Accomplishments, whoever introduces him has their work cut out for them. Born in lafayette, louisiana, Darren Walker was one of the first children in the nation to benefit from the head start program. He went on to were a scholarship at the university of texas at austin, where he would graduate with degrees in government, speech communication, and law, before pursuing a successful career as an attorney and an investment banker. For the past three decades, mr. Walker has been one of our nations foremost philanthropic executives. He has served as chief operating officer of harlems Largest Development corporation. Vice president of the rockefeller foundation, cofounder and chair of the u. S. Impact investing alliance, and for the past seven years as president of the Ford Foundation, where he overcease an endowment of 13 billion and 600 million in annual grant making. He is dedicated to tackling the most difficult issues in the world. He was among the most committed supporters of residents in new orleans after hurricane katrina. He led the way toward building a more just and financially Sustainable Future for the city of detroit. And as president of the Ford Foundation, he is contributing to the Economic Empowerment of tens of millions of americans across the country, including here in the south. In a groundbreaking 2015 essay toward a new gospel of wealth, and more recently in his book from generosity to justice, mr. Walker called upon americans to rethink the way we approach philanthropy, to shift from a charityminded approach to one that addresses the inequality that necessitated the charity in the first place. In that spirit, hes announced the Ford Foundations giving in reversal from its first 50 years would focus sole on the funding projects that address inequality. Tonights just an introduction, as was said, mr. Walker will be visiting duke. Were fortunate to say several times this spring, working alongside students, faculty and staff to forge partnerships with our neighbors here in durham aimed at combating injustice in the south. He is a leader of uncommon vision and purpose. I am delighted to have him here at duke. Please join me in welcoming Darren Walker. [applause] hello, good evening, good people, and welcome again to the 2020 Terry Sanford distinguished lecture. My name again is jay pearson, and tonight i the honor and pleasure of sharing the stage with mr. Darren walker, who serves as the current president of the Ford Foundation. In the interest of time and not overwhelming you with repetition on mr. Walkers complishments and honorifics addressed during the introduction, ill take a minute or so to lay out the format for tonights event. Mr. Walker and i will share the stage in directed conversation for about 35 minutes. We will then entertain questions from audience members. We have mic runners who will come to you if you raise your hand, and we ask that you first stand if youre approached and that you try your best to have a concise, well formed question. Thank you in advance. As discussed by dean kelly, while truthful and discussions on serious issues like inequality, injustice, supremacy oppress and domination by their very nature likely to be discomforting for some of us. We theep our exchange this evening will also be enlightening. We hope you dont miss the Important Message associated with this discussion. If you read the book or have seen previous interviews, you already know the compelling life story of mr. Walker swrks the groundbreaking work hes doing at the Ford Foundation and inspiring at other organizations. Tonight we propose to merge these two perspectives, the personal and the professional. As someone who has emerged from the populations and communities fill an throipy frequently propose to see serve, mr. Walker benefits from a unique constellation of experiences that grant insight into the fenn unanimous characterizing inequality difference from toes brought to bear by the typical head of a thrill an pop i organization, that is his real value. We will delve into how Lessons Learned from these experience have influenced his thoughts his action as pertains to the Ford Foundations mission that a fill appeary writ large, as well as how they hold promise for improving the nation and the world. Finally, the topics and questions we will be discussing this evening were solicited and collected from a series of collaborative meetings and conversations between Durham Community members, duke staff, as well as faculty. Out of recognition of and respect for the value of the diverse random perspective associated with these contributions, i will indicate those questions that were received of in advance by Durham Community members. So, mr. Walker, lets start with the bigpicture question. You open your book with a statement written by Andrew Carnegie some 130 years ago. In it he cites the importance of philanthropy. The previous referenced to end poverty champ bied by Terry Sanford was championed 57 years ago from. Your perspective, what, if anything, about the nature of inequality and how philanthropy proposes has changed since carnegies observations and fords efforts and from fords efforts until today . Thank you, professor, and good evening, everyone. I feel really blessed and enormously grateful for the invitation to be the Terry Sanford lecturer this semester. Of course, the opportunity to come to duke to this amazingly magical place that seems year in ly in its beauty and its excellence, and in its richness, you cant help but eel that this is a rich place. And it reeks of it. And it is an interesting thing that well get to in a moment, but i do want to say that it is just always such a warm embrace hen i come to durham and thats why when my friend once again intervened in my life to probably rig the system so i could be named the Terry Sanford lecturer, i readily accepted. I think your question of Andrew Carnegie