Episode 1: Racial Equity
Uma Mishra-Newberry is a global social justice advocate and women's rights leader. She began her career in the US Army before becoming an educator and community organizer in the nonprofit and development sectors. She's the former Executive Director of Women's March Global and the initiator of and lead facilitator for the Racial Equity Index. She joins us from Geneva, Switzerland.
We speak about:
community organizing
building an intersectional feminist movement
being in a position of leadership
the crisis of funding in the women’s movement
rejecting hustle culture and toxic work environments
problematizing white feminism
initiating the Racial Equity Index
working as a collective
being conscious of our own biases - and much more.
Transcript
Intro: We don't see this work getting easier. it's still very challenging, it is still very difficult. The global development space is still very hostile towards these conversations. So there's a deep amount of work that has to be done. and it's really exhausting to think about it, but at the same time, you know, we cannot continue to work in this way. And so we are committed, especially within the Racial Equity Index to seeing that this is changed.
Safa: Welcome back to the Rethinking Development podcast. My name is Safa and I'm your host. Thank you for joining me as we speak with and learn from practitioners of all career stages and organizational affiliations around the world. In our conversations, we aim to rethink ethical behavior and best practices through the lived experiences and personal reflections of different guests. To help me kick off our fourth season, I'm joined by Uma Mishra-Newberry. Uma is a global social justice advocate and women's rights leader. She began her career in the US Army before becoming an educator and community organizer in the nonprofit sector. She's the former Executive Director of Women's March Global and the initiator of and lead facilitator for the Racial Equity Index. Uma, thank you so much for speaking with me today. To begin with, could you share a bit with us about your background or your upbringing and some of the experiences that kind of shaped your worldview and led you down this career path?
Uma : Absolutely. I'm laughing because you know, my life has been very, very varied at times in terms of my experiences, and the different sets of my experiences. You know, I'm a first generation American, born in the US, but I was raised in India, by my grandparents. And then I moved back to the US and went and did all my schooling there. And I've always been back and forth from India, to the United States. And, you know, I have a family that has a very rich history with India in terms of being involved with the first Prime Minister of India. And so we have, I think, a family history of being socially active in many ways. And so I heard stories growing up of what my grandfather did, on my dad's side, what my father did, and those stories and so yeah, it was a very interesting upbringing, because, you know, in the juxtaposition of hearing those stories, and then growing up in West Michigan, which is a very white community - it was different. And so you know, in terms of my experiences, I'm also ex military, I was in the United States Army for six years as an active duty soldier. I've, you know, worked in the hospital as a medical lab tech for a number of years, I've taught at the university level, at secondary school, high school level, tutored, I've - you know, volunteered a whole bunch in terms of the women's rights and human rights space. And then now my previous tenure as the Executive Director of Women's March Global, but now also initiating and working with a group of people to launch the Racial Equity Index, so I'm always doing something, you know, and really just building on one experience after the other.
Safa: Yeah, absolutely. So you mentioned these kind of different chapters in your working life and the transition that you eventually made from those different work experiences to the nonprofit sector. Could you speak a bit about what drew you to transitioning to the nonprofit sector, the development sector? What was it you were drawn to? And what were you hoping you could contribute to by making that switch?
