Beyond Rhetoric: The Need to Tackle Racism and Discrimination

 The repercussions from the death of George Floyd in the United States, which triggered the subsequent anti-racism protests globally, has caused all of us to collectively reflect on the difficult truth that there is still not a level playing field in the world according to the colour of one’s skin. 

Whilst there is an academic argument about whether ‘race’ or ‘ethnicity’ or other words are ‘correct’, the fact of the matter is that these arguments stem from people and positions of privilege.  Regardless of whether it is scientifically proven that there is only one human race, the lived experience of people that ARE discriminated against based on perceived race, or ethnic origin, or physical ability, appearances, gender identities – is very real. People are discriminated against based on the layman’s understanding of race, ethnicity, colour, gender identities, and physical and mental abilities.

The humanitarian sector is not immune to these discussions, with calls for reflections about long-standing problems of overt, hidden or unconscious systemic racism, in addition to a wider discussion around ‘de-colonizing’ the humanitarian aid system. Anecdotes from the humanitarian sector point out the overt experiences of racial discrimination, everyday micro-aggressions and unsafe workplace cultures. Much has already been written around how racism and decolonization within the humanitarian sector is related to a legacy from the colonial-era systems and structures of ‘civilizing missions’ which humanitarian agencies, often from the same countries as the colonial powers, still perpetuate.

In addressing racism as humanitarians, both our narrative and our actions matter.  If we are speaking on issues such as diversity and inclusion, we need to ask ourselves these questions: “Can all people see themselves represented here? Does our organizational culture speak to the very real experiences of people?”. Furthermore, our narrative must support our actions, starting with developing an equity-based understanding of humanitarian action which advocates for ‘adapting humanitarian work to each individual’s needs and background [to ensure] those affected are being treated equitably’.  This means understanding the intersectionality of oppression.  Racism is rooted in power hierarchies that often do not operate alone but intersect with gender, religion, socio-economic status, geography, sexual orientation, and numerous other social markers, creating layers of oppression that are inextricably intertwined.

Crucial to this conversation within the humanitarian sector has to be one on decolonising Eurocentric knowledge systems and tools, and their role in challenging the enduring effects of colonialism (and racism).  Hence, we need to break the ‘white gaze’ in our work as we question whose expertise we value, who we listen to, who holds the levers of power, who sits at the table and who gets a vote. 

A decolonisation of the narrative illustrates the need to reflect that we can no longer use the humanitarian principles “as a shield” to prevent more difficult reflections on our institutional biases and inequality.  For example, whilst the principle of impartiality remains the driving force towards genuine inclusion and diversity in the humanitarian sector, it is important to remember that the demand that humanitarians make no discrimination as to nationality, race, religious beliefs, class or political opinions extends to who we are as much as whom we serve.   

We must also recognise that “neutrality does not mean staying silent”, in the face of racism and violence.  It means speaking out and transitioning from a passive stance of not directly engaging in racist behaviours (i.e. not acknowledging differences and not actively addressing systems of oppression) to fighting and dismantling the systemic racism and other forms of inequity leading to systemic oppression and subordination.  We have to become anti-racist to challenge the passive approach towards the institutionalization of racism that creates systems and structures in organizations that ‘maintain privilege for some groups or individuals while restricting the rights and privileges of others’.

As the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement, we also need to ask ourselves serious and difficult questions about the issues of racism and related discrimination and power imbalances that are and could be present in our institutions at every level.  We have to move beyond just statements.  Whilst our Fundamental Principles dictate our actions, and our values motivate our compassion with local communities, we cannot hide behind the fact that we are products of our own contexts and environments and, as a consequence, we can be influenced by the related thinking and attitudes.  We need to be conscious that our history, our principles and our work does not make us immune to perceptions, misperceptions, power imbalances, privilege, racism, and discrimination.