and the fund for north very a and today is a important one that really, first of all, we have to acknowledge Andrew Carnegie. Andrew carnegie was a radical for his day. Andrew carnegie believed that everyone in america should be literate, should have a library, have library books. He actually didnt have a problem with inequality. Andrew carnegie believed that inequality was just a natural phenomenon, and that the real estion was what did men like himself who benefited from their natural hard work and their superior intelligence and all of the things that brought them their wealth, what would they do with that wealth . To benefit society . He was a radical, but he doesnt look like a radical today. The fund for North Carolina that governor sanford led was also a radical idea, a disruptive idea, because it challenged the status quo in this state. T demanded that institutions look at the ways in which they existed and engaged with particularly poor, lowincome, black communities, and i think we have to acknowledge that while we in this country have , de tremendous progress everything has changed and nothing has changed. And what i mean by that is, we have made phenomenal progress in this country at reducing the isparities, at demonstrating see the tial for us to integrated better schools, employment that works for more people. We have demonstrated tremendous progress. Those demonstrations have been just that, demonstration projects. We have been unable to at scale sustain the progress, and that is, to my mind, the greatest challenge, because we actually generally speaking know what works. Name a social ill, a challenge that we face as a country, and theres a demonstration or a series of demonstrations that show us what work. Name something. How to increase student achievement for young black boys. We know how to do that in this country. And there have been randomized control trials out the wazoo to show us where it has worked. Those have been demonstrations. We have been unwilling to scale them, to invest in them, and to sustain those investments. So my challenge is to all of us and to philanthropy is to root that we look at the causes of, one, the problems that we are identifying, and two whats the root cause of our inability to invest in the things we know that works . In ew carnegie believed he didnt ut uestion that the negro libraries got secondhand books or no books at all. John d. Rockefeller was a radical to establish spelman college, to take what had been a small, Fledgling College for negro women and to believe that negro women should have a fouryear degree. It was a radical idea. Now, he wasnt creating a Scholarship Program to send those negro girls to radcliffe or vassar with his daughters, and there was a curriculum designed for those women that was different from the curriculum that was designed for his daughters. But he believed that they should be educated. But the root causes were left unexamined, and part of the reason the root causes were ft unexamined is because privilege the people do not like being made uncomfortable. And to engage in a root cause nterrogation makes the beneficiaries of the very systems and structures that , duce their advantage approximate makes them vulnerable. And one of the great things about privilege, because ive lived with privilege, and ive lived without privilege. Living with privilege is really good. Because what privilege is is sed to buy you insulation from being uncomfortable. I mean, how many times have i heard parents say, i worked hard so that you can have the privilege that i didnt have, so that those things that i had to worry about, you dont have to worry about. You can take for granted. Thats privilege. And every parent wants that for their child, particularly a parent who grew up hard or poor or but that privilege then ince late them from actually engaging in some of these really difficult conversations. Thank you. It sounds like youre talking about different but persistent manifestations of inequality, enduring inequality. And second question is, and tonights talk is moving from inequality to injustice. Theres a literature in the world that i live in in the academy that addresses different types of inequality. For example, economic, racial, or structural. There are also multiple definitions of these different types of ininookity based on the response you just save. Can you share with us what type of inook wallity you believe is the root cause and how you propose to define that, that type of inequality . I think the root cause is racism and classism. Think we and it becomes incredibly uncomfortable. First, because in this country, i believe, i believe in america. I am certain that there is no where one world with your background or my background could have generation n june the level of social and economic mobility we have experienced. So i was born in the bottom decile, and i am absolutely right in the 1 . And i am grateful for that, but to the s not blind me reality of the historic racism in our very foundation. And how we in this country have hat conversation where we both where we are comfortable with the contradictions of who we are rather than a romanticized version. I love thomas jefferson, and i get hell because i opened my annual letter a couple of years ago with a quote from jefferson to his friend, Samuel Dupont in 1816, and he wrote Samuel Dupont and said the work of america is to build a just nation. So i included that, and, you know, i got some people saying on twitter, why would you be quoting that horrible, racist, sally hemings, all that stuff, right . Because jeffersons words were brilliant. Were absolutely brilliant. Now, yes, he was a hypocrite. Bsolutely. But i want to hold jefferson to his words. So i use his words to demand of him that he deliver on those words, in spite of his hypocrisy. And to hold his hypocrisy and is brilliance at once, because that