Glen Galaich (00:16):

Welcome to an exciting edition of Break Fake Rules. I actually can't believe I'm saying this, but we are in front of a live audience right here. I mean, what an, it's incredible. This is like a dream come true. So I want to jump right into it and quickly introduce our truly amazing guests, the incredible intellectual historian who's changed so many lives. Joining us today is Dr. Ibram Kendi. Thank you.

(00:48):

And then I have to say just personally someone who has already in the short time, we have been friends, I think what a couple years now personally changed my life in many ways, just being with you. And that is Marcus Walton, the head of Grantmakers for Effective Organizations. Thank you for being here. Thank you, Glen. So we are live at Grantmakers for Effective Organizations in Los Angeles. The show has just ended for the conference, but Marcus has agreed to be with us here. So if he should fall asleep mid shoot, you'll know why. In case you've never put on a conference before, it's kind of exhausting. So welcome to our little show Break Fake rules. Thank you. We're going to talk a little bit about the fake rules that stop us from doing things and how powerful it is when you break them and change the world or change even your day.

(01:42):

It doesn't have to be the world, right? Just change the day. And I was just thinking, I've just gotten this great benefit over the last two days. I've had time with you, Dr. Kendi, and with you, Marcus, and had a chance to learn again from both of you. And I had all kinds of questions ready to go. But one thing that hit me this morning was I live a pretty big fake rule myself, which is when I think of philanthropy, I think of it in bits and pieces. I think of it in due diligence. I think of it in entrepreneurship. I think of it in donors, and I think about it in terrible donors and good donors. And that's where my head is. And after spending time with you guys, I realize that that's a huge fake rule I live in, that I'm missing something really important.

(02:31):

And that is the real thing we're all in this for, which is what they say philanthropy means, a love of humanity. And being with you. While I know the entry point oftentimes is through race at the end of the road, what you both get back to in conversation is the human part, the love of human, and how hard it is to break through all of that stuff, race, life categories, to just be humans doing our work together. I was hoping you might respond to what I've said because I learned it from you, Dr. Kendi, that fake rule I live in that you've helped me break in the last couple of days.

Dr. Ibram X. Kendi (03:16):

Well, it's interesting because I think racist ideas, and I would probably say sexist ideas, homophobic, transphobic, classist, ableist ideas, bigotry across different areas, not only prevents us from recognizing the full humanity of the other, but I think in being unable to recognize the full humanity of the other, we're actually not able to live in the full humanity of ourselves. Because I think it's that connection that I think allows us to be fully human. Because part of, to me being fully human is to recognize the fullness of humanity. And in recognizing the fullness of humanity, we recognize the diversity of humanity. We recognize the beauty of humanity, we recognize the entire human rainbow, and we see ourselves within that. But unfortunately, I think in many ways we're taught to not do that. And I think that's one of the things that has long plagued humanity, even from the ancient sort of world when sexism was rampant and certainly the modern world when racism emerged.

Glen Galaich (04:44):

And that encapsulation is what we've got to break through. I know you have thoughts on this.

Marcus Walton (04:50):

Five years ago or so, I was stumbling across this term of anti-racism after training and supporting foundations through racial equity training for about 10 years or so. And I was feeling a little frustrated because there's stages to that work. One is to make the case that it even matters.

(05:17):

That's right. And I spent multiple years just getting audience to say, no, look at what the data shows. That even when you look at all those other indicators and identities and categories of identity and communities, when you look at the analysis of race, there's a difference. And it's a predictable, we can predictably say the browner the population, the worst off people are doing inside of those categories of identity. And that made me frustrated that I had to make the case for that. And then there was something that happened about four years that's shifted to not making the case, but what are examples of what people are doing? So we went from this may not even be true to, can you show me other examples of what other people are doing? Which seemed absurd. Where was the space for that to happen? Where's the innovation space? And then you came along and offered, in my frustration a light, the light was that who I am is not contained inside of those categories of identity. You reminded me that how I was thinking about some of these things are actually social and political constructs that in many ways dehumanize me and separate me from other human beings and contribute to our collective dehumanization. And so you transformed my way of thinking about leadership, of practicing leadership and as offering leadership a different way to show up in leadership by our mere existence. Thank you.

Glen Galaich (07:09):

Thank you. So I think you both listed a whole slew of things, of rules, fake rules to break through. And you've mentioned construct. So I've been thinking about this a lot and I've been thinking about the construct, the social constructs that we live in. And I'm wondering, is race a fake rule?