Uma: Absolutely. I'd been a community organizer in Michigan before I moved to Switzerland. And I was deeply missing that in Switzerland. So when I was teaching in Geneva, and this was around 2016 - so of course, the election happened between Clinton and Trump. And so when the election happened, it prompted the heart wrenching reaction that it did, because we all - when I say we, I mean black, indigenous people of color, we all knew what that meant. Because Trump, you know, has never hidden that he is a racist, or a fascist, or any of the, you know, choice words to describe the reality. And so when the Women's March started, in terms of the organizing, there was a small group of people in Geneva that started organizing Women's March Geneva, and I volunteered with them and participated in the first Women's March in Geneva. And after that, there was this definite feeling like we've just participated in something historic from a global mobilization perspective. It was an enormous gathering of women and allies from across the world that I had never seen in my lifetime. And I also knew that if I didn't really seize the opportunity that was before me to really, you know, dig my feet in to continuing organizing, then it would be difficult for me to find that space, at least within the Geneva context. And so I started volunteering with Women's March Global to help gather all of the women that had taken part in the 2017 march and continue the work of building community, and figuring out how we continue forward as a global collective of chapters and members and what our mission was going to be and how we were going to organize and how we were going to really commit to intersectional movement building. And that's really where it started growing for me. I started as the volunteer Social Media Lead. And by the summer of 2017, I was volunteering full time, essentially, with Women's March Global - I would teach during the day and then come home and be on lots of organizing calls. And then I slowly shifted to being the Community Director, along with being the Social Media Lead. And then finally, in July of 2018, I made a decision to leave my teaching job and start full time as the Director of Global Community for Women's March Global. So that's how I started.
Safa: So you kind of evolved in the organization from Women's March Geneva to Women's March International. And, you know, ultimately, you were the Executive Director. In that position of leadership - could you speak to us a bit about how you were able to build a woman's movement that was anti racist? That was intersectional? What were some of the, you know, challenges you faced and experiences you had in terms of building that movement?
Uma: So I think we need to be really clear that although the unity principles, and the organizers behind the Women's March have definitely committed to anti racism, you know, myself included - that when you have a majority group of white women that are mobilizing in some cases - and I'm talking about in the European context, many of the women that showed up had never really had conversations around anti racism, and white supremacy and white feminism and the immense damage that white feminism does. And so much of 2017 was really spent on having hours and hours and hours and hours of uncomfortable conversations with our community. Because yes, it was amazing to organize and come together on that day, you know, on the 21st of January 2017. But if we were going to actually be an intersectional movement, that meant that we needed urgently to ensure that our community members were not just going to be a group of white feminists, co-opting the history of black led, indigenous led, and people of color led movement building, and that they were actually going to be committed to having these very difficult conversations about the role and the complicity of white women, and that they were going to actually do the work. And many learned that it wasn't really the space for them, because we were really challenging them. But then a lot stepped up, and they still are part of our community, and they still are very much organizing in an incredible way, alongside BIPOC organizers. It's taken a lot of work, and it's a constant re education. I mean, we saw this, again, with this past election between Trump and Biden, more white women than in the 2016 election voted for Trump. More white women, 55%. So the work isn't done. In the States, in Europe, in many places, the work isn't done - in the global development community, there is a huge issue and problem of systemic racism and white feminism in global development. Like we are on a massive journey here. And there's an incredible amount of work to be done. Now. I feel like I've kind of gone on some sort of tangent in my head. So I'm sorry, if I haven't answered your question.
Safa: No, no problem. So in your time there, in that journey were there moments where you faced, you know, push back? Where you were asked to kind of make things a bit more palatable? Or, you know, in a position of leadership, what were kind of the stances that sometimes you had to take?
