SPEAKER_00 0:37

Hello, you're listening to the Philanthropisms Podcast. This is the podcast where we try to put philanthropy in context. I'm your host, as ever, Rod Davis, and this week I'm in conversation with Martha Awajobi. Now Martha is the uh founder and CEO of JMB Consulting, um, which is a charity and philanthropy consultancy that focuses particularly on sort of anti-racism work in the charity sector. Um, and I've met Martha a couple of times before, and I was lucky enough to sit on a panel with her at an event about a year or so ago. Um, so I sat down fairly recently uh with Martha to talk to her about some of her work and particularly about the BAME Online conference that she uh organises, which uh started last year and the second version of it is this year on the 27th of July, so coming up very shortly as this podcast goes out. Um so we talked a bit about what that conference was, uh who it's for and kind of what people can expect from it. Um and then we talk more broadly about issues to do with race and power within the charity and philanthropy world, what it means to be anti-racist when working in the philanthropy sector, um, some of the challenges around trying to reconcile where wealth has come from in the first place with the desire to seek kind of racial justice through philanthropy, um, and also just some of the challenges kind of working within the charity sector today, um, and how some of those may be overcome in the future by working more across kind of horizontal networks rather than in traditional organizations. Uh, we also talked uh a bit about the power of storytelling and narrative in trying to kind of envision different futures and get us towards them and what that requires more of within the philanthropy and and charity world. So without further ado, let's go into the conversation. Uh, I really enjoyed it, I'm sure you will too. Um, I'll be back at the end for the usual little bit of housekeeping, and I will put links in the show notes to places where you can find more information on the BAME Online Conference and other places where you can find Martha. So without further ado, here's Martha. Okay, great. Well, I'm here with Martha Awajobi. Hi there, Martha.

SPEAKER_01 2:57

Hello, thank you for having me.

SPEAKER_00 2:59

Arno, thanks for coming on. And uh Martha, for those listening, is the CEO of JMB Consulting and one of the organizers or the organizer of uh BAME Online, a big conference that's happening very soon. Um, so maybe the best place to start, Martha, is for you just to tell us a bit about who you are, what you do, how you ended up doing that, and what the conference is all about.

SPEAKER_01 3:19

Okay, yeah. I'm like, where do I begin? Because I'm there's so much backstory. My parents met in the charity sector, no. My parents did actually meet in the charity sector. Um, but um I was a fundraiser for a really long time. So I actually started fundraising when I was 18 years old. Um, and I was always on the kind of other side of the relationship with funders being kind of the grantee. Um, and over the course of 10 years, I had quite a few difficult, painful um moments of awakening to some of the power dynamics that I was conscripted into doing, some of the practices that I was conscripted into doing that um really I guess went against my value system, uh, particularly as somebody who's staunchly anti-capitalist. Um so over time I became more and more uncomfortable with fundraising practices, um, joined a campaigning group called Charity So White. Uh, and like my time in there, I was definitely agitating funders more than anything else. Um, and then during COVID, I actually lost my job in a hiring freeze. Um, and I started a consulting firm. So it sounds a bit capitalist when I say firm. I started my own business. Um, and um and one of my first jobs was actually curating the BAME Online Fundraising Conference um for fundraising everywhere at the time. Um and since then the organization's grown. We do anti-racist practice in the charity sector and beyond. There's now six of us, which is really cool. Um, and I'd say that my job is to um invite people to be curious about the history of racism, white supremacy, imperialism, and how it has created the logics that underpin the work that we do today, particularly looking at fundraising and philanthropy. But we are happy to, you know, I'm happy to talk about it in the context of absolutely anything because um I think that, you know, systems of oppression really underpin pretty much every structure in society. Um so that's who I am and how I came to do what I'm doing.

SPEAKER_00 5:33

That's great. Yeah. I mean, the loads I want to pick up on uh there. I mean, I guess just in terms of BAME Online as a conference, what can you give people a sense of of what it's about and kind of what the content is and who it's for?

SPEAKER_01 5:44

Yes, of course. Um, BAME Online is for anybody who is interested in achieving mission. Um, for me, I think that um racial injustice and understanding racial injustice and building towards a just society, a society that's liberated for people of colour, queer people, trans people, disabled people, um is at the heart and the core of pretty much every single organization in the third sector. Um, it's at the core of their missions, even if they don't want to admit that. So, this is a conference that really explores how race and racism and the history of colonialism and imperialism underpin the structures of the charity sector. Um, it's an opportunity for us to totally reimagine what kind of charity and philanthropy could look like. Um, and in many ways, that means abandoning the kind of entire idea of charity and philanthropy and starting kind of new systems and new structures that are grassroots-led and that kind of put power in the hands of communities. Um, so we focus this year, we've still got the kind of fundraising and philanthropy track, but we also have another track. So we've got two tracks running at the same time that really helps people kind of get to grips with racism, with you know, the theories of oppression that often we talk about, um, or you we use buzzwords, but we don't quite understand what they mean. Um, but we're going to be really focusing on can you fund the revolution? Um, and how do you do that through compassion, through love, um, all of the words that we don't necessarily, I think, use in the charity sector, even though we should be, and particularly we probably use through more of a kind of neoliberal framework of like self-care, of uh what does it mean to kind of, you know, do love in your work? And I'm thinking about this from a more kind of like radical black feminist perspective. So it's going to be a very kind of black feminist edition. Most of our speakers are black women this year. Um, we've got a session that is kind of, you know, about black feminist funding where we're bringing together funders from across the world who are using black feminist frameworks as a way to move money to communities. Um, but I think it's a beautiful place for that is by people of colour, for people of colour. White people are really welcome and encouraged to join, but you're entering our table, right? This is where we come together and we talk about the things that matter. It's not for the white gays, but we want white people to come and join us in celebrating a future that we might not be able to see right now, but that we should be desperately working towards. Um, so if you're interested in race, racism, philanthropy, charity, achieving mission, which everyone in the charity sector should be, then this conference is for you.

