Even as we have spent our entire careers in this space, we quickly forget that many well-intentioned movements ultimately fail because they can’t be separated from the fury of their founders or the harms done by their high-profile advocates. This morning, I read an article on the “immense reputational damage” that Sam Bankman-Fried has done to Effective Altruism. Now that his trial is over, another publication has said, “let’s also put his ruinous philosophy on trial.” There are a number of so-called “movements” playing out in our sector right now: Trust-Based Philanthropy, Community-Centric Fundraising, and, of course, EA. Much has been said of these endeavors, yet much has also been left unsaid. What I find most telling about the effectiveness of these and similar movements is that they’re not finding ways to be a part of the vocabulary of the donor on Main Street whose giving consists primarily of their parish, their daughter’s alma mater, and the local food bank. When I see my colleagues advocating for these movements, I’m always reminded of Wendell Berry’s "Distrust in Movements." Barry insists that movements, ultimately, are insincere; “they propose that the trouble is caused by other people.” We’ve certainly found this to be true of our contemporary movement builders. Rarely do we see true introspection, just constant reminders of the harm someone else is doing. Barry explains, “People in movements too readily learn to deny to others the rights and privileges they demand for themselves. They too easily become unable to mean their own language… They almost always fail to be radical enough... they virtually predict their own failure by implying that we can remedy or control effects while leaving causes in place.” #trustbasedphilanthropy #effectivealtruism
Jennifer Harris
6mo
Also, some people call some things a “movement” - when they really are just a basic human practice (trust based philanthropy, etc) rebranded to claim ownership, etc. I try to encourage many of my clients to move away from “movement” language and appeal instead to our shared humanity. You and I both know this inclination to be apart of a movement is really about the pursuit of “belonging” which….has morphed into the pursuit of spaces where “outrage culture” is not only accepted but expected. The thing is: if we can not alchemize our rage into action and action into bridge building and bridge building into change…it’s not a movement IMO. It’s simply an awareness campaign. I could name many that have zero action or impact behind them.
Here's what Wendell Berry says about change… If change is to come...it will have to come from the outside. It will have to come from the margins...this sort of change is a dominant theme of our tradition, whose "central figures" have often worked their way inward from the margins. It was the desert, not the temple, that gave us the prophets.
Dan Drucker
6mo
Unfortunately, in society today, movements are nothing more than attempts to force opinions, ideologies or methodologies down other people's throats. While they sometimes start off with good intention, they quickly move into 'we're right, you're wrong' and all intelligent discourse is shut off.
Jim Langley
6mo
The absence of introspection is terrifying when encountered. It manifests as a complete lack of compassion and a willingness to justify the worst of means - including scapegoating and stereotyping- to achieve their ends. It isn’t a cause, it’s a shared untreated disorder.
A world of fundraising experience (30+ years in 100+ countries) to guide your fundraising journey. Strategy, Innovation, Mentoring, and Training.
6moBut, surely the role and joy of movements is that they don't need to explain or justify themselves to anyone who judges them from within the status quo that they are moving against?