Uma: That's a great question. I mean, I think it's interesting, because from a leadership perspective, so I started as Executive Director in December of 2018. And I very quickly realized that there's an explicit decision that is made for those who are Executive Directors within the women's rights space and global development. And that decision is, are we going to actually reify harmful ways of working in women's rights and human rights within our own organizations and our teams? Or are we going to decolonize our working methods to ensure that we are leading with a trauma informed mindset? That we are leading with vulnerability, that we are leading with empathy. And in so many cases, that does not happen, there's not awareness there. Because, again, the majority of global development is white lead executive directors and directors. But for me, I was critical that if I'm leading a movement that I'm really making sure, especially with the team that's working and grinding day in and day out, that we arrive at the work with care and concern for each other and ensuring that we are not reifying the same problems that we're fighting against. And so it is definite pushback, because especially when we're talking about the challenges of being an organization - one of the biggest ones is funding and funders do not recognize - especially within the women's rights funding space - funders do not recognize the need for funding that actually allows for budgets that build in mental health and well being. They do not recognize the need for budgets that allow for technology support, you know, so to ensure that we're not asking people to spend their own money on computers that they are using a majority of the time for work, but that they, you know, don't have to worry that if their computer breaks, like there's a budget to support that. Little things that actually in the corporate sector are mostly taken care of, you know. But in the nonprofit sector, somehow we expect people to show up to work and to also do everything, you know, off of their own dime, and their own mental health and well being and emotional health. And then additionally, a complete and utter lack of recognition from funders that the work that we do is deeply triggering for the people who are actually on the frontlines doing the work. And there is no support or understanding from funders that this means that the work isn't going to happen as fast as funders would like it to, because they are enforcing white capitalist and supremacist ways of working and timelines that are unrealistic and do not actually take into account that people need mental health breaks, people need to disengage, you know. We need time for radical imagination of what our futures could look like. But because we are so reactive within the movement space, we don't have that luxury because funders are snapping their fingers, you know, and demanding a return on their investment, if you will, it does not actually afford us the space to lead in a way that breaks the cycle of the immense amount of harm that many leaders within women's rights or global development inflict upon their stuff,
Safa: Yes, absolutely. And so speaking about the necessity for changing that habit of hustle culture and pushing back against that, did you feel that you had an ecosystem their or a support network in terms of the other participants, other partners, the other people in the team that were supportive of making those changes?
Uma: You know, it's interesting, because I think, as a leader, if you actually give permission for people to show up and say, I'm struggling today, I mean, take the day off, if you give that permission, then they know that they are supported, and they're not going to face reprisals, or be reprimanded or punished in some way if they do take that time off. And so, you know, I like to hope that the tenor that was set, you know, during my term as Executive Director was one that allowed the team to take deep breaths, to disengage, to disconnect and feel that they were supported throughout the whole process. One of the things that I did often was after a big sprint of work or a big push out of a report, we would always take the next either a long weekend, for the next two days off, completely disengaging, put out of office replies on and shut our computers off, you know. That is deserved. That space. The pushback doesn't come from the team, it comes from the board, it comes from the funders, it comes from other partners who are wondering why you're not quick enough to respond.
Safa: And in that type of kind of social movement building, advocating and hoping that that kind of work leads to policy change. Could you speak to us a bit about the aspect of the work that involves building partnerships and hoping that the efforts and the projects and the movement that you were building would translate into policy changes from other organizations from other entities?
Uma: Yeah, absolutely. I think a good example of this is when we came out - and I'm blanking on the year this was, I believe it was 2019. We came out with a statement in regards to September 28, the International Day for Safe Access to Abortion. And our statement in regards to abortion rights did not use the word women - we used the word people because we are intersectional. We also recognize as a movement that not all people who get abortions identify as women. And it causes individuals further harm if we are just using gendered, binary language, and not acknowledging the diversity of our community, and the intersectionality of our community. And there was a lot of pushback from some of our partners within the abortion rights movement, because they felt that the removal of the word women was somehow an affront that we were failing to recognize the decades of fight that women had contributed to pushing abortion rights to the place where it is now. And I always find this interesting. Are women not included in the word people? For whatever reason, you know. I was in a meeting with other abortion rights advocacy organizations and other providers. And this was a global meeting that happened with about 12 other organizations. And the tensions were very real for the changing of this one word from women to people. We recognized that as a movement it is our job, it's our mandate, to show up and be intersectional and also ensure that we are providing education to people who are not either aware of why this is so sorely needed, but also we recognize that not everybody is at the same place, that we are, you know. There's a great statement, you know, unity is not uniformity. And as long as there is consistent and continued discussion around why gender neutral language must be adopted in international abortion rights policies, as long as it's not immediately shut down by white feminists who are so you know, clutching their pearls because we've removed the word women, and somehow, you know, women are not identified completely in the word people, as long as we're not met with that level of resistance, I feel like slowly, that change is coming. But it's happening so excruciatingly slowly - because again, this is a matter of power, it's a matter of giving up what you have so comfortably held on to, this history of women fighting for abortion rights, is completely recognized and no one is taking away from that. And the word people is not detracting from that. And yet we see somehow the inclusion of individuals who do not identify as women, and yet also get abortions, we see the inclusion of these already marginalized and oppressed groups as somehow an extra ask that we now have to accommodate. Which is, it's mind numbing to me, and this is why the lack of progress and forward movement in the excruciating progress is so, so frustrating to bear witness to. So when you ask me about policy change, I immediately think of, you know, the fact that the policy is changing, it's slow, but it's changing. But at the same time, it could change a lot faster if people were actually open to understanding why intersectionality is critical. It is vital, literally to people's lives, and that white feminists really need to do the work of educating themselves and stop clutching on to the power in these conversations.