SPEAKER_00 8:29

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, it sounds sounds fascinating. Um and again, yeah, loads I want to pick up on. And one thing particularly though, you mentioned about uh some of the language that we use in the world of charity and about kind of reclaiming terms like love and an unashamed way. And this is something I'm fascinated by. Do you do you think that the language we use in in the charity world has become sort of too technocratic and jargonistic? And that actually that that's kind of alienating, particularly when we're talking about trying to support, you know, grassroots organizations or individuals who are working at the grassroots who who kind of don't really want to, you know, don't think in those sorts of terms.

SPEAKER_01 9:05

Um, I think yes and no, um, which isn't helpful. Um, I would say yes, there is definitely a kind of, you know, um what do you say?

SPEAKER_00 9:14

Technocratic uh Yeah, sort of jargon and technocratic language.

SPEAKER_01 9:18

Yeah, there's definitely a lot of jargon happening in the charity sector, and you can see that from the kind of like professionalism of the sector that kind of happened in the last like 15 years. But something that I'm really interested in is charities that are adopting radical language, the language of social justice that they're taking from the grassroots, and then they are making it completely devoid of its historical political uh significance. So we see funders or charities talking about anti-racism when not a single person in their leadership team could understand, could actually give me a definition of what racism is, or we see the language like intersectionality being like, you know, spouted out more and more when actually it's completely, you know, devoid of any meaning. So I feel like there's two things happening at once. There's um the language of social justice being misused in many ways for mainstream organizations to be able to say that they are being really progressive, um, to be able to actually um attract funding that isn't necessarily for them. Um that's something that I find really, really uh difficult as somebody who you know cares about anti-oppression. It makes it really hard to know who who to trust. And it often shows that some of these, and we'll talk about this in the conference in reclaiming anti-racism, some of the way that the charity sector seems to be like interested in doing social justice work is in the terrain of language rather than in the kind of material economic terrain, which is where kind of real change happens. So I think both things are happening at the same time. I mean, coming from a fundraising perspective, and now I do a lot of work with grassroots organizations to help them navigate some of these really difficult power dynamics, there is a really kind of alienating jargon that's happening kind of, you know, in policy in fundraising as well. But actually, what I'm more concerned about is the co-opting of radical language to give the impression that organizations are becoming anti-racist or are becoming anti-oppressive when actually it gives them the cover to continue doing more oppressive things.

SPEAKER_00 11:26

That's really interesting. And do you think do you think that is a conscious process, or you know, in some cases is, or is it sometimes kind of starts with the best of intentions, but actually that's still where you end up because you're not willing to kind of put your money where your mouth is, you just start using the language but aren't willing to follow that through the actions.

SPEAKER_01 11:44

I think that's a really difficult one, and I'm not sure because I'm not the one doing it. Um I would say, I would say that it kind of shows me like a fundamental misunderstanding of what it really takes to do anti-oppressive work. Um, I think that particularly let's let's take kind of 2020 and the resurgence of Black Lives Matter and every single organization suddenly saying that they were anti-racist without actually changing any of their institutional structures. I would say that a lot of a lot of people have a very ahistorical understanding of their organizations, like particularly like in foundations, they don't know where their monies come from. So they do think that doing like anti-racism or social justice is like a neat little project, they can be done in six months, you know, they can be done in one year. And I'm like, well, anti-racism is meant to undo your organization as you know it. So it should be something that you commit to for a really long time. Um, so I I I would say I think it's a bit of both. Um, I don't necessarily think that um it's intentional, like, haha, we're gonna trick people. But I think if we think about how the logics of like colonialism um underpin the charity sector anyway, it's no surprise that the sector is like co-opting language in the same way it co-opts, you know, grassroots organizers in order to kind of legitimise um some of the work that it's doing and kind of taking them from doing their really important work on the streets. On the streets, that sounds really ridiculous, but you know what I mean. Um so it's it's really hard for me to know. Like I'm trying not to be like really cynical, and I think you know, some people who are a little bit more pessimistic uh might say that it's totally intentional. But I think that the leaders in the charity sector have no idea what it takes to grapple with their conscription into white supremacy, into capitalism, into imperialism. Um, and they think that, and it kind of shows the charity sector kind of in many ways for what it is in that by like fine, and I think as far and Ilias um and Ilias who wrote Reclaiming Anti-Racism, he'll be speaking at the conference, um, talk about um how charities often think that by like fine-tuning their comms, they're winning a public argument, or by having a slicker campaign that they're actually kind of seeing progress. And I think it just kind of comes down to that same pattern um where we've replaced doing anything with saying something. Um that's a roundabout answer. The answer is I'm not quite sure, but that these are the things that I'm seeing.

