Gates, obviously. Jeff Bezos does donate to homeless families in the US too, so at least that’s a non-woke and worthwhile project, but this climate bollocks, man…;
”CLIMATE CHANGE: In early 2020, Bezos pledged $10 billion toward the creation of the Bezos Earth Fund to combat climate change, which Bezos has called “the biggest threat to our planet.” He has since given $100 million each to the Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Nature Conservancy, the World Wildlife Fund, as well as the World Resources Institute. The Earth Fund has scaled back some of its climate work since the second election of Trump. A newer area of interest, however, concerns the use of AI in climate mitigation strategies”
https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/find-a-grant/major-donors/jeff-bezos
And not a penny to help the starving and dispossessed.
I hear this complaint about her ex hubby – he apparently has enough funds to end world hunger, why doesn’t he? In response I would say that it’s her money to spend as she sees fit, and the same for him. So long as it doesn’t encroach on my life then carry on.
This naive view that people don’t inherently have selfish motives is one reason why we are all going to hell in a handcart. Always question the motives of someone or organisation which claims to exist only for your benefit!
It is indeed their money to spend and I certainly wouldn’t advocate preventing them from doing so.
I just think it’s immoral or it’s not really philanthropy. Giving people free stuff that they are short of is philanthropy (though in the long run it may not help). But what she’s doing is really political activism or simply self glorification. Is there a demand for what she is funding? There’s certainly demand from the people she’s paying to provide it – cushy bullshit jobs – but is there a real demand from the end clients? Maybe I guess. Perhaps there are enough vulnerable people out there who if they are told that they need “support” will believe it. They are more
likely to believe it if they don’t have to pay for it.
Rich narcissists want to be liked.
Look at me, look at me, aren’t I the most wonderful? All the trendy things, too much money, too little sense. Dumb as dog do!
I was wondering who paid so many activists to demonstrate (and have a nice shopping trip) in London on a regular basis. Now (in addition to funding from the CCP via ‘The Peoples Forum’ in NY) we know.
‘According to a Dec. 9 blog post written by Scott, her philanthropic organization Yield Giving donated to Solidaire Network…the network has funded organizations including Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), the US Palestinian Community Network, and the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM)
‘The progressive funding hub that distributes grants to left-wing activist groups received $5 million from Scott in 2025, and $10 million in 2021…SJP and AMP—two organizations receiving funding from Solidaire Network—face investigations in both the House and Senate for allegedly coordinating with terror group Hamas to start anti-Israel protests in the U.S.’
https://fortune.com/2026/01/06/mackenzie-scott-donation-to-nonprofit-supporting-anti-israel-pro-muslim-groups-federal-probes/
Such a good article. Thank you very much.
It’s behind a paywall.
one can only hope she receives some of the terrorism goodies she bestows n reap on the rest of us. She can reap what she sews
A fool and her money are verrry easily parted. No wonder Jeffy gave her the flick
Her money. It’s a lot easier for a bloke to piss it up the wall, so she deserves some credit, I guess.