Safa: Mm hmm. Absolutely. And you know, your comments about the relationship between language and power, they're kind of a good segue to some of the things I want to ask about the Racial Equity Index. But before we go there, I just want to - in terms of the work at the Women's March, I wanted to ask you - was there a point where you decided that you wanted to move on from that role? Or was there a specific experience or a reason for that? Or were you purposely trying to put more of your time into other types of work?
Uma: So this is a great question. There's a lot of things - it's interesting, because I was talking to a dear friend of mine today, who is a trans rights activist, and one of the things that came up was, do we have to have breakdowns in the movement space in order to demand justice? Like, do we have to literally, you know, have either emotional or physical breakdowns to the point where, you know, we are so exhausted, that we can't think or move? Is that the requirement of being an activist? You know, and I think in so many ways, it's because the space is set up in the way that it is. And funding is set up in the way that it is that it is a requirement that's demanded of - it's not a requirement. It's demanded of BIPOC people and marginalized communities that we show up and we fight with the tiniest of resources. And so my exit from WMG was very much centered on this immense feeling of exhaustion. Because after nine months of being a volunteer ED, because of funding struggles - the women's rights space is in a funding crisis. And funders fail to recognize their complicity in the crumbling of movements that's happening around the world, and on a local context. And so after nine months of being a volunteer ED, you know, and spending every waking moment trying to find a way to fund our work, and continue to build community and continue to show up, I had to resign, and I'm still on the board of Women's March Global, I'm still active in participating in our annual actionS. So this year, we're doing a global poll called the Global Count, and it's an opportunity for us to take pull of as many women and gender diverse people as possible to understand what the issues are that are facing women and gender diverse people around the world, and what are the barriers to progress? And we're hoping that a lot of this information can help us as a movement, especially, but also help funders really understand where the funding needs to go. It can help activists on the ground understand what are the issues that the community is really concerned about? And so I'm still deeply involved, but I am now, you know, looking for my next role, but also volunteering on lots of other things like the Racial Equity Index.
Safa: Yes, you are the lead initiator of the Racial Equity Index and Lead facilitator. Could you first share a bit with us about how that idea came up? And what the intention behind it is?