SPEAKER_00 14:28

Yeah, no, and I think that's really even-handed. I think to, you know, as you say, it's kind of it's easy, it could be easy to be cynical and just assume that, but you can't ever know people's motives, or most of the time you can't. Just just to pick up on on then the idea of moving beyond words to action, and maybe in the the particular case of kind of foundations and grant makers, given that I think it was Henry Ford who said, you know, foundations are fundamentally creatures of capitalism, so they kind of reflect the you know the systems and structures within which wealth's been created. What would it mean then for a foundation, in your view, to kind of move beyond saying that they were interested in in anti-racism, kind of addressing some of these issues and actually acting on it? What would they what would they need to do?

SPEAKER_01 15:10

Oh my gosh, where's it even begin? I mean it starts with like moving money to organizations that make you uncomfortable in many ways. So organizations who are really kind of um tackling systemic oppression, not just kind of doing like service delivery work or like tinkering around the edges, even though those organizations are really important where we are in such a kind of horrific capitalist um state at the moment. Um but I would say it's moving money to grassroots organizations who and trusting them to do the work that they think is really important for their communities. So that would be no strings attached, unrestricted funds, and in many ways, like not asking these organizations to report back to you, just trusting them because lots of the people doing these this grassroots work, this kind of you know, community building, um, shift, say shifting power. I hate that term. I'm gonna keep saying it. Um people who are doing kind of like community organizing, it's their money anyway, in many ways, right? This is money that's been hoarded through kind of capitalist exploitation, through the legacy of colonialism. Um so I think firstly, there is moving kind of untethered, um, unrestricted uh money to like grassroots organizations, um, community organizers, etc. Uh, but there is also about where foundations are investing their money. I mean, I read something recently that said that most foundations are investing more like are giving out grants that amount to about 4% of their endowments, uh, which for me is like totally mind-boggling. So they're telling this story of themselves as like, you know, we are defeating poverty or we are here to support social justice, uh, but they're actually doing only 4% of their work, is that. And the rest of it is oftentimes investing in the very kind of, you know, organizations, capitalist endeavours that create the problems that they're saying that they're trying to solve. So I would like to see foundations spend out their endowments, uh, stop existing in many ways. And I think this is, I think this is where like a lot of the more progressive organizations, I don't know if you can call a foundation progressive, but let's just say a lot of the more progressive foundations are actually thinking about, okay, what would it mean to achieve mission and to not exist for the sake of existing would be to spend out your endowment and for it to go to, you know, organizations that are trying to remake the future, essentially, rather than organizations who are putting kind of plasters on an avalanche. Um, so that's kind of what I'm thinking of. Um, I would also like to see, and I don't know whether this is like a terrible idea or not, like, but sometimes you just gotta try. Um, I would like to see money being moved in the in the first instance to like more intermediary funders who are closer to the problem uh that that that these foundations are trying to trying to assuage or dismantle or whatever. Um, and that was something that I found quite interesting in 2020 was, you know, foundations who were like, oh my gosh, you know, people of colour are disproportionately dying from COVID and realizing that they were totally ill-equipped to connect with those communities, to move that money quickly. So we saw more intermediary funders who were, you know, sometimes kind of infrastructure organizations that were led by people of colour who were actually kind of, you know, given large amounts of money to be able to move it quicker. Um, but I think the longer term project has to be the end of philanthropy as an industry and spending out those endowments. Um so I'm interested in kind of what's gonna happen to these organizations like resourcing racial justice, Baobab in the UK, even Civic Power Fund, who are those kind of intermediaries, um, and how they're gonna play a role in shifting the balance of power. Um but it's so, I mean, I think like philanthropy is like very mysterious as well. So like I don't even really know what's going on behind the scenes. I've never worked in a funder, like all I've ever done is experienced the kind of worst parts of um philanthropy. Um, but those are just a few things that I'm thinking about.

SPEAKER_00 19:34

Um yeah, I mean, lots of uh really interesting stuff in there. I guess a few, I mean, pick up on a few of those. Um, I think your point there about intermediaries is really interesting because there there are some that are kind of positioning themselves in an interesting way to precisely to kind of allow money to get to places that it otherwise might not have got to because they have you know knowledge of or links into communities on the ground that the funders themselves might not have. And also maybe they can kind of shift the the risk profile of some of that funding so that it makes it um intolerable for those funders, which I guess kind of points to to a broader question about who it is that's actually in the room and has say over where the money goes, and which brings me to the question of I mean, do you think that the charity sector and sort of particularly the philanthropy bit of it in the UK has a problem when it comes to the diversity of who's involved and that that is part of the problem in terms of kind of addressing the sorts of issues you're talking about?

