# data[].attributes.body
(www.omprakash.org/blog/time-to-call-out--cancel-culture--)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Collaborating vs Competing for Justice

This blog post works to explore such questions through a lens that places relationships at the centre of activism. We begin by considering a holiday-themed scenario. Possible responses run through your head:

You're sitting down to the holiday table, feeling happy to be gathering with your family, but also a little apprehensive about how this dinner is going to unfold. Last year's dinner ended with several family members storming out after an argument about national politics, and as much as everyone is excited to see each other, there is a noticable tension in the air.

For the first ten minutes, everything is fine. The conversation revolves around 'safe' topics: how is school and work going? How was your vacation this year? What are your plans for the new year? Family members on both sides of the table purposefully avoid anything political - it's palpable in the long silences as people run through possible conversation topics in their heads. But insofar as politics embues everything, this doesn't last long: while talking about his son's new music teacher, your uncle makes a derogatory queer joke. Without missing a beat, your queer cousin (who prides herself on being 'woke') begins yelling at and berating him. Other family members sit quietly, not sure what to do.

a) Just let your cousin keep going - after all, as a queer-identifying person, she has every right to be insulted by the remark and respond in this way. As someone who does not identify as queer, is it really your place to say anything?

b) Give your cousin some back-up - although you don't identify as queer, you realize how insulting your uncle's remark was, and feel you should be an ally to your cousin in this conversation, or

c) Consider a different tactic ... As you watch your uncle being yelled at by your cousin, you see him shrink in his chair, his eyes fall to the floor, and his face redden in embarassment. Might there be a way to engage that shifts the conversation from a put-down to a helpful discussion? What might you say to your uncle - and to your cousin?

These conversations are perhaps most difficult at family gatherings, due to the importance of the relationships at play, and how literally close to home such discussions can hit. Yet we face similar choices in many of our social circles, and not only when interacting with people with vastly different opinions: with the growth of 'callout culture' and 'cancel culture,' spaces of higher education and social activism can also sometimes feel a lot like a tense holiday dinner table.

Our challenge, then, is often figuring out how to defuse the tension and open space for critical conversations while also leaving room for the empathy and vulnerability necessary to make these conversations more real. After all, as this scenario suggests, it's almost impossible - and probably not desirable - to shy away from charged topics altogether. The question, then, is how to engage in a way that is authentic and resolute, without becoming counterproductive.

Most students who join EdGE do so because they are interested in trying to connect across differences, and are usually genuine in their willingness to explore the complexity of doing so. If students say things that we or their Mentors disagree with - perhaps even things that others may find offensive - it can be challenging to strike the right balance between pushing back, while not shutting them down. On the other hand, and somewhat ironically, students sometimes graduate from EdGE feeling like they are now 'extra woke'; and need to proselytize to others about what 'ethical volunteering' is. We worry that this can be just as problematic if it has the effect of alienating people and shutting conversations down - after all, we don't claim to have a final answer on what 'ethical volunteering' is, either, and we look at it as an ongoing conversation.

How can we encourage students to maintain this sort of humility while also emboldening them to raise critical questions about practices that they find to be problematic? How, moreover, can we encourage these students to seek meaningful connections across chasms of difference when these chasms are not only in an exotic faraway location, but in their own neighborhoods, or even within their own families?

Of course, we don't claim to know the answer to such questions, or to suggest that any neat solutions exist in this arena at all. Instead, we offer three questions that we find to be helpful waypoints as we navigate this treacherous landscape.

Are we searching to form conclusions about people, or connections with them?

As we come into contact with others, we inevitably make judgments and draw conclusions on the basis of impressions and what little information we have at the time (as much as we try to be more conscious of the assumptions we make and check ourselves, unconscious biases run deep). As we seek to figure out how the person we see in front of us fits into our schematic of the world, we scan for some of the most discernible markers like skin color, accent, or clothing. In the following TED Talk, Sarah Jones uses comedy to 'play' with these sorts of assumptions.

By convincingly embodying many different people in her TED Talk, Sarah Jones pushes us to re-evaluate the assumptions we make based on superficial readings of people, and urges us to find ways to forge connections, rather than rushing to conclusions. Who are the people underneath what we are seeing and hearing? What might not be apparent?

It might be easy to assume that someone wearing a cross is religious (though perhaps it was a gift from his grandmother, and he wears it as a reminder of her), that someone with long hair identifies as a woman (though maybe they just find it easier to move navigate the world by complying with gender norms), or that someone studying Classics at Oxford grew up wealthy (but perhaps she had to overcome a lot of obstacles to get there).

Thinking back to your family members in the scenario, might it be helpful to take a step back to consider where they are each coming from as well? What factors and influences might have led to your uncle's remark? What experiences might have impacted your cousin's response? We have the tendency to make assumptions from snippets of conversations and extrapolate on the basis of very few pieces of information. To some extent, this may be unavoidable, but perhaps it points to the need to dig deeper, assume complexity, and avoid 'cancelling' folks right off the bat.

Recognizing that sharing our thoughts and experiences with one another requires vulnerability and empathy on both sides (and that a looming threat of being called out or 'cancelled' is unlikely to make honesty and openness desirable), our team works to create inclusive spaces for discussion during calls and webinars, and within the EdGE Classroom itself.

The first step for EdGE students - before they get deep into the EdGE Classroom - is to connect with their EdGE Mentor and begin to get to know one another on a personal level. We believe this personal connection is foundational for everything that follows: together, EdGE students and their Mentors will engage with complex and weighty topics throughout their experience, and often consider questions that get to the heart of our core beliefs. Taking on such a task requires a profound amount of support and trust, and we believe that this is what makes mentorship so valuable.