Uma: Absolutely. The Racial Equity Index was very much born because of the murder of George Floyd last year. And the spark that this ignited in the global development sector. Shortly after we saw a number of very public reckonings with Women Deliver, IWHC, Noble Women's Initiative, and MSF, and WHO - lots of global organizations that faced a very public reckoning with their staff either walked out, or they spoke up publicly for the first time of the deep and toxic level of racism within the workplace. But the toxic work environments that the all white leadership in the cases that I just outlined, had built and had reified. And so after witnessing this, and after also experiencing this, you know, in my tenure, with Women's March Global, and I've said to a lot of colleagues in the space, who are my sisters in this space, that I've never felt the color of my skin more than in a funding conversation. After witnessing all of this, and after talking, you know, with a few people, and recognizing as well, there are a lot of gender equality indexes within global development that measure gender equality. And I asked one of the leads of one of the indexes that's based in Europe, why they don't measure racial equity. And their response was, it's not on our radar. And again, this is a matter of information, right? If we don't know, we can actually have the data to be able to say, this, indeed, is an issue - and we know it's an issue. White people also know it's an issue, but they fail to, you know, acknowledge it - they don't fail to, I'm going to retract that. They choose not to acknowledge it, there's a deliberate choice there. And so this idea of the Racial Equity Index was born, because my thinking around this was we need an index that measures racial equity in organizations in global development. And we need one that is built by BIPIC people for BIPOC people. This cannot be a white bud initiative. White people have not experienced racism, they have no idea the level of trauma, the burden, the amount of harm and the level of violence that black, indigenous people of color have to go through in global development. And so this has to be an initiative that is built by BIPOC people and led by us. And so I put a call out in June of 2020 - and within, I would say three weeks, we had our first ever working group call, and it's now been six months. And we are structured in a way where we have a working group, a core group, we've got work-stream leaders. We are collaborative decision makers. So we have a decision making framework. We have spent over 1,000 volunteer hours getting our first global mapping survey. We've got peer reviewers So it's been an amazing past six months to see this collectively come to life and to witness my colleagues in this work really bring this together in the way that we have.
Safa: Wonderful. Yeah. So under the Racial Equity Index, you have a variety of resources. And one of them, as you said, is this global mapping survey. In the sector, there's, of course, a big focus on evidence-based policymaking and the need for qualitative and quantitative data and measurable results and all of that. So was there a thought process behind the need for this in terms of - if we have something in which racist practices and systemic racist problems can be measured and quantified, that somehow maybe our calls for change would maybe be taken more seriously or be legitimized in some way?
Uma: You know, the thing is that this is, we believe, really the first time that we are explicitly talking about racial equity as both a process and an outcome in terms of the build of this index. The index itself is about demanding greater accountability, and embedding racial equity in global development practice and structures so that we can collectively dismantle structural racism and create more equitable systems. But, you know, we are taking into account as a collective, in this process, all of the inequities that we individually as people who have 50 years of experience as a group in global development, all of the inequities that we have faced, and that's very much informing our work, but then also ensuring, and this is the reason for the global mapping survey, ensuring that we're also asking, especially BIPOC people who work in the global development space, how they define racial equity within global development. We've been asked this question why are we just focusing on on racial equity? You know, why are we not doing racial equity and gender equity, you know? And the thing is, is that there are a lot of gender equality, not equity, their gender equality indexes out there, but the level of systemic racism in global development cannot be ignored. And people, for whatever reason, like to ignore the history of global development, and the fact that the global development sector itself has very deep roots in colonialism, you know, and imperialist structures that were very much involved in the slave trade, gave birth to the slave trade. And so this ideology and history that informs the global development sector is itself inherently built on white supremacy, you know, and white capitalism. And so if the global development sector at large cannot actually face that history, then, of course, they have not then openly acknowledged the deep and systemic level of racism within global development organizations. And it's for this reason that this data is so critical, it's for this reason that this index is so vital, so that we can say, you know, in a very concrete way that based on these indicators of human resources, of organizational culture of your funding practices, and based on the rating systems that have been built collectively by a group of people and that have been peer reviewed, that your organization is shit at racial equity. You know, that's really what it comes down to. But then also providing them an opportunity to go on a journey, so that they can also unlearn these problematic ways of working and commit to doing a whole hell of a lot better.
Safa: Yeah, absolutely. It's such a timely initiative and important - and actually overdue in many ways. But when it came to authoring the global survey, framing the questions, choosing the wording, and then also having it translated - internally with your colleagues, what was that process like in terms of determining what are the questions we want to ask? How are we going to articulate them? How are we going to translate them?