SPEAKER_01 20:34

I'm not entirely sure, to be honest, because I don't think that having black and brown faces at the helm of these like quite horrific institutional structures is really going to make a difference. If anything, it may give the illusion of progress while allowing for even more difficult things or more kind of you know oppressive things to happen. I don't necessarily um think that the charity sector, well, I think the charity sector thinks it has a diversity problem, but I think it's got a power problem, right? Um, and I don't think diversity is in any way equipped as a kind of you know practice to really deal with the the power structures. Um and I think for me, it does come down to like politics more than diversity. And I know we're not really allowed to talk about politics in the charity sector, but I think that's kind of the point. Like if we make our sector apolitical, it means that it can never actually do what it sets out to achieve. I mean, I think there's a really interesting case of Blair Grave Trust, right? Who have actually done a lot of work to diversify their board. Um, and they've got kind of, you know, a younger black CEO, um, and have put in a lot of work to diversify. But a lot of that was, I hope they were okay with me telling this. Um a lot of that was um also thinking really strategically about kind of the politics and the knowledge that was coming with those board members. And actually agreeing to a direction of travel, which is one that is, you know, what does it mean to be a funder that um espouses racial justice? Um, I don't necessarily think, I mean, all we need to do is look at the conservative um government uh to see that putting diverse faces into high places really doesn't make a difference, or um, if anything, it can make the situation worse. Um, and that's why I'm I don't know if I'm just yeah, I'm very critical of equality, diversity, and inclusion um as a practice. And I think that we need to move beyond that framing and really start thinking about okay, what does power look like within an organization and how what does white supremacy look like within organizations, you know, uh rather than thinking about how do we make them more diverse. Because at the end of the day, the people, my colleague Khadijah always says, um, you know, having more black and brown faces at a table doesn't matter as much as understanding who's being served at that table, right? If my community, if working class people, if black people, if queer people, if trans people are the ones being served, it doesn't really matter. And I when I mean served, I don't mean like we're serving them like woohoo, I mean serving them like we're eating them. Um, it doesn't really matter who's eating them. They're still being eaten. Um, so I'd say yes, it does have a diversity problem, but that's not the issue at hand in many ways. And I don't think getting a diverse, more diverse workforce necessarily will make the problem better. It might ameliorate some of the worst parts of it, but I don't think that's transformation.

SPEAKER_00 23:39

Yeah, and that's really interesting because it goes to kind of long-standing fundamental criticism, I guess, of charity and philanthropy, which is that it it too often does end up just being something that addresses things at a symptomatic level, but it leaves the fundamental structures untouched. And and if you, you know, I guess it sounds like what you're saying there is actually a lot of what goes on around diversity and equity and inclusion has the same function in that it kind of, you know, if it fiddles around with things, but leaves those underlying problematic structures untouched. And if so, it's not really addressing the issue. Um, one thing you you mentioned there that I thought was really interesting and was something I wanted to ask you is that the necessity of engaging on issues that are seen as political and actually kind of the lack of willingness to do that, maybe being part of the problem. I mean, obviously part of the issue there is that there are there are kind of laws in place and rules that prevent charities from getting involved in quote unquote political issues, and also a sort of perception of what that means that maybe makes them self-censor. Do you think that is a real kind of limiting factor in terms of the sort of future usefulness of the registered charity model and that actually, you know, if we're going to engage on some of these issues properly, we're gonna have to look elsewhere. And maybe that's why people are interested in some of these kind of new models like um Black Lives Matter and Extinction Rebellion that aren't positioned as traditional charities.

SPEAKER_01 25:04

Oh my gosh, 100%. Like there is a reason that I did not set up my organization as a charity because I wouldn't be able to do the things and agitate in the way that I can. Yes, I definitely think that the charity model like presents um a lot of barriers and a lot of difficulty. But what you said there about charity self-censoring, I think is really important. And I think kind of the function of a lot of these oppressive systems is they make us do their work for them. Like they're not a lot of the time, like the charity commission isn't saying you can't talk about this thing. It is charities who don't want to rock the boat, don't want to put their head above the parapet. And you'll see what happens when they do, right? We saw what happened to the National Trust being kind of like hounded by um, you know, the right-wing media. We've seen um people calling for Runny Me Trust to have their um charity status revoked. Um and that's not necessarily coming from like the governing bodies themselves, but what it is doing is creating a lot of distraction, a lot of confusion, a lot of fear in organizations who are really just doing their work and trying to kind of achieve mission. And I think for me, if we're thinking about what is the role of the charity sector, and a lot of it is the role is kind of picking up the pieces for where the state has failed us, then you cannot be achieving mission if you're not being political. Um, and I think when we talk about political, people often think we're talking about party politics, and like sometimes we are, but doing anti-racist work is inherently political, doing any kind of anti-oppressive work is inherently political. Um, but I do think what I'm really interested in, and some of the work I really, really enjoy doing, is working with those organizations that are not registered as charities who are able to like really um yeah, like be kind of wild in their approach and be um, yeah, quite um, yeah, really daring in the way that charities probably could do if they weren't so you know gripped by fear. Um, but I'm really interested in like what is the identity of the charity sector? And I know the charity sector is really big, and I'm just generalizing when I say that. But are we a sector that is interested in achieving mission, or are we a sector where we want to exist for the sake of it, or we just want to keep employing staff, or we just want to keep growing? And I think that when organizations really grapple with what it means to achieve their mission, they will understand that they have to be political. Um, but yeah, I think you're right about that kind of self-censoring um piece. And again, I keep bringing up the session I'm doing with Ilias and Asvar on reclaiming anti-racism. Um, but they wrote an amazing book called Um Race to the Bottom. I don't know if you've read it. Um, and they talk a little bit about kind of the self-censorship that happens um in charities uh because of that kind of perceived backlash. Um so yeah, I would love to see the charity sector get a little bit more radical. Like we're seeing it happen sometimes in some places, but I'd say I'm not so interested in what the larger institutional organizations that are just, you know, sucking the sector dry are doing as compared to the smaller grassroots ones who maybe we don't know their names, maybe they're unconstituted, we don't know who's actually in them. Um, and I'm seeing that, you know, if we think about how change has happened throughout history, it is those groups um that are that everybody hates basically, who end up making like huge strides, you know. We look back at the suffragettes with like pride and everything, but like everyone hated them. They were calling them terrorists, you know. The Panthers are a huge source of inspiration. There are so many of them were assassinated, they're one of the most hated groups in um, you know, in in US history, uh, depending on who you ask. And I think there needs to be something about how we like engage with the past and understand how victory has happened and how we've won in the past. Um, and it's not really been from charities, but I don't I think charities do have a role to play in maybe if their hands are tied, they can think about what it might mean to resource some of these organizations that are more radical, and what would it mean to pivot accountability away from funders, away from kind of a neoliberal government, and start thinking about what would it mean to be accountable to movements rather than declaring themselves to be the movement when they are really not.