Are we focusing on the 'destination,' or embracing the process?

In responding to their mentees in the EdGE Classroom, Mentors often draw from their own experiences, both as a way to demonstrate concepts through rich examples, and in order to reassure students that they're not alone in navigating the complexity of engagement across differences. In thinking how to respond to a student who might voice views that may be considered in some sense 'problematic,' EdGE Mentors may think back to a past version of themselves, and draw from their own learning journeys, realizing how their thinking has changed over the years.

These days, it often seems that the aim is for us all to have the 'right' views, and if you espouse the 'wrong' ones, it is the task of others to call you or 'cancel' you to exclude the offending views altogether. But such an approach fails to recognize the fluid and complex nature of morality, and ( as studies suggest) is ultimately is more likely to alienate people than to change their minds.

Rather than searching for an end point or final answer to complex questions, in EdGE we draw from the work of Paulo Freire to encourage students to engage in a continual process of 'praxis' (reflection, dialogue, and action), and to embrace the inherently processual and communal nature of understanding.

In the following TED Talk, Liz Kleinrock shows how calling people out might have the adverse effect of causing them to retreat in embarrassment (without necessarily even understanding what they've done wrong), rather than opening space for more complex understandings and mutual learning. [We recommend watching to 5:22]

Perhaps like your uncle in the opening scenario, Abby in Liz Kleinrock's example didn't realize what she'd done wrong when she was bombarded by kids yelling at her. What did you think of Liz Kleinrock's response, and do you think a similar tactic might work in the holiday dinner scenario?

None of this is to say that we need to be apologetic of ignorance or excuse hateful speech, but rather Kleinrock reminds us of the value of not shutting others down when they are trying to understand. This might not always be possible (what if, for example, your uncle in the scenario had responded to your cousin with anger?). However, if everyone involved in the discussion is ready to engage with humility, and if we situate ourselves in space and time, realizing the unending layers of complexity and ambiguity in our world - and the partiality of our current understanding - we might then be able to begin a more transformative conversation.

Are we competing to be 'woker than thou,' or collaborating to build a more just society?

The space of social activism can sometimes feel more like a battleground than a community, with wars started over the slightest of perceived transgressions, and waged to prove the superiority of our views over those of others. Our argument here is not that everyone working towards the same cause should agree on everything. On the contrary, we believe that ongoing debate is vital if we hope to continue deepening our understanding - but how the debate occurs is key, as it has real outcomes: are we competing to have the ' best' opinions, or collaborating to build something better - while acknowledging the complex and processual nature of this work? Perhaps Barack Obama said it best...

We worry that the growth of 'callout' or 'cancel culture' threatens the viability of spaces for dialogue that are both critical and inclusive. Even within institutions of higher education - places ostensibly built for open and expansive conversations - it seems that discussions often end before they even begin, and students (and faculty) increasingly feel nervous to speak, let alone engage in action. How are we supposed to deepen our learning if there is no perceived space for exploration and vulnerability, and when alternative views and ways of thinking are silenced?

When confronting something we do not agree with, it tends to be easier to criticize it, or dismiss it entirely, as it saves us from having to question our own beliefs - an unsettling task. Fostering inclusive spaces while simultaneously challenging ourselves and others to think more deeply about issues is much more difficult but, we believe, absolutely crucial in any attempt to work towards meaningful social change.

We believe this work ultimately comes down to relationships, which is, of course, what Omprakash is all about: building mutually beneficial relationships across differences. Misunderstandings and disagreements are an inevitable part of relationships. But if intentions for earnest connection are there, exploring the spaces between us might just be where the most profound learning happens.

If, as Obama suggests, calling people out is not activism, perhaps inviting people in to inclusive conversations might be where we can start to envision what activism could be. Across the Omprakash ecosystem, we seek to hold this space for open, critical, and inclusive dialogue, and we offer one vision for what this might look like. As you go to fill up your plate (or bowl!) at upcoming holiday gatherings, it might be one to keep in mind:

The Empty Bowl represents the endless potential that emerges when we open ourselves to new questions, new ideas, and new relationships. For us, this openness is both a method and a product: rather than promote any single cure for the world's ills, we hold open a space that can amplify local voices and facilitate the sharing of multiple perspectives. We hope that the diverse members of our educational community will find humility through the recognition of their own interconnectedness, and that this humility will guide their actions as informed citizens of the world.

What are your perspectives on 'callout culture,' and 'cancel culture'? Please join us in discussing this topic further on Global Dialogue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Time to call out 'cancel culture'? | Updates from Omprakash

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Collaborating vs Competing for Justice This blog post works to explore such questions through a lens that places relationships at the centre of activism. We begin by considering a holiday-themed scenario. Possible responses run through your head: You're sitting down to the holiday table, feeling happy to be gathering with your family, but also a little apprehensive about how this dinner is going to unfold.

# data[].attributes.body
(www.momentsoffreedom.org/asset-based-community-development)

# data[].attributes.headline
"There's Nothing Selfish About Self-Care 

# data[].attributes.subject
"There's Nothing Selfish About Self-Care 

# data[].attributes.body
(www.sacmag.com/health/theres-nothing-selfish-about-self-care/)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our lives, our cultures, are composed of many overlapping stories. Novelist Chimamanda Adichie tells the story of how she found her authentic cultural voice -- and warns that if we hear only a single story about another person or country, we risk a critical misunderstanding.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Week 6_ Setting Boundaries and Game Night.pptx

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Week 4_ White Supremacy in the Workplace_.pptx

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Week 3_ Storytelling for Interviews.pptx

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
WIN 2021 CELE Center Talk LCP CRT and CWF 