Dr. Ibram X. Kendi (07:40):

So I mean, I think on many levels it is. I sort of argue that race is a power construct. It specifically was created by racist power. That race is the child of racism, not the parent as we're seeking to show. And the reason sort of race was created and constructed, to get even more specific, the reason why blackness was created and constructed in the 14 hundreds was to justify the enslavement of all these different peoples who had different skin colors, who had different cultures and spoke different languages from different parts of West Africa. And the Portuguese were really the first to begin exclusively trading in what we now understand as African people. And so their justification for why they were doing that had to change. Previous enslavers in the Mediterranean world made the case that they were people who were remote from civilization. If the Mediterranean is civilization.

(09:02):

And people in northern Europe or eastern Europe or Sub-Saharan Africa were remote. So that was the sort of justification in the 13 and 12 hundreds. But when the Portuguese changed the sort of script from enslaving people from what's now the Middle East, or people from Eastern Europe and people from Sub-Saharan Africa and started exclusively enslaving people from Africa, they had to create a new justification. And that new justification was built on the construction of race. And so it's been a fake rule from the beginning, but what's striking is almost like it it's a fake rule, but at the same time, because people consider it to be a real rule, it literally really impacts the lives does people. So the solution isn't necessarily for us to say, oh, race doesn't exist, so let's just not identify by race, because then that will eliminate racism. Because then what that will actually eliminate is our ability to see racism.

Marcus Walton (10:17):

Yes, yes. And when you say that, I think about measure racism, quantify racism, the value of that, in my opinion and from my experience is once we name a thing, once we acknowledge the presence of a thing, it has boundaries. Now acknowledging that this is a thing and I can feel it, it has edges. So okay, there's parameters. Now I can start to connect with others who have engagement around other aspects of that thing. And we can get to work, we can tap into that collective genius. We can work together to start to dismantle and rearrange whatever that thing is in service of our shared vision.

Glen Galaich (11:09):

Again, thank you, man. I always am. So where you take us, what I was thinking right there, Marcus, as you were speaking, as we've been doing this show, I've had so many people in such a short time walk up to me and say, I really like what you're doing with that break fake rules thing. Actually you've made me think about, I haven't made you think about anything. You just saw the show. But they are saying in their heads, I think about what are the fake rules around me? What's come up for me? And I don't want this to sound, I'm not trying to sound grandiose with it. It's just a simple thought, really. I don't get much beyond that. But the thought is,

Marcus Walton (11:45):

Come on, let's stop that fake rule. Come on, man. The thought is, the thought is, yeah, I'm sick of that, Glen, thank

Glen Galaich (11:51):

You, Marcus. I know. Bad, bad me, Glen. Now don't do that in front of Marcus

Glen Galaich (11:59):

Okay. But in its most simple way, it’s an instruction manual to systems change. I think. I love it. I think listen, systems are built on a series of relationships and rules that we flow into. The only way to break a system is to start to break down the channels. Now hopefully the ones that are working, you stay with them, but there's so many that are not. And you guys today have named probably 400, I'll come to you right now, Dr. Kendi, and that's kind of a big question, but you handle big questions. Well, that's what you do. When you think of systems change, is it potentially as simple as in your everyday thinking about those fake rules around you and breaking them down?

Dr. Ibram X. Kendi (12:51):

What’s happening is there isn't just sort of this system or even sort of structure that's excluding or including people or harming or helping people, but we're also misled into believing that system or structure doesn't exist. And so I'm saying that to say that I do think that it is important for us to sort of recognize that and break that rule, but that's where ideology comes into play. Because I think people are constantly and consistently taught that it's not actually the structure that's causing Black and Indigenous people to be overrepresented in prisons or poverty. It's their own individual depravity. And so I think that's why it's hard for people to even recognize the rules to break because they're so soaked in these ideas that rules aren't even shaping their lives.

(13:59):

And I think that's why it can become sort of exhausting because sort of first you have to almost bring yourself out of this sort of ocean of ideas. And then you think once you get to the top that you're free, but then you look up and you're like, oh my God. Now I see the structure that I have to now break down. So we're actually only starting the process when we sort of liberate ourselves from those ideas. And so I'm saying that to say I think we shouldn't necessarily become disillusioned because we spent so much energy and time trying to see the rules we need to break because once we get to that point in which we could see it, there probably isn't any going back. Now. They're going to create new racist ideas to bring us back, but hopefully we will recognize those new ones as we did the old ones.