SPEAKER_00 29:41

Yeah, I mean that it's really interesting. I think that that historical point there, I I often bring up the example of the suffragettes in the context of sort of saying, you know, it's it's really easy with the benefit of hindsight to talk about the past and and be really positive about those sorts of things. But it'll be one and the same, you know, politicians and commentators who who you know talk wax lyrical about how wonderful the suffragettes were and how important, who will then criticize organizations in the here and now for being too political or for getting involved in campaigning, because it's kind of when you're the one getting criticized, it's quite hard to look above that and sort of be be the bigger person. Um, I guess one of the things I wanted to ask, because it related to one of the sessions I think that's coming up at the conference, and the name caught my eye, and it feels like it's really relevant to this, was there's a session on the role, I think, of storytelling um uh and kind of creative arts in in developing radical imagination. And again, it struck me when you were talking there that as well as politics, one of the things maybe that the charity sector or civil society more broadly could be doing is genuinely sort of envisioning other ways for things to be. Um do you think at the moment there's enough of that stuff going on? Maybe that's too leading a question, but but like what do we need to do to kind of encourage the space to allow genuinely sort of different ideas of how society could function to flourish?

SPEAKER_01 31:03

Oh my gosh, that is such a big question. And I think part of the reason that I decided on this topic is because I would like some answers too. Um, I've definitely come from the like written word doctrine where like everything needs to be quantified. I think capitalism needs, you know, quantification. It needs for us to be able to order things, to number things, to say like this is this. Um, and actually, if we think about kind of indigenous ways of knowing, that was a very small part of it. There's also kind of knowledge by celebration, knowledge through art, knowledge, knowledge through storytelling, um, through simply being in relationship with each other and being in relationship with the earth. And something that is really interesting about the charity sector is, or not interesting, horrible, that is so exclusive that only a particular type of person with a particular type of knowledge can really enter. So these are people who are, you know, able to speak in the language of philanthropy, people who um really understand the written word where English is their first language, um, who are good at spreadsheets, who can like quantify, who can number, who can evidence based on kind of, you know, I guess like empirical evidence. Um and that I think is, you know, very much at like the core of like white supremacy and capitalism. And then if you think about like the cultures that have literally been the custodians of the earth, like they think about things so differently. And I'm just thinking, okay, like what would it mean to um, I guess, cultivate a practice that like we can't really quantify or like we can't even really like explain or understand that would allow us to value like relationships not just with each other um in our organizations but across organizations, but also like with the earth, um, because I'm like, well, we're running out of time, so that's something that I've I've been thinking of. And I think I, you know, we do a lot of, we get a lot of artwork commissioned um as part of like the conference as well, um, so that people who, you know, are neurodiverse or who English isn't their first language or who just simply do not like reading um are able to like engage with some of the the concepts that that we're that we're putting forward. Um I think that I think that the arts has the power to transform like what we think is possible. Um, and particularly for like, you know, so where I grew up, I grew up in Tottenham. Um and it is, you know, a place that is seen as like quite deprived. Um, but actually, you know, the kind of amazing like music that comes out of Tottenham, like the amazing like artists that come out of Tottenham who aren't necessarily engaging with a kind of white way of knowing the world, but are bridging the gap between like maybe the way our ancestors would have understood the world. Like in um Yoruba culture where my my father is from, uh, we don't talk about world view, we talk about world sense because we sense the world through like hearing um rather than like through you know visual. Um and I was just I'm just really, really keen to like talk to people about how I think funding works in the art sector in a way that like really like dampens out radical imagination. Um but yeah, I don't I don't have the answers. That's why we all have to go to the conference, right? Uh because this is like one of the sessions that I've been really, really, really looking forward to. Particularly, I've been working with an organization called Migrants and Culture for the last year, helping them with fundraising strategy. And the way they've transformed my thinking, um, even though I'm meant to be the consultant, I've literally just feel like they have schooled me, they have taught me, they've invited me to think very, very differently over the time that we've been working together. So I've asked them to come and talk to us a little bit about yeah, radical imagination and how the arts kind of can free us and transform us and allow us to put words to the unexplainable in many ways. Um so a little bit of musing there. I don't think I've answered the question, but that's because I don't have the answers.