Uma: That's a great question. I mean, this survey has taken over 1,000 hours to build. This has been deeply intentional, the build of this survey because when we started this global mapping survey, our intention at that time was really to build a definition of racial equity within global development. And we very quickly realized that the definition of racial equity that we have access to is different in many different parts of the world given the different context. And so we are using the global mapping survey as the very first step to explore really the dimensions of racial equity. We want to make sure that we're hearing from as many people as possible, which is why we, you know, and again, a lot of people have asked us well why don't you have more translations? We're all volunteers, we have no budget, we don't have any funding at this present moment in time. It's something that we're working on. So the the translations that we do have are there because these are the people that we had access to. And we wish that we could have done more, but it's also about capacity as well. And so this survey, it took us a long time to create, because we were constantly questioning 1) the purpose of the survey, 2) ensuring that the questions that we're asking are not leading, that we're not inserting our own trauma, own experiences into the design of these questions. So even the definitions themselves, you know, one of our peer reviewers gave us the mandate that they cannot be leading definitions, they have to provide the context without actually providing any further detail than that. And that was really challenging, it was really difficult, because again, every single person that is part of the Racial Equity Index has experienced individually, systemic racism. They have experienced racism within global development, every single person in the Racial Equity Index. And we have 50 years of collective experience in the global development sector. So it is very hard to not bring those individual experiences into this process. And yet, it's so deeply informs how we collectively show up - not only for each other, but for the work itself. And for the language portion of this, you know, when we started the language process, there was this really deep recognition on how language itself is steeped and rooted in colonialism and imperialism. And the translation process itself was deeply triggering for our team members, and for the survey development team. Because especially if we're looking at racial identities, and the terminology that's used to identify racial identities, and in many languages, it is very much based on colonialism, we cannot change that, unfortunately, for many languages, they have not developed a decolonized way of talking about race, which itself is a deeply problematic social contract. But it is, you know, that's the context that we're working in. And so we are exploring as a as an index and a collective, how language itself is rooted in racism. And we'll continue to explore this and develop it in the next parts of the process, because we are at the very beginning of a very long journey here.
Safa: Mm hmm. And you mentioned how it's important for you that it's not just about the end product, but also the process. The survey is live on your website. Could you speak to us a little bit about what your plan for it is, in terms of the next steps? And then what's the next step once you have collected the answers? And, you know, looking to the future?
Uma: So yes, the global mapping survey is the very first step in the build of the index. And we are working with a group of amazing peer reviewers who have helped to really guide this process. But this global mapping survey is what it is, because we want very much to understand what are the top level indicators that people are looking at when we talk about racial equity in global development? Based on the feedback that we get from the global mapping survey, we are going to analyze that data. And that itself will take time because we want to make sure that we are analyzing the data in such a way that we are mining the data that we actually need to move forward in this process of the build of the index. From there, our next kind of public step after the data mining process will be focus groups - and the focus groups, we're still really conceptualizing. But to protect people's anonymity, we're probably going to be doing this individually, and it will take a long time. But what we want to do is take about maybe three to five of the top level indicators that come back from the global mapping survey, and really have the focus groups help us piece out these subcategories and the indicators within each of these issue areas. So really helped us set the definition - like what do we mean when we say human resources from a racial equity perspective? What are we looking for? What are the tangible markers of a human resource management practice that is anti racist? You know, at its core, what are the what are the different indicators that would be set that we could measure. From the focus groups taking all that data - and this, again will take time and mining that to build a detailed survey. And the detailed survey will help us confirm the indicators and the subcategories. From that, build a scoring and a test group so that we can actually develop the scoring system and the rating systems for the index, and then do our first round of ratings for the index itself. From a timeline perspective, what we're looking at is that because of the fact that we really want to be deliberate and give ourselves enough time, again, we are at the moment all volunteer led - that the first round of indexing probably won't be released until, let's say Q2 or Q3 of 2022.