At the 33rd International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent in 2019, we recognised that trust was the most critical currency for the future of principled humanitarian action as we seek to systematically engage with and be accountable to the communities we serve.  Moreover, the Movement Statement on Integrity adopted at the 2019 Council of Delegates reaffirmed our commitment as a Movement to these communities by ensuring that our workplaces are safe for all and that the dignity and integrity of our staff and volunteers is preserved, safeguarded and promoted.  Building a supportive, safe and inclusive environment is a commitment we need to make to continue fostering honest conversations around racism and discrimination. At the same time, we must also encourage difficult questions that help to improve trust between each other, respect and acceptance of each other’s diversity, and enable an understanding and support for better practices within the Movement. In turn, this will also allow everyone to have their voices heard and respected.

There are no boundaries in terms of where we can go based on our Fundamental Principles and what we should do as individuals and organisations.  The fundamental argument for the fight for diversity, equity and inclusion is a moral one.  We need to DO better and we need to BE better -not because it is the good thing to do, but because it is the right thing to do –  and to treat people with dignity, respect, and humanity.  This is our moral responsibility.

This originally appeared here

Beyond Rhetoric: The Need to Tackle Racism and Discrimination

Abstract

The global anti-racism protests have caused all of us to collectively reflect on some difficult truths regarding racism and discrimination.  The humanitarian sector is not immune to these discussions, with calls for reflections about long-standing problems of systemic racism and ‘de-colonizing’ the aid system.  As the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement, we must be involved in these difficult conversations and should not shy away from serious reflections.  There are no boundaries in terms of where we can go based on our Fundamental Principles, and what we should do as individuals and organisations. This is our moral responsibility.

---

The Story

The repercussions from the death of George Floyd in the United States, which triggered the subsequent anti-racism protests globally, has caused all of us to collectively reflect on the difficult truth that there is still not a level playing field in the world according to the colour of one’s skin. 

Whilst there is an academic argument about whether ‘race’ or ‘ethnicity’ or other words are ‘correct’, the fact of the matter is that these arguments stem from people and positions of privilege.  Regardless of whether it is scientifically proven that there is only one human race, the lived experience of people that ARE discriminated against based on perceived race, or ethnic origin, or physical ability, appearances, gender identities – is very real. People are discriminated against based on the layman’s understanding of race, ethnicity, colour, gender identities, and physical and mental abilities.

The humanitarian sector is not immune to these discussions, with calls for reflections about long-standing problems of overt, hidden or unconscious systemic racism, in addition to a wider discussion around ‘de-colonizing’ the humanitarian aid system. Anecdotes from the humanitarian sector point out the overt experiences of racial discrimination, everyday micro-aggressions and unsafe workplace cultures. Much has already been written around how racism and decolonization within the humanitarian sector is related to a legacy from the colonial-era systems and structures of ‘civilizing missions’ which humanitarian agencies, often from the same countries as the colonial powers, still perpetuate.

In addressing racism as humanitarians, both our narrative and our actions matter.  If we are speaking on issues such as diversity and inclusion, we need to ask ourselves these questions: “Can all people see themselves represented here? Does our organizational culture speak to the very real experiences of people?”. Furthermore, our narrative must support our actions, starting with developing an equity-based understanding of humanitarian action which advocates for ‘adapting humanitarian work to each individual’s needs and background [to ensure] those affected are being treated equitably’.  This means understanding the intersectionality of oppression.  Racism is rooted in power hierarchies that often do not operate alone but intersect with gender, religion, socio-economic status, geography, sexual orientation, and numerous other social markers, creating layers of oppression that are inextricably intertwined.

Crucial to this conversation within the humanitarian sector has to be one on decolonising Eurocentric knowledge systems and tools, and their role in challenging the enduring effects of colonialism (and racism).  Hence, we need to break the ‘white gaze’ in our work as we question whose expertise we value, who we listen to, who holds the levers of power, who sits at the table and who gets a vote. 