our f the fact founders were racist, they also left us the tools to fix what and so i think where we have to begin in this country is to have an ability to manage the complexity of both of those area tives in a nation where we have only had a narrative of deification. So we have had a narrative that is this romanticized idea of , and that romanticized idea, i hold that too. That lso hold a reality is the lived experience, certainly of folks of color, of poor white people, and that to me is whats critical to our ability to engage. And i think what has happened is in our society today, too many of us are taking oppositional positions on that narrative continuum. And some feel that it is important to protect, and some kneel we have to tear it down. And and i believe that we have o be able to bridge, because we are like the soul of any of us. I mean, if you have any religious tradition or you believe anything, i mean, i grew up in the south as a baptist. I mean, we have a soul. But our souls need nourishment, d we, if left to our own will, will do things that are harmful to our souls. And souls need healing, and i think thats what this country needs. So how do we think about the kinds of conversations that helped us heal . And understand you got to be able to diagnose what were healing from. Thats a part of it. You opened by referencing jefferson and the mood towards a just nation. Can you give us a combination of what that would look like and how you imagined that . What does justice look like, and how do we get this . Whats the pathway . I think the pathway is to is gnize that our democracy combined by a set of systems, structures, cultural and social practices, and those systems beginning with the economic designed to get us what we got. So there is no facet of our life in this country, and that no social problem we should be surprised about the outcomes. So none of us should be surprised about the fact that we are the most overly incarcerated nation in the world on a per capita basis much thats a fact. And we have designed a criminal Justice System to get us that. I mean, im not surprised. If you look at the inputs into the outputs, it is actually a perfectly designed system to get us that. D so every aspect of our lives, those systems, and the design of them, will get us more justice or less justice. And so i think we have to focus n every system and ask ourselves, is this system more ed to generate justice, more fairness, or is it designed to create more injustice . And this is not this is not a unique phenomenon. I mean, the Ford Foundation has offices all around the world, a function of is the way, and particularly those who are privileged design society. I was in our Eastern Africa office, and people said we have ot to hire we have hired an overabundance, because the lua ethnic groups in the office feel like theyre already privileged in that society, why is it that assets, whos in power, etc. , now to many of my colleagues, theyre just all black in east africa. How hard can it be . Well, they have inook wallity too, and it is designed by the privileged ethnic groups to benefit them, and the minority ethnic tribes and groups, it could be like a conversation in harlem in 2010. I mean, the conversation is about how they are exclude and had how the privileged ethnic group at the top of the pyramid makes it hard for them to scomber have access to the economic benefits, the benefits for land, the benefits for agriculture, whatever. You go into the urban slums, and you look at whos in the slums in nairobi, and you find out their ethnic, it is often those ethnic tribes who are rural, who are minority. You go to the nicer neighborhoods and see whos living in those, this is design eople people structures that are based on historic, that are intended to reate hierarchy. That is a global phenomenon, and in the United States it has absolutely manifested in the way in which racism and White Supremacy was designed and everything around that, and it is regrettable, but it is a fact. And if that fact makes us uncomfortable, deal with that uncomfortable, the discomfort, because in order to solve it, we happened to understand how do we get it out of our system. So if im understanding correctly, youre suggesting that inequality is foundational to the construction of the nation. Its attached to the structural mechanisms that manifest in the institutions. And it either promotes or con strains justice. So lets take a look at a practical example of this. In your book, you mention worldwide improvements in birth outcomes as illustrative of how Justice Informed movements can improve social conditions and reduce inequality. The u. S. , however, has not seen similar improvements in birth outcomes, and blackwhite birth outcome differences, particularly maternal mortality, actually increase with higher income and more formal education. In fact, why do american women who have less than a High School Education have better women utcomes than black who have College Degrees . How do we zwhare sir zphell to you, what does that reflect about the u. S. Social order, particularly the state of affairs on this inequality and injustice . At t reflects the depth with race credits progress. Race, not income. Because income is not necessarily an equalizer. How is e conundrum of that you have black women th a fouryear credential, with higher income, achieving Poorer Health outcomes than white women without a fouryear degree with less income . How else can you explain that . I mean, i think the data and the research on this, the way has prevented, constrained economic gains, do not translate into better social and health outcomes. Translate into more social mobility, it does not translate into less social isolation. And so, i think we have to ask again , and that what do we do about that . Forof the real challenges to say, what do we do about that . Frustrations for , the