Glen Galaich (14:58):

Let's hold here for a second. You wrote an entire book for all of us on how to be an anti-racist. So for those of us that have not yet read it, we have people in the room here now with signed copies of it. Thank you, Dr. Kendi. Thank you. Where do you go with your book? Where do you say to us, what's a key message you took us to the point where we see it and they're going to make us, they're going to stop us with more things. What do we do?

Dr. Ibram X. Kendi (15:29):

Well, I think first and foremost, in sort of striving and continuing and sort of not being disillusioned and pushing to disrupt and deconstruct, it has to be an affirmative practice. In studying the history of people being racist or even the history of racist ideas and policies, it becomes apparent that really every generation is self-Identifying those ideas, self-identifying those policies, even personally, self-identifying as what we now call not racist. When you track the history of people who claim they're not racist, you're tracking the history of people who are actually being racist. But we currently have a conception that the opposite of racist is not racist, which to me is deeply ahistorical. When you actually look at the history, and not just the history, but even the present, a scenario in which no matter what a person does, no matter what a person says when they're challenged on being racist, their typical response is, no, no, I'm not racist.

(16:53):

And some people will say they're the least racist person in the world after they said one of the most racist things in the world. So I'm mentioning that because the current sort of binary is actually a fake rule. The binary between racist and not racist. And I mentioned binary because one of the ways in which the book and my work, particularly as it relates to anti-racism, has been critiqued, has been for people to say, oh, he's just introducing a binary. Last I checked, there was already a binary which was racist and not racist. And I'm just sort of replacing it with a new binary. And that is that the opposite of racist is actually being anti-racist. And while those who are being not racist are typically in denial, to be anti-racist actually is to acknowledge those times in which we were being racist. If to be racist is to think in terms of racial hierarchy.

(18:00):

What's the opposite of racial hierarchy? Notions of racial equality. If racist policies are leading to racial inequity and injustice, there's a clear opposite to inequity and injustice, which is equity and justice, which we can sort of measure. But then I also think that the other aspect of that fake rule, which is sort of this contrast between racist and not racist, is that these are fixed identities, that these are terms that define who a person essentially is, which is why you have people saying, I am not a racist. I don't have a racist bone in my body. That's who I am. Because they think racist is also a term that defines who a person essentially is. And so I show in my work that actually the term anti-racist, like the term racist, are descriptive terms that describe what a person is being in any given moment based on what they're doing or saying or not doing.

Marcus Walton (19:07):

I love this guy. Take your time, man. Preach this thing.

Dr. Ibram X. Kendi (19:11):

The reason why this is important is because you have people who can imagine, for instance, that Black people are inferior to them in a particular type of way, but could imagine that native folks are equal to them in that same way. So then how would you describe that person? You can't essentially say that they're racist or anti-racist, but what you can say is when they're equating themselves to native folks, they're being anti-racist. When they're imagining that they're superior to black folks, they're being racist. But this also allows people to change, to grow, to engage on something called a journey, which humans typically are always on.

Marcus Walton (19:57):

Yes. Yes, sir. Yes sir.

Glen Galaich (20:02):

So how do we bring anti-racism into funding? Marcus, you just had an entire conference and I'd say that this topic was alive in the conference.

Marcus Walton (20:17):

Yeah, I would say so, too.

Glen Galaich (20:18):

And I would add to it. A lot of conferences and a lot of meetings these days want to have this conversation. You are bringing an anti-racist lens to funding. I think. So tell me how you do that.

Marcus Walton (20:33):

Well, I think I feel uncomfortable receiving what you described literally as factual. And so I'm going to wrestle with the truth inside of what you offered as a possibility. That's what I would hope. Let me offer a few things. When I think about the cultural implications of institutional philanthropic giving, first and foremost, institutionalizing a thing that has existed within human relationships since the beginning of humanity, that is philanthropy dehumanizes it by definition. We instantly create structures that limit the fullest expression of love between humans. And so just starting from there, the GEO way of being is to go back to the history. Let's start far enough upstream as philanthropy and not obsess over the strategies as if one strategy is going to be able to resolve a thing that's actually a complexity that's connected to overlapping systems of dehumanization. So we're shattering a few myths.

(21:54):

One that I'll offer is that we can program our way into and through transformation. We will never be able to create a program that contributes to the full dismantling and reconstruction of our systems, of the structures that organize our activities as human beings. That is an act of our collective genius, and we are demonstrating how that works. Today, the group out here, a part of this podcast is contributing their energy. It's alive. There's a dynamism here. And so the most effective philanthropy is not about efficiency, it's about effectiveness and efficiency doesn't equal effectiveness, which is another one of those breaking the rules because for so long, traditional philanthropy was about efficiency, but efficiency for whom? And it ended up being efficiency for making sure we can get the dollars in, we can accumulate wealth at all of these measurable goals that we set for ourselves.