A decolonisation of the narrative illustrates the need to reflect that we can no longer use the humanitarian principles “as a shield” to prevent more difficult reflections on our institutional biases and inequality.  For example, whilst the principle of impartiality remains the driving force towards genuine inclusion and diversity in the humanitarian sector, it is important to remember that the demand that humanitarians make no discrimination as to nationality, race, religious beliefs, class or political opinions extends to who we are as much as whom we serve.   

We must also recognise that “neutrality does not mean staying silent”, in the face of racism and violence.  It means speaking out and transitioning from a passive stance of not directly engaging in racist behaviours (i.e. not acknowledging differences and not actively addressing systems of oppression) to fighting and dismantling the systemic racism and other forms of inequity leading to systemic oppression and subordination.  We have to become anti-racist to challenge the passive approach towards the institutionalization of racism that creates systems and structures in organizations that ‘maintain privilege for some groups or individuals while restricting the rights and privileges of others’.

As the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement, we also need to ask ourselves serious and difficult questions about the issues of racism and related discrimination and power imbalances that are and could be present in our institutions at every level.  We have to move beyond just statements.  Whilst our Fundamental Principles dictate our actions, and our values motivate our compassion with local communities, we cannot hide behind the fact that we are products of our own contexts and environments and, as a consequence, we can be influenced by the related thinking and attitudes.  We need to be conscious that our history, our principles and our work does not make us immune to perceptions, misperceptions, power imbalances, privilege, racism, and discrimination.

At the 33rd International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent in 2019, we recognised that trust was the most critical currency for the future of principled humanitarian action as we seek to systematically engage with and be accountable to the communities we serve.  Moreover, the Movement Statement on Integrity adopted at the 2019 Council of Delegates reaffirmed our commitment as a Movement to these communities by ensuring that our workplaces are safe for all and that the dignity and integrity of our staff and volunteers is preserved, safeguarded and promoted.  Building a supportive, safe and inclusive environment is a commitment we need to make to continue fostering honest conversations around racism and discrimination. At the same time, we must also encourage difficult questions that help to improve trust between each other, respect and acceptance of each other’s diversity, and enable an understanding and support for better practices within the Movement. In turn, this will also allow everyone to have their voices heard and respected.

There are no boundaries in terms of where we can go based on our Fundamental Principles and what we should do as individuals and organisations.  The fundamental argument for the fight for diversity, equity and inclusion is a moral one.  We need to DO better and we need to BE better -not because it is the good thing to do, but because it is the right thing to do –  and to treat people with dignity, respect, and humanity.  This is our moral responsibility. 

This was originally published here

Mental Health Reflections

 8 months since the world went into an unprecedented lock down on normalcy. Working from home amidst kids and partners and other life priorities has put an additional hurdle for people to overcome. The pandemic fatigue is very real, trying to keep a sense of normalcy, optimism and hope amidst abnormal circumstances. This fatigue is exhausting especially if you are in a period of leadership, in your family, with friends or with co workers. The pressure on managers and leaders during this time is intense, to deal with your own personal difficulties, but to provide hope to others.

This fatigue is exhausting

As someone who has been in this situation, I didn’t truly appreciate this additional burden until I suddenly one day felt physically tired (my body hurt like I had spent the previous day in a marathon) and I felt emotionally and mentally tired (I couldn’t read the words on the screen and my brain felt soft as if I couldn’t take any more in). I was and am experiencing signs of mental burn out. It is not something imagined. It is painful. The emotions are high. That was when I realised, who motivates the motivators? How do we ensure we recharge our bodies and minds? How do we ensure we are not mentally and physically burnt out?

For the latter it is about ensuring eating healthily, exercising and sleeping well. But how do you deal with mental burn out?

Mental health is nothing to be ashamed of

Firstly realise that this is a real issue and not something to be ashamed of. For many of us who come from cultures where health and healthy emotion is a sign of positivity, acknowledging mental health challenges or emotional vulnerabilities is not encouraged. We have to be mindful of this challenge and it is not a sign of shame or weakness to acknowledge this.

