Funded NGOs versus unfunded activism

I was reading a post by a senior leader in the NGO space who used the phrase "we have professionalized and packaged activism." It got me thinking. How did this happen? And what does it mean for those working for human rights?

Civil society, NGOs and movements are not all the same. There is considerable variation in every aspect — but above all in finance. Some are well funded, some have moderate resources, and many have none at all. As a social worker or activist, what you "earn" every month can vary from little or nothing to corporate-sector-like paychecks with insurance. I have worked at different points of this spectrum.

What makes raw, unfunded activism powerful

1. Not belonging to a heavy structure or institution can lend a great deal of freedom to the issues raised and the methods of expression.
2. Complete control over your form of activism.
3. Better chances of staying connected with ground realities — of living and working amongst the people whose rights you're advocating for.
4. People and communities are the highest place of accountability — not answerable to any donor or funder.
5. No administrative overheads. A simple, flexible structure, if any — which can be powerful depending on the self-discipline of individuals and the group.

The real downsides of unfunded activism

1. Sustainability. Activists also have families and needs to care for. Not having a stable income can be devastating. It can be hard to plan a family or have any financial goal.
2. Family strain. I know of many family members — especially spouses or children — of activists who feel pain more than pride. They would do anything to stay away from the social sector, uninspired by the activist in the family who cared deeply for society but could not provide for their own.
3. Particularly hard on women. Women activists from lower-class or -caste backgrounds often have no security behind them. Even as they do inspiring, life-altering work — such as supporting rape survivors in low-income settings — they often struggle with loneliness and insecurity themselves. One long spell of illness can be quite revealing.
4. Accountability can be unclear. The absence of institutional backing can make accountability to people vague, hard to track, or simply absent.
5. Zero social security. Many colleagues tell me this is exactly why they choose the funded NGO space over unfunded movements.

What do you think?

The purpose of this post was not to lead you to a conclusion about which form is better or worse — but to articulate the realities and choices people make within the civil society world. It is an incredibly challenging space to work in.

I will leave you with something my mentor in Vidarbha once said:

"NGO bhi ek nasha hai. Kabhi chodta nahi."

(NGOs are also an addiction. They never let you go.) — my mentor in Vidarbha