SPEAKER_00 35:09

And that's I mean, it's probably unfair of me to expect you to have an answer to a question that big, but you know, it's really interesting. And I do I think it goes back to the I mean it ties together neatly for me with that point about sort of understanding where the systems and structures we use in philanthropy and and charity have come from. Because again, it kind of there I think there's a lack of appreciation sometimes of the fact that the the way in which we do funding particularly, but kind of charity more broadly, does reflect a particular worldview that's largely kind of an early, late 19th, sort of early 20th century one that's built on a kind of you know model of scientific process and empiricism. And actually, you know, that isn't the only way of doing things, and it doesn't always tell you anything, everything, and it's not it doesn't always fit that neatly with other ways of knowing. And I think there is a real issue with kind of different forms of knowing having been historically undervalued. So I think it's really interesting to see these conversations that maybe try to, you know, expand our understanding of what it is to have knowledge.

SPEAKER_01 36:08

Um, I still like I'm trying to get to grips with love. Um, it's really important, but I think it's something that like, you know, part of the reason our culture is so deeply embarrassed by love is because love is so transformative, right? Um and like you can't quantify love, like you really can't, but like you can experience it like through other ways of knowing in many ways. Um, and I think it's uncomfortable for us to not know everything or not be able to kind of like quantify everything because white supremacy demands us to have perfection in many ways and like to just be able to evidence absolutely everything. Um, but I think if that was gonna work, then like we wouldn't be in this shit show. So I'm like, okay, what does it mean to do like things totally different in ways that make me feel very uncomfortable? And I think that's part of like what's been great about my organization is that like we've all committed to just like doing things in a totally different way, regardless of like whether it works or not. Like our version of what is a good job is like whether we've had a good time, and that's it for me. Um, rather than thinking about oh, how many people come to my conference or like how much money are we making? Like, obviously, it matters that we make money so that we can all survive. Um, but actually, if we were doing our work through with a with a loving practice and by with joy at the heart of it, then for me it's like, did we have a good time together? Have we built like really great relationships? Like, can we say that you know this has felt good? Um, and I think, yeah, that's just not what I'm seeing at all.

SPEAKER_00 37:52

Well, it's a much much healthier way of doing things, I think, to my mind. Um, I just want to ask a couple of final questions. I'm more I'm in danger of taking up too much of your time, but I could keep talking about this stuff for forever, really. Um, but one of them was around, I mean, we sort of touched on it a bit or quite a lot in terms of thinking about the you know the need for fundamental reform as opposed to just kind of working within existing uh structures. But but one of the things about that seems to be this kind of whether there's some sort of tension between the idea of charity and philanthropy and the kind of fundamental idea of seeking justice. Do you I mean, do you think there is that tension, or do you think you kind of can use the tools of philanthropy to to seek justice? And what does that look like in practice?

SPEAKER_01 38:34

Good question. Um last year um we had a session at the conference where Stephanie Brobby, who's the CEO of the Good Ancestor Movement, said charity is where social justice goes to die, right? And I was just like, this this that's all I needed to hear. We could end the conference there. Um, I think that we couldn't, we can't see justice through philanthropy. I think philanthropy needs to die. Um, obviously the money will still be there, but it is actually kind of like fundamentally changing like all of the structures. And for me, that comes down to like accountability in many ways. Um you might have to ask me the question again because I kind of lost my train of thought there.

SPEAKER_00 39:17

No, just about whether you can use, I mean, given that philanthropy is to some extent, I mean, maybe kind of a reflection of historic injustice, can it be used as a tool to further justice? Or is it kind of, as some people are many people have argued that ISG kind of gets in in the way of it because it sort of does just enough to you know to address the symptoms of the problems that it undermines some of the momentum that you need for like more fundamental reform? Or, you know, can we actually do things within these existing structures that, you know, I mean, as you've been saying, almost sort of put themselves out of out of business?

SPEAKER_01 39:51

Yeah, I'd say putting yourself out of business is the way forward, you know. And I think what would be interesting is if we are like philanthropic organizations and like charities, what would it look like to for you to have achieved your mission in 10 years and then you have to close? The strategies would be so different. It would be so different what was going on. I think we would move from philanthropy to justice, right? And I think just because philanthropy in itself has to keep existing and has to actually keep growing in many ways. Um, but if an organization was like, okay, what would it look like to spend out? That stops being philanthropy. Well, it maybe it starts being what philanthropy is really meant to be, which is the love of mankind, right? Um, and stops being kind of the industry of philanthropy. Um, I think that, you know, it's so interesting that like we use this language about like achieving mission and you know, seeing social justice, and then don't do anything that actually precludes those things happening. But I'm really interested in seeing more organizations work towards an end strategy, right? Um, and just the very fact that many organizations are not really thinking about like what would it mean for us to end, means that they have no interest, I think, in doing social justice. Um, they just have an interest in kind of saying social justice in many ways. Um, so that's something, yeah, I think could happen. Because if you were an organization and you were like, okay, what would it mean to be accountable to communities, or what would it mean to be accountable to grassroots organizations? You wouldn't be doing the things that you're doing, probably. Um, you would be thinking about, okay, we need to resource these groups, like we need to make sure that they have time to strategize, we need to make sure that they're fed, we need to make sure that you know they um we're protecting them from the worst kind of parts of the state, which means that organizations would be out stopping sex workers getting arrested. They would be out. And one of our, in one of our sessions, um The Empire of Philanthropy that we have um pre-recorded, um Chelsea Jackson kind of talks about this like beautifully, talking about okay, what would it mean for um charities to yeah, to play a role um where they protect, I guess, like grassroots groups and those activists and those agitators from the state. Um and that would mean that you know they were stopping just stop oil from getting arrested. Uh, that they were kind of like campaigning on behalf of like, you know, Palestinian um groups that are, you know, being arrested, who are being uh repressed by the state. Um, so I feel like I feel like the charity sector, philanthropy, it has so much potential. Um, if it would just stop lying to itself about what it's doing, I'd rather they were just like, hey, you know, we just want to grow and exist for the sake of it. We just want to be investors. Like, that's fine. Then we know what's going on. Um, but I think there's a lot of kind of you know, misdirection, mystification that happens in the charity sector. Um, and I think it's a real shame that people aren't curious enough about what's going on in their organizations that they're kind of just like sleepwalking through oppression in many ways, and then saying that they're good people and saying that they're doing good work, and actually not.