Safa: And you mentioned the problems of funding, the crisis of funding, faced not only in the women's movement, but of course, a variety of community led initiatives. Could you speak to us a bit about what your hopes are in terms of being able to access funding or if you've already had conversations with funders and what their reactions have been at this stage of the process so far?
Uma: So we are in very initial conversations with funders. And, you know, as you so rightly said, you know, this work is so long overdue and needed, and funders recognize this. But because as well, we're being very intentional, we want to be autonomous as a collective, we want to continue to work in the way that we are working. We are a collaborative group. And, you know, we work off of consensus decision making, that's not necessarily recognized in the traditional nonprofit structure. So it's about really building a partnership with a funder that will recognize the decolonized way in which we are trying to work and respect that, and also allow us to retain autonomy. Those are not easy combinations when it comes to the funding world. But because this work is what it is, in regards to racial equity, we feel that we cannot be countered to our values just because we need the funding, you know. It would be reifying such harmful ways of working, that it would be a detriment to us and the work if we were to do that.
Safa: Yes, absolutely. Yeah. You know, we all come to this work with our own perspectives, experiences, and also our own biases. So in your work so far with your collective of colleagues, has there been times so far when maybe a mistake was made or something happened that was maybe harmful? And that you had to take a pause and reflect on that as a team? And learn from that? Have there been moments when you've had those conversations amongst yourselves?
Uma: I mean, absolutely. We have definitely had a lot of those conversations internally, as a collective. We come with the understanding each of us to this work that we have to be, we have to have radical empathy, not only with each other, you know, we are mindful of the fact that we are all arriving with our own positionality and layers of privilege. And in this work, we are, you know - and this is in our statement on our website, we arrive with this privileged knowing that we are an English speaking group, and within the global development space, there is a power dynamic that's inherent within that. And so if we cannot actually be truthful, and what that affords us, if we can't confront those realities within ourselves, then we end up reifying these very harmful power dynamics. But at the same time, we are also learning. No one, not any one of us in this collective has all of the answers. And this is why this is collective work. This is very much a space - and I think it's been echoed a few times in the past six months where one person will say, you know, I feel supported in this exploration of these topics and the understanding, and we'll ask each other questions, and they are welcomed. And they are welcomed because we recognize that we are all learning in this process. We came together in the way that we did, because we all believe that this is an overdue need. This need for the Racial Equity Index. It is greatly overdue, but at the same time, you know, we're all coming as either people who have full time jobs or part time jobs, or, you know, for me, I'm in between roles, and still experiencing, you know, different levels of violence in terms of the levels of racism that we're experiencing, as we move through the global development sector and how that informs how we show up. So there's a lot of empathy in our group. But there's also a lot of understanding that, you know, we're gonna have questions for each other that we're gonna have to hold space for and support each other through the process of learning and unpacking and decolonizing.
Safa: Yeah, and you know, just relating it back maybe more to yourself - at this stage, we're in the beginning of 2021. 2020 was a heavy year in so many ways. But the initiatives that you're working on with the survey and the other resources that are well underway, what would you say is kind of your energy level right now or your headspace right now, or what's top of your mind in terms of the things that you're hoping to achieve and to, you know, look forward to in the coming months with this work?