Secondly realise that your own personal spirituality is one source of comfort but may not be the panacea. How you choose to reflect and pray and internally introspect will certainly help you in this journey. This can also be complemented with mindfulness, meditation and yoga. However it also helps to engage in conversations with your ‘energy catalysers’. What I mean as ‘energy catalysers’ are those people: friends, loved ones, who you can let some of the steam go, who joke around with you, make you forget your different roles and responsibilities. These are important spiritual boosts as the personal spirituality that you pursue.

it is ok not to feel ok

Thirdly, it’s ok not to feel ok and it is ok to admit that. There might be a pressure to be as productive as possible and to be super disciplined. This is an illusion that being and achieving perfection is the goal. It is not. We all experience fear and anxiety at different amounts in these messy times. These are emotions which need to be honoured and respected during whatever time of the day. So be gentle with yourself. Give yourself what your most self-loving (and wise) you needs.

…take the extra rest if you feel exhausted.

…eat the extra ice cream if you crave it.

…watch the extra movie if it’ll bring you joy.

Practice ‘deliberate kindness’ with your family or friends. There is no greater joy than helping someone else in need. There is no greater need than fulfilling that urge to be significant and make a contribution. Deliberate kindness can be something small or large.

We have to move out of the Normalcy Bias and stand strong to realise that the new normal is as such.

Today is world mental health day . This isn’t a stigma but reveals the frailty of the human mind & condition exacerbated by COVID-19 and having additional pressure mounted by social media at a time when you are seeking validation, confirmation & seeking significance.

At a time when covid 19 has put additional strains on us, we can not allow ourselves to be pressurised to project a public image of strength and prosperity without realising that it is just that: an image stamped in time and place that doesn’t reflect the depth of character and personality. Most of the time our lives are focussed around preserving that image in the window without realising that it is as opaque as what is allowed with light.

It’s important to remember that it takes both sun and rain to grow a flower. Let this be a gentle reminder to everyone who feels stuck in a rainy season.

the darkest of nights brings the sunniest of mornings

Remember that when everything seems dark — it’s important to appreciate the sparkles of light…that the darkest of nights brings the sunniest of mornings…. Where ever you are in your journey, get more rest, drink more water, walk in nature and stay in touch with loved ones.

Remember it is taking a day at a time and being thankful for the day gone. Ultimately this is my take home remedy… take, enjoy and love each day.

There is no health without mental health

This originally appeared on Medium

Understanding Non Violence in today’s context

 Mention Non- Violence and you get mixed reactions. There are those who reflect on the legacies of Mahatma Ghandi or Martin Luther King Jr whilst there are those who mistakenly perceive non violence as something fluffy or weak. In the current global narratives, it is attributed to being passive. There needs to be a de-bunking of the concept of non-violence. It is important to start from an understanding of violence.

There needs to be a de-bunking of the concept of non-violence

Violence is a global catastrophe and one of today’s greatest humanitarian challenges. Violence is a health, social, justice, legal, spiritual, economic, cultural, community-development, and human rights problem. People who are vulnerable to certain forms of violence can also fall victim to other forms, and hence be subjected to multiple forms of violence. The narrative of violence is a mechanism of false consciousness that obscures and conceals the real sources of poverty, humiliation and underdevelopment.

Non violence is the counter to this narrative, starting from the inculcation of a set of attitudes, actions, or behaviours intended to persuade the other side to change its opinions, perceptions and actions (Abu-Nimer 2003). It implies an active commitment to social change that would ultimately result in a fair distribution of world resources, a more creative and democratic cooperation between peoples, and a common pursuit of those social, scientific, medical, and political achievements that serve to enhance the human enterprise and prevent warfare” (Smith-Christopher 1998, 10). It implies an awakening of a sense of injustice and moral shame in the supporters of a power structure, showing them that they have more to gain by ending injustice and oppression than by maintaining them. It is about exposing the unjust means of a power structure, the isolation of actions, changing the narrative that can be used for justification. Thus, nonviolence is not passive but requires great strength of character, perseverance and discipline to foster a moral priority encouraging nonviolent resistance and communicating the structural injustices of the day.