SPEAKER_00 43:12

Yeah, it feels like there are some really interesting conversations starting to happen in uh the grant-making world. I mean, I've I feel like I talked to a lot of uh people, you know, maybe not always leading organizations, but involved in the kind of frontline of grant making, who kind of really seem to have internalized a lot of this, you know, the the contradictions in philanthropy and the fact that it, you know, it it it doesn't necessarily address inequality, it might just reflect it, or it doesn't necessarily lead to justice. And and I guess are kind of slightly racked with with sort of existential, you know, crisis as a result. I guess the question for them then is how to move on beyond just feeling uh like they're you know they recognize these problems and to to kind of take action on it, which will be, you know, that I think will that, I guess that will be the the proof of all this sort of stuff.

SPEAKER_01 44:00

100%. And there's only so much that people can do when they don't have power.

SPEAKER_00 44:03

Well, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 44:04

Power sits within boards and in many ways, in many places. But I would always say just look to the people that are doing this. Like there are really great examples of organizations who have completely pivoted their accountability structures. There are great great examples. Um I don't know many of them, but there are some examples if you kind of start looking. But even kind of thinking about foundations. Like there's some cool stuff happening with like groups like 30 Percy, uh, groups like the Black Feminist Fund, Project Talua in the UK. Um, and I think it kind of starts there of like, okay, what have these groups been doing? Um, and also working together, like across philanthropy, not just like being the sole person in your organization who is really kind of pushing for change that will kill you, right? But actually, who can you work alongside with, who can you be strategic with? Um, and sometimes that comes down to like picking your battles, but also like understanding that like individualism is not going to help us, like the more collective we can be, like the stronger that we the stronger we are, because philanthropy is a beast, you know, like me and you, we're not gonna take it down. Like so, so yeah, and I I think you know, there is there is no place for despair, um, particularly if you are privileged enough to be working in a foundation, um, in many ways. Um, but there is place for organizing and strategizing.

SPEAKER_00 45:29

Yeah, and it has but just on what you're saying there about kind of not doing it uh alone or in isolation, I guess the success of camp, you know, campaign groups that work horizontally across organizations like Charity So White or kind of movements like the Grant Givers Movement does show that even if you're not the one at the head of an organization, actually, if you can reach out and find those people who who are sort of struggling with the same things in other organizations at the same level, there is there is a lot of collective power that you can that you can harness and don't have to feel like you, you know, to take the responsibility entirely on your shoulders. Because as you say, that that's that's kind of an impossible ask. Um I just wanted to uh the final thing I just wanted to to touch on was um, I mean, kind of relates to all of this in terms of like what one of the barriers might be to to getting action on some of this stuff, I suppose, is that even when people are you know accept the arguments and accept that that you know these are issues and generally want to address them, there's there's the kind of problem and the you know, the quote of when you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression, you know, that people are being asked to give something up and that actually kind of recognising the need to to shift power or to share it with others might mean that you as a result, if you are somebody who's kind of benefited from those systems and structures has less power. How do you think the the danger is that that kind of makes people more defensive than they otherwise would be? And what's what's the answer to that? Do people just need to get over themselves and stop kind of exhibiting white fragility, or do you kind of need to work with people to get them to the point where where they can you know do what's necessary to shift power?