diagnosis is not that hard. Clear. A are pretty its the, what do we do about this . And i think that is the hard work, that is the work of this nation. Thank you. Can we talk some about relationships between different groups in offsetting these kinds of inequalities . From your perspective, what are the characteristics of a justiceinformed partnership between universities and those individuals, families, andunities, who are living, by extension, disproportionately impacted by the inequality phenomenon . Hundreds of researchers like you would not are interested and propose to understand the offset. Had we get those perspectives how do we get those perspectives . This is a community had been generated question. Sure. I think one of the real important ways we achieve that is first by recognizing and owning our power, and the power imbalance. And the resource in balance. And how that can distort our behavior. Philanthropy, sometimes humility,se sense of a fake sense of humidity. Humility. We simply will say, we are just and i think that is harmful. In order to get to a better relationship and engagement with community, we have to recognize the power in balance, in balance. Im the way we engage that first have to be that we dont privilege credentialed knowledge over the lived experience, and the perspectives of people closest to the challenge. We are dont say that going to bring experts in. Because the people who are in those communities are the experts, too. Worked, before i i went to rockefeller and i the 90s,harlem in which was a very different harlem then today, we were practically giving away brownstones, we couldnt get people to move to harlem. We there were times when felt like we were the guinea the lab brats, or whatever. When you feel a sense of being observed, being monitored, being analyzed, but never being at the table as a full partner. And i think that part of that requires from day one the design of whatever the engagement is should have that be the preamble to whatever the intervention is. What kinds of funding opportunities and mechanisms might actually inform that perspective . How do you get to folks who have boots on the ground and represent the perspectives of those populations . You have those this is also a Community Generated question. My former trustee will tell you that one of the things we have learned from his organization and organizations like it, the thing in terms of resources that nonprofits need that they cannot get is general support. Funding thatd of matters most, just as it does to any Venture Enterprises flexible capital. What philanthropy provides the least is flexible capital. To my mind, thats like an indication of how you see both strategy and your partners. Initiated,things we the trustees approved five years initiative, aon new initiative that is all and a set ofrt, key institutions. We believe they are on the front fighting for racial and gender equality. And what that has meant is that we have gone from our report, we of our spending was general support, we now are seven new percent as of last year. Be 100 , although my colleagues say it can never be 100 because there are certain saygs but i say that to we have to change our strategy, too. If you are going to do general beport, your strategy has to strengthening those institutions. Changeole headset has to as a foundation, where you say, actually, our work is to invest in institutions and people. Thats our work, thats our strategy. , themost foundations strategy has been something that has been designed. Its not designed in a conference room, but it has been designed and there are a set of and we fund organizations to get those outcomes. And thats admirable. Organization to iduce teenage pregnancy, believe if we fund the organizations, our outcome should be attached to their outcomes. We should be informed by, saying, all right, if we want to reduce racial inequality, and there are a set of organizations Whose Mission it is to do that, so, get them in a room, just name all the organizations doing that. Design a collective strategy that is about strengthening each of those institutions, develop those indicators, develop the outcomes for those groups, and given general support to do that. Give the multiyear general support. This is getting into the weeds, but i say this to my Foundation Friends because this is one of the things that makes me crazy foundations, and that is, the board approved a budget, the board approves a oneyear budget. , why cantk someone you do more multiyear grants, they say because my board only approves a oneyear budget. Ford board the only approve a oneyear budget. But they could approve a fiveyear budget if they want to do. Theres nothing that says you cant approve a multiyour budget. I understand why some organizations, conservatively and otherwise, but there are ways to prudently scenarioplan worstcase scenarios and to know that you will have the money to pay out. Why dont we do more of that . We didnt have a 2 billion budget with the trustees. After a lot of work with our cio, the financial people thought comfortable that they could approve a fiveyear budget. So we could start paying out those grants right away. The good news was that some of those organizations, a larger ones, got 10 million. And some of them, we given 6 million in year one in 4 million in year two. We can do that. Why dont we do that . I guess im just saying, there are ways in which, if you believe in community beyond the rhetoric, that you manifest that in your programming. When you came to the Ford Foundation, you sold the existing Art Collection, and used the funds to replace it with pieces from a significantly more Diverse Group of contemporary artists. Purchase ofrsaw the andy and jet collections donated them to the archive at the museum of African American history. Why did you make those changes . The art. Ok. As a community director. Forhere