Non violence is not passive

Strategic use of non-violence means to resist the power structure though long term social and economic polices. You let the community acquire the necessary knowledge and skills to advance in society and challenge the status quo of the power structure, provoking it in order to expose its unjust means and illegitimacy by seeking to prevent the advancement of the community.

For Ghandi, his concept of non violent resistance meant direct action including boycotts and acts of civil disobedience. His strategic use of non violence resisted the power structure of the day, the British Colonial Power, provoking it to expose the unjust and racist colonial experiment. In exposing this, it allowed the colonized to challenge the power structure and seek independence. There may be those who argue whether this is a good or bad thing and that is another discussion. The legacies of colonialism are still with us today and the journey started by Ghandi in his non violent resistance is as still valid and applicable today as it was 70 odd years ago as we seek to decolonize narratives and attitudes.

The concept of moral priority within Non — Violence is about understanding the righteous cause against injustice that one must challenge the power structures on and be willing to shift or identify a higher priority. No one understood or communicated this hierarchy of moral priorities better than Martin Luther King Jr, who despite losing his supporter base would shift attention from the civil rights movement to economic injustice and the Vietnam war in 1965 because this was the higher priority of the day. Unfortunately this element has been erased from the cultural narrative of his life and legacy.

In his 1963 letter from Birmingham jail in particular, King drew inspiration from the gospel and biblical teachings in order to justify his fight against injustice. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. He mentions just and unjust law and offers insight into how not only the church, but other faith leaders and communities should act in the face of injustice. In King’s words, it was about being a thermostat that transforms the morals of society and in this sense he invoked a moral shame at the Vietnam war and the economic injustice associated with it.

In today’s pandemic landscape amidst growing economic disparities and social injustices, nationalistic calls that isolate minorities and where anti racism sentiments are high, what could a non violent resistance look like and why is it important?

First and foremost, the widening gap between people increasing marginalization and vulnerability can not be left to the devices of the economy and the path of corporate profits. The chasm between the rich and the poor, those in power and those who don’t have has to be addressed. We have to address the abuse and exploitation of the vulnerable. This requires a long term resistance to the status quo of the power structures.

This starts with recalibrating our moral compass based on some ethical principles such as compassion (the ability to treat someone as you wish to be treated); stewardship (that we have a spiritual responsibility to take care of all those around us, human and non human, as borrowers of the earth from our grand children); mercy; egalitarian justice that is put into action; and honesty. These have to be the starting point for a non violent rebuilding of our post pandemic societies which has to be more animated by the love of the neighbour; egalitarian justice; an economic system based on cooperation instead of dog-eat-dog competition; political and social responsibility for the needy instead of selfishness; economic relations structured to value people over profits; and a politics that serves instead of abuses the people.

we need to recalibrate our moral compass

This is the starting point for commemorating October 2nd, the International Day of Non-Violence, coinciding with the commemoration of the birthday of Mahatma Ghandi.

Where do we stand during times of challenge and controversy?

How do we rise above the narrow confines of our individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity?

Interesting references:

Abu-Nimer, M Nonviolence and PeaceBuilding in Islamic Theory and Practice, Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida (2003).

Smith-Christopher, D.I. Subverting Hatred: The Challenge of Nonviolence in Religious Traditions. Cambridge, MA: The Boston Research Center for the 21st Century (1998: 10).

King, M L (1963), Letter from a Birmingham Jail, https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/letter-birmingham-jail

Ghandi, M K, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), https://www.amazon.com/Non-Violent-Resistance-Satyagraha-M-Gandhi/dp/0486416062

This originally appeared on Medium

The World Peace Day: Social Solidarity amidst Physical Distancing

The World Peace Day is once again upon us at a time when relationships are being tested in unprecedented ways with physical distancing becoming part of the norm due to the pandemic. Over the last few months, we are seeing a rise tension in how we relate to the other in terms of empathy, sympathy and compassion which explains the rise in the number of incidents of domestic and inter personal violence.

