After the passage of Typhoon “Bualoi” in Guangxi, the donation details released by the Baise Charity Association revealed several donations ranging from only 0.01 yuan to 0.1 yuan, sparking discussions among the public. Some comments pointed out that although a penny is minimal, it symbolically conveys a form of protest, reflecting dissatisfaction with the opaque charity management system.
At the end of September and the beginning of October, Typhoons “Bualoi” and “Matmo” successively hit Guangxi, causing severe flooding in many areas. On October 6th, the Baise Charity Association published the “Public Announcement of Social Assistance Donations (Phase One)” to disclose the donation situation. The over 7,500 donations mainly targeted the disaster caused by Typhoon “Bualoi” in the Baise area. During the typhoon, heavy rainfall in various parts of Guangxi led to disasters such as flooded houses, broken bridges, and landslides.
The 318-page donation announcement revealed a total of approximately 1.8458 million yuan in social donations, with an average donation of 244.7 yuan per person. Among them, there were dozens of donations amounting to only 0.01 yuan, with some donations as minimal as 0.02 yuan or 0.1 yuan.
A netizen from Zhejiang wrote on a WeChat public account, “Rough statistics show that at least 20 people donated a penny. This is not a prank but a real reflection of the public’s attitude and sincerity towards social donations.” The netizen also praised the transparency of the Baise Charity Association’s information disclosure, stating that “regardless of the amount, even one penny is a gesture of love.” The article further mentioned, “The responsibility for disaster relief lies with the government, not the citizens. Donating is a matter of goodwill; not donating is one’s duty.”
Regarding those who donated only 0.1 yuan or even 0.01 yuan, opinions online varied. Some viewed it as a charitable act of giving with modest means and a sincere heart, while others straightforwardly saw it as a mockery of the charitable system’s credibility.
A member of a non-governmental organization in Xiangtan, Hunan, Mr. Qin, expressed to a reporter, “The phenomenon of ‘donating one penny’ not only reflects economic pressures but also mirrors a social sentiment. We often receive donations from the public, but some donors are invited by the State Security Bureau and prohibited from donating to us. This indicates the difficult survival of NGOs not under government control, while government-run charity organizations are not trusted. Why is that?”
Mr. Qin pointed out that donating one or two pennies is not just a simple act of donation but a symbolic protest. He stated, “This indicates a decline in government credibility. People donating a symbolic penny are essentially saying, ‘I am still willing to show goodwill but no longer blindly trust the system.’ This reflects the collapse of trust in official charity departments.”
The author of the article analyzed that Chinese people have generously donated during past major disasters, especially during the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake, when a ‘nationwide donation’ movement swept across. However, subsequent revelations of the misuse of relief funds seriously undermined societal trust.
An internet writer from Guangxi, Liu Jinglei, remarked during an interview, “I remember after the Wenchuan earthquake, the people of Guangxi collectively donated over 16 million yuan. Almost all my friends participated, with some donating two hundred and others a thousand yuan. But later, there were cases of misappropriation of some donations in Sichuan, and people no longer trusted these institutions.”
Many commentators believe that although a penny is small, it symbolically expresses a protest against the opaque charity management system’s practices.
According to several media outlets and unofficial research reports, within six months of the Wenchuan earthquake, various sectors of Chinese society collectively raised the equivalent of approximately 65 billion yuan in donations and supplies. However, some independent scholars and charity observers point out that only about 15 billion yuan’s usage has clear public records. The lack of detailed disclosure on the whereabouts of the remaining large donations has raised transparency concerns in society.
Additionally, the total donations from Hong Kong society were approximately 20 billion yuan (including contributions from the SAR government, corporations, and the public), but some donations did not appear in the publicly disclosed lists. The media once discussed this issue under the title “Disappearing Hong Kong Donations.”
Researchers generally believe that some charitable funds might have been incorporated into local government infrastructure or reconstruction budgets, leading to the ambiguity in their final utilization. Furthermore, the lack of transparency in donation disclosure and delayed audit reports further erode public trust in the official charity system. Media commentary states, “With over 80% of donations not publicly accounted for, this is a severe blow to the official charity’s credibility.”
On social media platforms, many comments mentioned, “We would rather transfer money directly to the affected individuals than donate to organizations.”
Mr. Hu, a retired professor from Guizhou University, stated that over the past decade, government integrity has already collapsed in the eyes of the public: “Starting from the Guo Meimei incident, people no longer believe that donations from well-intentioned individuals can genuinely reach those in need so they prefer not to donate. In the floods in Hebei a few years ago, our school advocated for student donations, but almost no one responded. Now, everyone believes disaster relief is the government’s responsibility, not the people’s concern. It’s tragic.”