Uma: It's interesting, because, you know, it's 2021. And, you know, today, as we're speaking, Safa, you know, we've just seen the inauguration of the first black, first South Asian, first woman Vice President in the US. And that is deeply inspiring. And at the same time, I know, so many of my friends and colleagues and sisters in this space are so tired from the events of the past five years, and they are so deeply exhausted from the levels of organizing that they have had to do, and the level of racism that they have experienced and have had to bear. And so I don't find, at least in the spaces that I'm working in, that anyone's arriving in 2021 like feeling fresh as a daisy. And feeling like boundless levels of energy. There is still such a deep level of exhaustion, because it's not like white women woke up in 2021 and decided all of a sudden to be anti racist. I bet many of them did not read, you know, the 10 books on anti racism that they bought in the six months of last year. So there's still a deep level of violence that we know that we face, and because of the fact that there are so many white women in the space that refuse to acknowledge the harmful ways in which they show up the harmful ways in which they, quote unquote, act as leaders, you know, and so it's hard. You know, it's hard, because we don't see this work getting easier, it's still very challenging, it is still very difficult. The global development space is still very hostile towards these conversations, because, you know, their idea of dealing with this conversation around anti racism is to hire a consultant for a two hour session, you know, an EDI consultant for two hour session, and then be done with it. And then oh, we've had our anti racism training for the year. So there's a deep amount of work that has to be done. And it's really exhausting to think about it. But at the same time, you know, we cannot continue to work in this way. We cannot continue to work in this way at the expense of BIPOC individuals in global development, it's not tenable for anybody. And so we are committed, especially within the Racial Equity Index to seeing that this has changed.
Safa: Mm hmm. Yes, yes, absolutely. And when you think about the ecosystem that we're in, within the sector, and the Racial Equity Index being, you know, one great initiative, absolutely. But you know, just broadly thinking about all the other initiatives that exist or don't exist, and the work that has to be done or generally the conversations you hear happening in all kinds of different spaces in terms of rethinking development paradigms, rethinking international cooperation mechanisms. Are there any final thoughts that you have in terms of where we are at or the other initiatives that exist, or the incredible amount of work left to be done, of course, but just any final thoughts you have to share?
Uma: I mean, the great thing is, is that BIPOC people in this sector are incredible organizers. And so if I look at the work, for example of Charity So White, Aid Reimagined, ReproJobs and Leaderships Away, and so many others, these conversations aren't going away, as much as white leadership in the sector would wish that they would. They are not going away. And it is only because of collectives, like ours, like Charity So White and so many others, that are committed to this work that that there is hope for change. But at the same time, you know, it is incumbent upon funders, who have said that they are committed to racial equity to actually fund racial equity efforts, to actually fund decolonizing development efforts. You know, it is incumbent upon them. Because they're in lies the power, in that space, in the funding space, that is so deeply entrenched in neocolonialism. Therein lies the power and we cannot do this work without that funding and it has to be trust base. And it has to be recognizing that autonomy is paramount and that these are collective led efforts. Therefore, they are not you know, following the paradigm that is set by the nonprofit space or the charity sector - that we will work in a different way, we will show up in a different way. And so I think for the global development sector at large, there's a decision that needs to be made - either as an organization you can choose to continue working the way that you have, and pretending that anti racism is an issue that's not going to hit you as an organization in 2021. And at some point, be called out because your work environment probably is toxic and it will take one person just having enough of the BS to, you know, finally say something. Or as an organization, you can do something different. You can listen to the BIPIC people that you have on your team, you can promote them, you know. You can ensure that you don't have all white leadership for a global organization that's based in North America, you can make different choices. And that's what we're asking. And so the work continues, and we're here for it.
Safa: And we applaud you and we celebrate you. So thank you. Thank you so much for speaking with me today. And I encourage all those listeners to support the Racial Equity Index, follow them on social media, fill out the survey, be part of the work and the movement. Thank you so much, Uma.
Uma: I thank you for taking the time with me.
Safa: Thank you also to our listeners for tuning in and supporting the podcast. I invite you to join in on the conversation by going to our website, hitting the send us a voice message button and sharing some of your thoughts with us. Don't forget to subscribe to the podcast on your preferred podcast player, rate and review past episodes and share our conversations with your friends! You can also keep up to date with our latest episodes and offerings by signing up for our newsletter on our website and following us on social media. On our website, you can also find a donation link where you can choose either a one time donation or reoccurring monthly donation option to help us cover our production costs. Thank you again for tuning in. I look forward to continuing this conversation with you all next time. Until then, take care.
