Read on Twitter
(thread) We've had an incredible conversation at @EngnRoom about what we mean by resilience as a team. The concept plays a central role to our new strategy, but we find that more static definitions (= the ability to bounce back from trauma) are perpetuating existing injustices.
One of the key tensions in the various understandings of resilience is how they contextualize change. Resilience can be appealing concept b/c it works to preserve the status quo, rather than "challenging existing power structures.” (More here: https://nonprofitquarterly.org/the-problem-with-resilience/)
As my colleague @nthabi_Afrikan put it, if it wasn't for systematic oppression, violence and injustice, people wouldn't need to be resilient to begin with. ( https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/19/health/resilience-overrated.html) In that sense resilience in and of itself is not about systematic change, or not automatically.
And yet we believe that resilience is a form of self-care => in and of itself a strong political act. We cherish and promote a dynamic understanding of resilience that prioritises preparedness over bouncing back, collective support and adaptability over individual 'grit'.
Our understanding of resilience (both on the individual and collective levels) builds on feminist notions of adaptation and care, e.g. thinkers like @adriennemaree whose approach to resilience draws its inspirations from nature and ecology. http://adriennemareebrown.net/tag/emergent-strategy/
We will be back with more on our blog. In the meantime, curious to hear your thoughts!