was a Wonderful Foundation Art Collection that henry for the second henry headquarters the was built, a mast it was a beautiful collection. It was really quite lovely. I would say, art historians would say that we had a lot of names, but it was unlike anything was the best, but we had a lot of names. Know, when the trustees as we started to reimagine the building, if this was part of a larger strategy to move the building from being a fortress to being a community , i said to the trustees, we have in our collection an art that is all white men, mostly european, and one woman. And we have a foundation that just approve a new mission to focus on inequality and diversity in the world. We should sell the art. The good news is the trustees are a Remarkable Group of people. I mean, exceedingly distinguished people who are relentlessly focused on advancing the foundations mission. And i think they really understood that. Pleasure,everyones collection,ell the and that then made it possible because we didnt want to use grant dollars for any budget. That made it possible for us to begin to acquire a new collection. The first required is an eight personll from the who did the portrait of president obama. It has gotten a lot of media because it is such an amazing portrait to have down in our now, ive collection is about 80 women of color and people and queer and diverse in lots of different ways, and i think people notice it, and it has been written about a lot and got a lot of attention i think because it does reflect our sense of who we are as a foundation. Thank you. And so, weve reached the point of our session where we will take questions from the audience. Sisi, again, remember, succinct, well thought out questions. We have runners will be making the rounds. Raise your hand if you are interested. Otherwise, i have additional questions and we will continue the dialogue here. No questions . We have one. Hi, my name is emily, thanks so much for coming tonight, i really enjoyed your conversation. Talk aondering if you little bit about very early on, you talked about how we know what to do, but we dont do it. Ive worked with some foundations, and foundations have a lot of resources but at the end of the day, it still is limited as compared to the government, for example. Could you talk a little bit about what you see as the limits of foundation work, and what you see the governments role as, and how the Board Foundation works with the government and in what capacities . Thats a great question. I actually dont believe that the Ford Foundation or philanthropy at large can solutions wef our would wish at scale. No foundation to do that. Can do that. Consequently, we have to believe in Public Policy. We have to believe in the potential of government to act both experiment and to be a partner with iflanthropy, but ultimately we want to scale a large, public challenge, government and Public Policy are the pathway. Unfortunately we have allowed in of theuntry the idea grading government degrading government, degrading public good so, anything that is becomes negative. There is something negative associated with it. Public housing, public transportation, public school, public parks. All of these things are our public access. And when we start to privatize them and say, well, the solution is privatizing the public, i believe that we will regret that. That that can, in fact, excel the kind of inequality. And i think it has contributed to accelerating the inequality. Role should,opys i believe, be actually shining a light on that. Actually lifting that up, which is not always easy because we sometimes participate. Ill take my own city, we have an amazing park called central park. 100 by private wealth. The worst days of new york city bankruptcy, a group of amazing private citizens proposed for they would take over the revitalization of the park, and they have done an amazing job, and they should be commended for that. But the central park conservancys success, some would argue, has contributed to the degradation of parks in the bronx and in queens, staten idea thatcause this we dont need a robust public parks system in new york, look at central park. Look at the high line. Situations that the geography of of those parks. And to extrapolate from that, a Public Policy that says, you see, we just need to allow the privatization, because those communities in the south bronx and on Staten Island dont have billionaires living on them, dont have the wealth, dont have people who say well, i want to make sure that when i take my kids to that playground, that it is clean. Aspiration, but they dont have the wealth. If we, again, go back to all the systems that are public, that are being privatized, philanthropy should be in the role of not accelerating that, but of calling that out as itself a contributor to the very problem were trying to solve. Thank you very much for coming tonight, i really enjoyed this. But i missed something along the way. Theres a word up there that says justice, and i dont understand exactly how you interpret that word. Could you help me with that . Is rooted, for me, for me, in my religious teachings. The idea of social justice, of fairness, of every human being of notorthy of dignity, experiencing indifference physical orome them quality that renders the other. Mind, justice, and this is why i worry in philanthropy, because in philanthropy, justice, as it is in our society more broadly, is a contested term. The number of Foundation People ive had in the last year, two president s of big foundations have said to me, my board would never be comfortable with all of that social justice stuff you talked about. Like, really . No,ard doesnt like we talk about opportunity. We talk about leveling the playing field. Around in the language that makes us when, in fact, the core issue yes, we can talk about opportunity, so lets talk about who