SPEAKER_01 47:04

That's a really good question. And um I sometimes feel really fortunate to like not be like white so that I don't have to do all these tool. Um I would say that yeah, some like people do need to get over themselves. Um, and also like for me, like it helps for me to understand that like not everybody wants equality, not everybody wants for us to have a just and free and fair society. And I need to know the difference between someone who doesn't give a crap and somebody who might be a little bit misguided, who actually wants kind of you know the right things but kind of needs to get out their own way. Um I would say that I don't it depends on who you ask as to kind of what argument works. Like, I don't really do the moral argument myself. Um, but I would say that if we don't tackle these problems, we are all going to die. And like that sounds really dramatic, but like if we look at the climate climate catastrophe that's happening at the moment, the root of that is kind of white supremacy, colonialism, imperialism, the extraction of kind of wealth resources, uh the destruction of kind of indigenous knowledge practices that you know kind of goes back to what we were talking about earlier about how do we actually like see ourselves as interconnected with the earth and see like environmental uh justice as all of our responsibility. Like for me, I'm like we don't really have time to be like faffing about with people's guilt uh because people are dying. Um and I think yeah, it's I I feel I feel for I feel for white people in many ways, right? Because like particularly when I'm doing like training or like workshops with um like foundations and stuff, there's so much fear and perfectionism that is like getting in the way of like building bonds of like love and care and solidarity with other people. Like, I think to like free us from oppression means that like everybody is free, right? It also means that white people are free as well. Um, because most people, most white people don't actually really benefit from whiteness, they might perceive that they do because they might feel superior to somebody else, but at the end of the day, like that's like a false sense of superiority. Um but I think that for me, like if we know that what we are working towards by doing this anti-oppressive work is we are working towards like liberation, we're working towards love for everybody, like it should be irresistible in many ways, right? Um, but yeah, I'd definitely say like what's been a big learning for me, like I'm shocked that like people don't want to see an end to white supremacy in many ways. Um, but like for us to know the difference, and I think that's what makes some of this like organizations using the language of social justice um really difficult and really like upsetting for me. Yeah, I think because I can't really tell who's on my side, like I can't really tell who I can get into the trenches with. I can't tell who's like you know, my co-conspirator. Um, but yeah, I would say that white people need to understand what white supremacy is doing to them. Um, they need to understand that whiteness is killing us all, it's not just killing people of colour. Um but yeah, and I think it's you know, that's a choice that they have to make. Like, I'm not really interested in like soothing the egos of like upset white people at all. Like, I'm really interested in like forming like tight bonds with people who really want this to happen. Um and I think the more we can spend, well, the less time we spend dealing with the egos of white people who don't want to change or white people who, you know, are really kind of yeah, like invested in whiteness, like the stronger then the bonds, the bonds of solidarity like across races become. But I think we spend a lot of time focusing on like racists and changing the minds of racists rather than thinking about actually like who could we be co-conspirator or who could we be be conspiring with? Um, you know, who shares our values and our vision? They might not share our language, but like who shares our our vision? Um, and I think, yeah, I I see it, I see it happen a lot. Like, I think it was Tony Morrison that said the function of racism is distraction. Um, and I'm like, actually, you need to be really clear on like your your navigation and like you know where where to put your energy. Um, and I do a lot less shouting online about you know, at white people who are racist, and a lot more having dinner with other people who share my dream of an anti-racist future. Um, so yeah, it's it's a bit of a difficult one because I do feel like you know, each to their own, like everyone's got their way of doing this work. Like my way of doing this work is very different to like yours or to anybody else's. But I'm definitely like, if I'm thinking about like joy being at the heart of this, I'm really not interested in battling with white people who don't want to get out of the way. Like I'm really interested in bringing those who do want to see a liberated future to our dinner so that we can, you know, beast on our ideas uh rather than on people of colour.

SPEAKER_00 52:33

Well, that yeah, that sounds sounds absolutely understandable. And as you say, kind of just I mean, a more bearable, you know, way of doing things, I think, if you're gonna make it kind of sustainable uh to actually kind of keep doing this work. Because as you say, just kind of having fruitless arguments with people whose minds you're never gonna change is gonna grind you down pretty quickly, I think. 100%. Yeah. Listen, Martha, it's been an absolute pleasure having a chance to talk and you know, really kind of uh range around over lots of really interesting stuff there. Um, I'll put links in the show notes to where people can get um information about the uh about the conference and sign up and you direct people towards that. And I'll put some links as well to other things they can read if they're interested in uh the stuff we've been talking about. Uh just remains to other than that, just to say thanks ever so much for coming on the podcast. You know, I hope the conference goes really well and you know look forward to catching up at some point in the future.

SPEAKER_01 53:24

Thank you. Thanks for having me.

SPEAKER_00 53:35

Okay, great. Well, my thanks again to you, Martha, for coming on the podcast. As I said, I'll put links in the show notes to places where you can sign up for the BAME Online conference and also where you can find more information on lots of the topics that Martha and I talked about. Um if you want more information just generally and thoughts and feelings about philanthropy and civil society, do check out the website at whyphilanthropymatters.com. Uh, you can find all the back episodes of this podcast there as well. Uh if you've got ideas for people that we could have on the podcast or things we could talk about, um then drop me an email. You can find the contact details on the website. You can follow me on social media for now, still on Twitter at Rodri underscore H underscore Davis and at for literacy. I'm also on threads as well, sort of reluctantly, but you can find me on there as well. I can't remember what my handle is, uh, and I'm on LinkedIn as well and various other places. Um I think we're gonna take a short break uh for the summer on the podcast, because I like to uh try and down tools a little bit over the summer and spend as much time as possible with my kids and my family. Um so I've got some episodes lined up, some really good conversations that probably uh still need editing, but we'll keep that to ourselves. Um but I'm gonna do that and then get those episodes ready and lined up to go out at the start of September. So in the meantime, I might do a few tweets and bits of social media kind of pushing out some uh choice back episodes of the podcast, and it's an opportunity, I guess, for you to go and dig through all that lovely audio content while you sit on the beach or do whatever it is that uh you're all doing over the summer. Um, but yeah, we will see you in a few weeks' time. I hope you all have a good break and uh yeah, come back in September refreshed and ready to go again. Okay, bye, and you're gonna be able to do it.