Stay ConnectedWhat can we learn about making social and political change from talking to professional change-makers? This work takes a combination of persistence, shrewdness, and luck. On the Battles We Pick podcast, skilled advocates and organizers talk about how they deal with the various challenges they confront.
Theme music by generous permission of recording artist Stephen.
Copyright: © 2024 The Battles We Pick
Recently retired teachers union leader Bob Walsh shared many useful insights from his career going all the way back to politics on the college campus where we both went. As a student government leader, Bob was the farthest thing from the Tracy Flick stereotype. He was set on making a positive difference from the outset and learned lessons that he drew on for decades afterward.
In discussing the all-important timing of advocacy and picking moments when issues are ripe for change, we talked about the politics of abortion rights and marriage equality in a heavily Catholic state. Rhode Island also gives an interesting vantage point on the (d)evolution of the GOP in New England where moderate Republicans once flourished.
We wrapped up with a discussion of relationships in advocacy and organizing work -- from the Thanksgiving dinner table to behind-the scenes deal-making. In the latter category, we talked about a topic that doesn't get enough attention: working to limit the damage of an unavoidable bad outcome. As Bob recounted from a comment he got after such an episode, the softening of those blows can be really significant but you don't get much credit for it.
When George Floyd's horrific murder prompted a reckoning with the America's pervasive racism, a nagging concern had been on Angela Bruce-Raeburn's mind for at least a decade over the racism she saw in the global development field. As a Black American who migrated from Trinidad and Tobago as a child, Angela felt it was time to highlight the problem in her profession via articles such as "The Hustle -- White saviors and hashtag activism." She also devoted herself full-time to helping make the field more diverse by starting the DEI consulting firm DiverseDEV.
In the spirit of bringing the reckoning home to her professional field, she began our conversation by pointing out the deep roots of racism in development that trace back to colonization by White people in earlier centuries. In its current form, this has meant White aid donors imposing their "solutions" onto local black and brown people without asking what they see as the best path. And the same dominance by whites of these conversations and decisions at ground level around the world could also be seen within the aid organizations themselves.
It shouldn't have taken a videotaped murder to shock society into awareness, but Angela saw an opening and new possibilities for change that were worth exploring. To begin with, she was able to catalyze a more honest discussion about race and development. As she tells David in the podcast:
"Now there was an opportunity to even speak about it. Now there are panel discussions in these organizations, shocking for someone like me, who ten years ago would never have been able to be so vocal or so open about what I was seeing."
Angela and David also reflected on the wider implications for advocacy work -- that getting people talking about previously denied or downplayed problems can be an essential precursor for meaningful change. Angela stressed another interesting form of cultural competence, saying it's important for her to work only in the development sector, basing her advice on DEI on her familiarity with that field's professional culture. And her current effort raises fascinating questions about the forms of change she pushes for change in the workings of organizations that themselves do advocacy, In addition to the podcast conversation, this article by Angela gives some good examples.
Elisa Massimino shared reflections from a distinguished career in human rights advocacy, including as CEO of one of the major organizations in the field, Human Rights First. Drawing from her 2020 Drinan Lecture on "Chutzpah and Humility: Twin Virtues for Changing the World" at Georgetown Law Center where Elisa teaches, she talked about the importance of recognizing the right moment for the right form of change to push. She views this as central to the work of advocacy.
And she drew a sharp contrast between advocacy and demanding wholesale transformation: "We don't get any gold stars for being right or being on a particular side. In fact, if you're satisfied with just being on the side of the angels, it's kind of like you're not really in the game. You're on the sidelines."
Elisa also recounted an experience rare in this field: getting Congress to go back and fix an overly restrict immigration statute they had adopted just a few years earlier. Very much a harbinger of problems still on the agenda today, the 1996 immigration reforms made it extremely hard for migrants fleeing oppression to make their asylum claims. Those seeking safety from persecution have a right to safe harbor dating back to World War II and the failure to take in refugees from the Nazi Holocaust. And through the persistence o f Elisa and other advocates, Republicans in Congress came to realize that some of their reforms needed to be softened.
David and Elisa's conversation explored some of advocacy's difficult dilemmas. What risk are you taking when you offer a very narrow critique or attack a problem on limited instrumental grounds? For instance, if you push for an end to capital punishment for anyone under age 18, does that mean it's okay for the state to put adults to death? Or if you criticize harsh post-9/11 interrogation on the grounds of effectiveness, does that mean torture is okay if it works? These questions led to a fascinating discussion of the need to somehow give new salience to debates gone stale. Perhaps deliberating issues on new terms forces a closer examination of them, and is likely to push things forward rather than backward. Even so, advocates must take these dangers seriously -- saddling them with responsibilities akin to the public trust that government officials bear.
Our TOPPODCAST Picks 