has it and who doesnt. But if we are actually going to deal with the core issues, we have to deal with justice. Surprisedhropy, i am by how often i find resistance. And we started to say that we were a social justice philanthropy, not because we wanted to say we were special or cool or anything, it was to say actually, social justice philanthropy demands Something Else of us. In 1968, when dr. King talked about philanthropy, he had a different idea of an carnegie or because he said philanthropy is commendable, but it should not allow the philanthropist to overlook the economic injustice which makes philanthropy necessary. That was a very different idea then carnegies idea. It was an idea that says philanthropists, you the ways inrrogate which you have become so privileged that you have all of this money to give away, when so many others dont. They dont have the subsistence with a life a giddy. And how do you, as a philanthropist, think about it . And how do you, as a engaging in that conversation to interrogate those systems and structures. Rather than investing in the things that actually affirm your advantage. And that is really, really hard to do. I was at a dinner party in new york city with a group of progressive, supersuccessful people, black and white, this had gone most of them to private schools and ivy leagues and someone said, i read your times and it was really good. And i said, did you read the part where i said that we should do away with legacy admissions . To a one, including all the table, said at the absolutely dont do away with legacy. How do you think we are going to address inequality . A verymy friends, who is successful banker on wall street, africanamerican, grew up in Public Housing, i said to him, im not worried about your children, im worried about who you used to be. Your kids are going to be fine. Meaning, there isnt an Ivy League School in america who is not going to accept a black kid who went to dalton who doesnt need Financial Aid and whose father is a legacy. Im not worried about your kids. The kids who we are used to be. Thats who we should be worried about. Do they still have opportunity in this country . Can they still dream the way we all dreamt . To me, thats what justice looks like. When people like that start to say actually, we need to not give back, we need to give up. Thats the difference in what im talking about, looking at philanthropy from a standpoint and looking from our own personal behavior, which is, again, where it gets really hard, because we started with this point about privilege. Privilege,oint of the whole point of you being able to donate a lot of money to a private school and have a leg up for your child is to buy that for them. Youre going to step aside and give that up . Whos going to do that . Good evening, im an independent consultant. Thank you for all that you have brought, for all this truth telling you have brought. In particular, im grateful for your affirmation of the value of peoples lived experience and creating concrete avenues for people to actually participate. In that spirit, i wonder if you could speak to the importance of bringing participatory grantmaking to life, and moving some of the decisionmaking power as an avenue for addressing a quality. Inequality. Thats a great question, participatory grantmaking is something that we are interested in and we are experimenting with. We have underway a couple of experiments, one with a disability rights program, and another with a group of foundations working in three or four communities. Ideaery curious about this of participatory grantmaking, and i think it is another way in which we can think about , andratizing philanthropy the kinds of innovation that mean that we share more in power, in process, in decisionmaking. The ford really clear, foundation is never going to turn over our endowment to the community to manage and make grants on. I dont pretend to be something im not. The way we will get better and the way philanthropy gets better at grantmaking is to have more people in leadership positions who look like the communities we are seeking to serve. Because the more authentic understanding of the problems and the proximity to those problems that we have in our boardrooms, in our executive offices, i believe the better we will be, as philanthropy. And while participatory grantmaking is one way in which we can do that, what i would not want to see is the demographics of philanthropy remain the same while, in 10 or 20 years, weve got 10 of our grantmaking iniquitous victory fund. Again, its not a distraction, but it is much easier to take 5 or 10 of your nothing else has to change. Actually, weng is need to change. Boards,to look at our we need to look at the senior staff of the foundations and ask those questions and not allow things that are important, but that can actually become trojan horses for Something Else. Hi. My name is jesse. I am an alum here and im also with the board for history and social justice. Thank you for being here. My question for you is a bit of a personal one. Part one. You mentioned the word healing. That is a word that has deep resonance for me. To thinking about my journey, the pastors kids, coming to family and what it has meant to stay here, engaging in community and my healing journey coming out as queer, remaining connected to my community has been dynamic and is ongoing. I would love to hear, as you feel comfortable sharing, what healing is meaning for you. Hearlso, would love to what you think about collective healing and what that means on a broader, public level. , inlast thing i would add the south. , in that in some way we are broken. And we feel it in our spirit. And we sense it. To, firste to be able can modelour leaders for us what healing looks like. That we and our daily engagement with people very granular ways to the kind of healing that we need. I think that there