(23:03):

And at no time over that last couple of articulations that I mentioned, the end recipient of those dollars, we weren't making the process easier for the folks that are doing the hard work. We were making it easier for ourselves. And so going upstream, inoculates us from falling into what I would call the equity trap. And the equity trap is about believing certain things that exist in the domain of diversity such as the browner, we make a thing, the more equitable it becomes. That is important. Diversity is necessary and insufficient for producing, for generating, for revealing the disruptive change, the transformative new normal that we all aspire to experience as thriving. That's right. And so our work is about our way of being that allows us to connect meaningfully, affirmatively with those individuals across the spectrum of proximity to bring forth our highest and most honorable expression of philanthropic practice.

Glen Galaich (24:19):

Thank you.

Marcus Walton (24:20):

Thank you, thank you. And thank you. Thank you.

Glen Galaich (24:23):

So we usually wrap up the show with one final question. I don't know how you're going to answer this one, but I'm going to give it a shot. What is one final rule that you call on? All of us, all us to break?

Marcus Walton (24:41):

I'm going to go. So the last word is from our esteemed guest. The fake rule that I'll invite us all to consider is to dare to grapple with complexity as the new normal for transformative philanthropy. Maybe in our willingness to move through uncertainty together with care and tenderness and grace. And if it's not, it sounds like a damn good thing to try. Yeah.

Glen Galaich (25:23):

You make me think that way all the time. When I hear you speak,

Marcus Walton (25:26):

That’s because I love you.

Glen Galaich (25:28):

It's a damn good thing to try.

Marcus Walton (25:30):

Yeah.

Dr. Ibram X. Kendi (25:31):

I think for me, there was a time in my life when I saw myself to Du Bois through the eyes of others

Marcus Walton (25:45):

Double consciousness

Dr. Ibram X. Kendi (25:48):

In which when I would sort of look at myself, I didn't see myself for myself, I sort of saw myself based on how I imagined other people saw me and sort of shape shifted and changed and improved myself based on standards that other people had created. And so I would offer people to consider sort of breaking the rule of, for the lack of a better expression, sort of keeping on the glasses for us to literally take off. Yes, take them off, take off those glasses. And those glasses are sort of societal standards, societal sort of conceptions of our particular group and assess ourselves based on standards that we for ourselves. Yes, sir. And I just think that for each of us, it could just be so liberating. Now, there's a cost to that because if you are seeing yourself for yourself and you're interacting with other people who are seeing themselves from societal norms and they're expecting you to be and do the same, and then when you're not, that's right. There can be sort of tension there. But in a way, we have been taught that freedom is chaotic. So we've sort of ran back into slavery, the big lie. And I don't think freedom is chaotic. Freedom is just uncertain. Yes, sir. And I think it's possible for us to create new norms and standards for ourselves and create a certainty based on that individual conception, and then create a world where we are allowing people to see themselves for themselves. And I think that's when we would be able to create a truly free world.

Marcus Walton (28:10):

Yes.

Glen Galaich (28:16):

Well, I hate to say what I'm about to say, but we've got to wrap it up. Thank you both so much for what felt like two seconds, and I know it's a lifetime of what we've gotten today. So thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. And thank you for joining us in this great edition of Break Fake Rules. We'll see you again next time.

Marcus Walton (28:41):

Thank you.

Glen Galaich (28:44):

Thank you. Next time on Break Fake Rules hear from Ryan Easterly, executive director of The Width Foundation, who shares why his foundation is joining the spend down movement to advance disability justice.

Ryan Easterly (28:56):

I would say to me, as a person with a disability, and especially as a healthcare organization, healthcare matters now, lives matter now. There's work that is literally making the difference between life and death, surviving and thriving, that needs to be supported now.

Glen Galaich (29:15):

Thank you for tuning in to Break Fake Rules. This show is brought to you by the Stupski Foundation, where we are returning all our resources to the communities we call home in Hawaiʻi and the San Francisco Bay Area by 2029. Our producer extraordinaire is Claire Callahan. The show is mixed and edited by Patrick Childers of Odd Conduit Media. Special thanks to our videographers and visual production team who fly from all over the world to be a part of this, Steve Johnson and Brook Van Dam of See Boundless. Subscribe to the Stupski Foundation YouTube channel to watch videos of each episode. You can find us on YouTube by searching Stupski Foundation. We hope these conversations don't end here. So join the conversation with me on LinkedIn.