So this year as there is great play made towards reaffirming global and national peace processes, there should be thought paid towards how one works on inner and inter personal peace. Much more thought has to now be given to how safe environments can be developed at homes where people can pursue conflicts without violence and harm to themselves or others. In this regard, a recent product issued by the International Federation of Red Cross (IFRC) and World Vision International, the Child Friendly Space at Home activity cards, is a great tool for families to work on providing safe spaces for children at home.

Creating this safe environment for people requires an understanding of the values of equity, fairness, inclusion and respect for human dignity, and with that the importance of human relationships that are fulfilling and functional for peace. Unfortunately, the understanding of values is in short supply but as Jack Ma has stressed, is a key life skill to be learnt in the future of education.

This year in particular with the physical distancing, we are confronted with overcoming exclusion based on difference. World Peace Day has to reinforce the commonalities of existence such as values, ethics, social justice and social responsibility. We have to build communities that are resilient to stress and strain; that are knowledgeable, healthy and can meet its basic needs; that are socially cohesive; that has economic opportunities; that has well-maintained and accessible infrastructures and services; that can manage its natural assets; that are connected. This is the essence of tackling the differences arising out of the pandemic lockdown.

In order for this to happen, there needs to be strong advocates for creative dialogue, and diplomacy that understands the context and addresses civic empowerment. These should ultimately lead to the view that conflicts can and should be resolved peacefully as much as is humanly possible, i.e. that every effort should be bent to that end. And where and when that proves impossible, every effort must be devoted to returning to a situation in which violence does not threaten every person’s safety and wellbeing, and in which conflicts can be handled by dialogue, discussion, the law and settlement.

This is very much the concept behind developing respect and understanding which was articulated by Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen in his book ‘Identity and Violence’ that the key to good citizenship and social cohesion is the encouragement and retention of multiple identities. People have several enriching identities: nationality, gender, age, and parental background, religious or professional affiliation. They identify with different ethnic groups and races, towns, or villages they call home, sometimes football teams; they speak different languages, which they hope their children will retain, and love different parts of their countries. It is the recognition of this plurality and the searching for commonalities within this pluralism that will lead to greater respect and ultimately understanding and acceptance. Thus, these new solutions will have to challenge people to accept diversity and create equal opportunities for diverse communities, ethnicities, traditions, cultures and faiths. The new solutions will also have to take into account the existence of multiple identities which add a richness and variety to diversity and pluralism as part of a common wealth that needs to be celebrated in the global civil society and integrated into life as a positive force for development.

True inclusivity can only be obtained when we carefully position all elements to create a compelling cosmopolitan mosaic. There is a need to remain committed to engineering the software needed to work effectively in a range of situation. This will never be easy, but remains vitally important for, it involves creating the very 'ideas and institutions that will allow us to live together as the global tribe we have become' as Kwame Anthony Appiah wrote eloquently in Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers.

This starts with the empowerment of young people to be part of and take the lead in building peace. Young people are agents for peace, engaged in transforming the structures and institutions that hinder the socio- economic and political well-being of people living in fragile and conflict affected communities. As the COVID-19 pandemic has shown, young people have been on the front lines of self-organising and responding to the pandemic.

Dealing with addressing conflict and building peace is about the long term. While political leaders’ decisions are required to make these unfold positively, to sustain or protect them, they do not come about at the flick of a leader’s switch. Similarly, while peace is most likely and strongest when many individuals gear their actions toward peacebuilding, the effects of activism are not necessarily either quick or linear. Rather, change is indirect, incremental, and cumulatively transformative and above all it is personal. It is at this personal level that we need to start.

It is at this personal level that we need to pause and hit the reset button this World Peace Day in terms of building back relationships and social solidarity despite the physical distancing.
This originally appeared on New World Order