An article caught my eye recently (The Milwaukee Independent: A "perfect failure" allowed a few white activists to stop a $60M project in a black neighborhood). I've been reflecting lately on the role of white activism and its impact (often unintended) on communities of color. As a white progressive, I know that my single-mindedness, my experiences as a white woman, and my limited connections to communities of color have led me to make assumptions, overlook critical truths, and fail to organize with an intersectional lens--meaning, an understanding of how issues intersect and relate to one another, particularly as it relates to race and racism. When I saw that headline, it grabbed me.
The article describes a phenomenon that's painfully familiar--It's what I call Checking the Engagement Box. Over the years, I have seen many government entities schedule community meetings, put a few flyers up on bulletin boards and an announcement on their website, offer no supports like child care or food, complain about how nobody shows up, check the "community engagement" box, and move forward with projects that have direct and lasting impact on communities of color and communities of low financial wealth. This enables people with personal and institutional power to feel that they've tried; they've had good intentions. But unfortunately, the good intentions are not grounded in connection, and don't flow from an authentic curiosity about how to best reach out to people in communities that are not our own. Instead, they rely on stale, outdated or inaccessible methods that are quick and easy: flyers, website announcements, and an empty meeting room.
This methodology perpetuates the longstanding practice of doing things in and to these communities without their input or consent. The reason these weak attempts at engagement fail is not because people don't care, it's because the government entity in question (or NGO for that matter) exerts the absolute bare minimum effort and does no relationship-building with people and no trust-building (often in the context of generations of earned mistrust). The community meetings are designed to fulfill a requirement, not authentically engage people from the beginning.
I know very little about the project in question in this article and I don't live in or near the neighborhood in question (though I am a proud Cheesehead), but I have little doubt about the basic dynamics in play because I see it over and over again. Government entities--and all organizations, really-- have a lot to learn about how to genuinely serve communities, and lots of white organizing has plenty of room for intersectional growth. It was a good reminder to me to check my impact, not my intentions, and be rigorous about putting time and energy into make authentic connections and warm invitations that feel real, respectful, and inclusive.
Comments