Thoughts on decolonizing wealth

Decolonizing wealth – the book

Decolonizing Wealth, a book by Edgar Villanueva, was published back in 2018, but has become particularly prominent in the past few months. The reason is of course increased societal concern with social justice after the protests of 2020, as well as the ongoing pandemic.

Villanueva, partly Native American and focusing strictly on the American context, has a simple thesis: the wealth we see around us is inseparably linked to centuries of white supremacy (he avoids the term “racism”), slavery and colonialism. His statistics on just how much power and capital is held by white people are unsurprising but still somehow amazing when seen on paper: from the percentage of CEOs to the control financial resources (the entire finance industry, in fact), white representation is routinely at 90% or more. A measly 1% of venture capital, for example, goes to Black and Latino entrepreneurs.

The author realizes that some organizations have moved to remedy this issue (or rather – its perception) in a superficial way, and goes on to criticize tokenism in all its forms as humiliating for the minorities and essentially a way of ensuring no change happens. I have written previously about the scramble on the part of the white-dominated industries to introduce Black and minority representation. Villanueva himself often felt as a “token” even as he gave away substantial amounts of money, seemingly a powerful position.

The book is at its most interesting when it talks about the mechanics of how a typical foundation works. The book depicts the crooked process of soliciting and funding proposals, for example. Money seems to be going constantly to the usual suspects – nonprofits which have built up connections with those allocating money within foundations. In describing these “one hand washes the other” relationships the author does not go so far as to suggest downright corruption (kickbacks) but that seems like the natural next step. 

Many (most?) deserving causes out there can’t have access to necessary funds since they don’t have the armies of “connected” grant-writing experts. They are too busy, you know, working to change things. Villanueva poignantly describes the humiliating experience of having to beg for money from people who represent the colonial system that took resources from your ancestors in the first place.

Decolonizing wealth: the solutions proposed

Villanueva’s solution is to deal with the situation the way one deals with trauma, because a trauma is what the whole situation is. It’s a trauma for the victims of colonialism, obviously. But it is also a trauma for the colonialists, because they are condemned to suppress the guilt and “live within a lie” until they come to face the facts. He suggests a seven-step process – grieve, apologize, listen, relate, represent, invest, repair – most of them meaning what you’d expect them to. 

The second part of the book, where this solution is presented, feels less striking. This is partly due to the fact that the solution he proposes is, understandably, one that involves healing and reconciliation rather than some Apollo-style mission to fix our society with roles for heroes all-round. There are still some good nuggets in there – for example when the author talks about the importance of listening, and caricatures the average foundation owner as loud, opinionated and unable to hear the other person; this gave me flashbacks of my years starting out in the industry.

Decolonizing wealth: assessment

The point of decolonizing wealth is clear and well taken. Of course white supremacy is the core of the system we see nowadays. The shadow of slavery and imperialism still hangs over the West, perhaps more precariously than at any time in the past, like a repressed trauma finally emerging into view through therapy.

If the strategy for change is the creation of fissures in the ruling elite then the book might have a role to play. Some among the wealthy do feel strongly about these topics and are willing to speak up and put their money where their mouth is. Some speak about apologies, other even mention reparations. These are positive developments. 

The question is what is the realistic next step; here the book is less clear, and what is clear doesn’t look feasible to me. The key question is: how do you get the wealthy to start going through this process? What will urge them? Guilt, fear, compassion? Why has this not happened already? What are the forces pulling in this direction? Why can’t we go on repressing for another 200 years, with a bit more tokenism and a bit more guilt-money being dispersed?

Serious problems need serious solutions. And the one proposed in the book is aesthetically pleasing but half-baked. If white supremacy is based on genocide and colonialism then should the money be taken away and those responsible for the crimes tried, at least symbolically? For example, some of the American Founding Fathers held slaves; others agreed that a slave is 3/5 of a person. What about this? Should we impose meaningful financial reparations that would equilibrate the wealth in the society? And do white people even get to have a say in what needs to happen?

I don’t have answers, but I want the discussion around decolonization to become very practical very fast. Otherwise, it will be just another trend and will in no time be tucked away into buzzword territory. I have said it in the past and repeat it again: expecting the wealthy to simply repent and ask for forgiveness without a broader context is just not going to happen. People like Peter Buffett (who wrote the introduction to Decolonizing Wealth) support the process – admirable. Does that mean he’d be willing to give away his wealth to make things heal? I don’t know. I’m yet to see a clear plan.

Without contextualization and a clear way forward, I fear that books like Decolonizing Wealth will be just another “hate read” for those suffering from the status quo, without much practical impact.

Decolonizing foreign aid

The book has, at least, been a conversation starter. The rethinking of foreign aid in the context of decolonizing it is ongoing, and it is a fantastic thing. For too long, white saviors criss-crossed the globe “Saving Africa” with while in the process doing more harm than good at times. Questions are being raised about it that now. The issue of who measures success and how didn’t use to be on the agenda; now it is. 

Foreign aid can foster dependency and prolong conflict. It is also dehumanizing when it uses poverty porn, which Western organizations employ in order to collect money from donors, with whom the technique apparently works. 

Decolonizing wealth is, therefore, now on the agenda of foundations and international organizations alike. The COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to the trend. The question is how to do it. Since most of these organizations are led by white people (and token minorities, for good measure) a lot of anxiety and tentativeness goes into the process.

Of course, consultancies are stepping in to guide. Many of them have the credibility of being led from the Global South. This bodes well. But iNGOs should be careful to do their own housework, which no consultancy can do for them. It is fine to have pledges. It is better, but more difficult, to decolonize from the ground up, taking cues from your local partners and receiving feedback from you own staff of color.

Decolonizing foreign aid: how to keep adding value? 

More and more iNGOs look to invest in the local organizations and empower them. Good. But they should not go away. Instead, they should find a better way to add value. Local organizations on their own can’t change the world as quickly and as holistically as we need it to change. They access to capital, an exchange of expertise, and support with logistics and back-office services, to name just a few practical matters. This “globally connected” element is where iNGOs can indeed help.

The decolonized approach is, I should say at the end, at the core of why the Altruist League was conceived. Investing money directly into grassroots action around the world without strings attached and without the humiliating grantseeking process is what the non-colonial approach should be about.

Our approach can be copied by others, but they need systems to allow them to do so. Finding and tracking potential partners, takes work. Just transferring money internationally to thousands of accounts is a challenge in itself. Measuring results in the real world took us years of developing our AI / ML model. And so on. This is why I predict that, when it comes to the practicalities, many iNGOs looking to decolonize their approach will eventually come to organizations like the League for support.