US is considering airdrops of aid into Gaza. My statement:
— Scott Paul (@ScottTPaul) February 29, 2024
"Oxfam does not support US airdrops to Gaza, which would mostly serve to relieve the guilty consciences of senior US officials whose policies are contributing to the ongoing atrocities and risk of famine in Gaza.
1/
Jeff Brooks is a fundraising writer. This is from a blog post he wrote titled “Worried about “donor as hero” fundraising?”
“One of the most common edits … relates to the perception of white saviourism. The idea that charitable donors are only helping people in a self-serving way reinforces patriarchal, colonial, and white supremacist attitudes and systems.”A blogger who writes about school and race wrote a post about pandemic pods. She addresses the question "Would it be more socially just to invite families with fewer resources to join our pod?", saying,
"This entire conversation is largely an exercise in privileged people trying to feel better about their own complicity in generations of inequality and injustice."There is an idea behind these statements that I have seen enough to pique my curiosity. I am going to do my best to try and articulate this idea, which I’m calling Privilege Paralysis, and then do a little bit of speculating.
Privilege Paralysis starts like this. Imagine a person, we’ll call him James. James is a person of privilege: white, male, rich, married, inheritor of old money, etc. James feels guilty about his privilege. James decides to give some of his money to help disadvantaged people. Maybe he gives to UNICEF, or the ACLU, or his local food bank. It doesn’t matter where. What matters is that when he gives, it resolves his guilt.
The people who hold Privilege Paralysis DO NOT want his guilt to be resolved via this act of charity. If they are in a position to do so, they will take away his ability to make this donation that resolves his guilt.
So far, I am 90% confident that I have passed the ideological Turing Test. Now comes the speculating part.
The reason the adherents of Privilege Paralysis do not want James to resolve his guilt via his donation is that they want him to hold onto his guilt. They believe that the way to solve the BIG PROBLEM that they care about (Capitalism, White Supremacy, Patriarchy, whatever) is not by small acts of kindness but by tearing down entire systems and building equitable ones in their place. Therefore, they need James and his guilt to help accomplish this. And the only way to do this is to get enough powerful people to feel that guilt and for it to propel them to tear down these systems.
Now I’m more like 65% confident that I am passing the Ideological Turing Test.
Jeff Brooks’ blog post, which I quote above, also tries to steelman Privilege Paralysis. He writes:
“The idea is that donors unfairly get to feel good about helping those who are less fortunate than themselves. Because donors are part of and contribute to an unfair system — even if it’s unconsciously done. It’s this unfair system that keeps people in need in their disadvantaged state … But when we use these messages, we may be propping up a patriarchal, white, colonialist system.”As someone who also works in fundraising, I am beginning to come across people who follow Privilege Paralysis. And while Brooks uses his blog post to try and find common ground, I am going to use this post to put my foot down.
Because this is mission creep.
The people espousing this idea have lost the plot of their organization’s mission. Instead of helping people they are trying to solve a global problem with a solution that lacks consensus. And in the process of solving the global problem, they are denying care to the very people they are supposed to be helping.
Instead, their thinking looks like this:
And that’s fine if that’s what you want to do. But then leave your goddamn organization and start a new one because there are people who want to help those in need and your idealistic ass is getting in the way.
And when you start your anti-capitalist, anti-colonial, anti-racist organization to create your vision of utopia, don’t forget that every fringe ideology is trying to do the same thing and none of you are good at building anything. It always ends up looking like this:
The people espousing this idea have lost the plot of their organization’s mission. Instead of helping people they are trying to solve a global problem with a solution that lacks consensus. And in the process of solving the global problem, they are denying care to the very people they are supposed to be helping.
Instead, their thinking looks like this:
And that’s fine if that’s what you want to do. But then leave your goddamn organization and start a new one because there are people who want to help those in need and your idealistic ass is getting in the way.
And when you start your anti-capitalist, anti-colonial, anti-racist organization to create your vision of utopia, don’t forget that every fringe ideology is trying to do the same thing and none of you are good at building anything. It always ends up looking like this:
Happy Friday, everyone!