is no doubt ,hat for africanamericans queer people, that the burden in our own community of homophobia is profound. I remember, i am reminded of something i hadnt thought about long time. When i went to work at the i hadnian church in 1993 my desk in the basement and there was a picture of my partner on the desk. Someone said to the reverend, he has a picture of a white man on his desk. Called me and said, do you have a picture of a white man on your desk . I said yes, i have a white man at home. Was, inknow, i think it some ways, culturally, in a black church in harlem in 1992, it was not a normative thing. Reverend butz and i have had this conversation on many occasions, because of always been queers in the black church. Always. Which that has been acknowledged and were not is really contributed to some of the dysfunction of black men and black women who are queer. It is compounded by race. I think that we have reached a point, and i know on my own journey and my own journey at abyssinian church, where a few years ago david and i were at church and reverent butz calls up from the pew the pulpit, as you know happens and you are just sitting there. That sort of thing happens at black churches. Know, i see that you and david have shown. Where have you all been . Im like, oh my gosh, i cannot believe this man is calling me out in church. Inwould not have done that 1992. He would not have called out two men, a couple, sitting on the fifth pew on a sunday morning at 11 00. So, thats the journey. That journey is his journey, my journey, our journey was informed by the experience of living and working together in a shared mission. The work of that church. Its a i think that process. And i think the collective work is the work that comes when people come together and have the courage to stand together. And that is not easy. Often, today, too courage is discouraged. Risk to stand up and stand out, is not something that many people want to do in this twitter cancel cultural time in which we live. I would just encourage you to do that. We have time for one more question. His hand went up, enthusiastically. Would you like my mic . Hi. Im ruby, i am a physician in the local area. Hi, ruby. Some of our local durham residents who live in Public Housing have been displaced for approximately a month because of underfunded maintenance issues. And many of these residents feel like secondclass citizens in our society. Your experiences with katrina and recovery, how did you integrate many of those citizens back into their community and include them so that they did not feel like secondclass citizens and how can bystanders in the Community Engage people that have lived in these terrible conditions . Is hink that this issue and your question is a metaphor. In thehould be rage streets. Over that kind of injustice. And the rage ought to be as intense from the privileged part of town where people are living in nice big houses, covered with it and nice cars, as much as should be from those residents who are living in temporary shelters. And that is often the challenge. Is that, the people who are calling city hall, who are calling the Public Housing authority, are not those people. Are doing that are the people themselves who vulnerable and often have the least power and resources. So, again i come back to the question of, what do we privileged people say and do in a case like that . And i will only say that the wildlands, while there is much to be proud of in new orleans, not all of those people in Public Housing got their housing back after katrina. So we should also be really ofar that the process addressing the solutions to challenges like Public Housing is multilayered and very complex. We specific instance had a situation in queens like this a few weeks ago in new york. You know, we fund housing advocates, so there is a lot of weocacy going on, but how do themselveswho arent necessarily proximate to the problem, to own that problem . Put the dont want to burden to say, oh, you know, if you are privileged you should be going over and working on Public Housing. Thats not necessarily what im that webut i am saying cant choose to look the other way. And even if you arent going to be engaged in that specific, engaged in some way that does matter to those communities. Otherwise, what we know will happen is that there will be indifference. To those communities. Because left on their own, they ist have the power and that difficult and uncomfortable, but it is true. Truthful and dealing with the reality is often uncomfortable. Thank you. We have come to the end of our time for this evenings event. Please join me in taking mr. Walker. [applause] the house returns on wednesday and thursday for legislative is this and vote on the fisa reauthorization bill. The bill extends surveillance authorities through 2023. It has been amended by the senate and will require house action. New rules in place to allow for proxy voting, house members on wednesday can vote for other members not present during floor votes. Watch live house coverage on cspan. Watch any time on cspan. Org. Or listen on the go with free cspan radio app. This memorial day weekend on book tv, today at 4 00 p. M. Eastern, foundation for liberty and american greatness founder nick adams on his book trump and churchill. At 4 30 eastern, Time Magazine correspondent molly paul talks about her latest book, hello see. Pelosi. On afterwards, chris hughes talks about his book bear shot. Bear shot. David about. Writer she talks about his career and books on indepth. Watch book tv this memorial day weekend on cspan two. Host joining us this morning from montclair, new jersey is kimberly weisul, editor at large for inc. Magazine and inc. Com. We are here to talk about the paycheck protection program. Thank you for joining us. Explain the paycheck protection
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.