First, as an international educator who sends student abroad to learn about international development and social impact, I want to thank Courtney for this piece. It’s a conversation that many in our field have discussed for years.

One of the questions raised by this piece for me is:

What does it mean to work toward a more just, equitable, and sustainable society?

This question matters because it defines what legitimate work in development is and who the legitimate actors toward justice and equity are. As I read the piece, I’m challenged to find where I fit into the equation as a White male of privilege. Courtney suggests that perhaps my privilege means I should focus on local issues instead of global ones. I agree that reductive seduction is a real and dangerous pitfall. But, another major problem exists, too. There are leaders in the social justice movement in the US who tell me that my privilege excludes me from being a legitimate actor here, too. While it’s certainly not true of everyone, I have been given the implicit and explicit message that my skin color, gender, sexual orientation, and economic privilege discredit me as an actor and voice toward equity and justice. I respect those voices. I hear them. I appreciate that I am afforded power by our society that is both easy for me to wield and can be tremendously destructive to others.

But, I want to push back against this framing of privilege. It seems to assume that the privilege bestowed by societal systems has an absolute hold on whomever it is placed. I define privilege as a measure of the power afforded to individuals through societal systems and cultures. I do not define it as absolute. I do not believe that it robs any individual of their capacity to develop humanizing relationships with others. Privilege may suppress that capacity, but it does not eliminate it.

Why does this definition matter? For two reasons: First, my belief is that social justice and equity are best pursued by creating humanizing relationships among people. Second, everyone is capable of creating humanizing relationships if individuals pursue critical consciousness of how privilege affects their relationships with others and themselves.

The problems described by Courtney as “reductive seduction” are the result of dehumanizing assumptions by youth of privilege about communities that aren’t their own. The assumption that water — a fundamental human need — could be provided to a community if only someone with low or no skill picked up a shovel for a few days or weeks is deeply problematic. It assumes that the local community is either too lazy or too inept to accomplish this task on their own. It fails to recognize that the complexity of human relationships we see in our home communities occurs in other communities of humans, too. Perhaps most frighteningly, it assumes that the presence of volunteers and a new resource in the community won’t be seen as a tool for power by members of the community who may wield it benevolently or malevolently. But, as with the example of Molly Melching, someone who has unlocked and developed their capacity to build humanizing relationships with others can contribute to justice and equity, even outside of their community of origin.

Becoming conscious of one’s privilege does not negate one’s privilege. It’s absolutely still there. We can’t “conscious” our privilege away. But, the pursuit of critical consciousness is about consistently and forever reflecting upon one’s privilege, actions, and the consequences of those actions. This process, when coupled with a commitment to love, is what can allow even the most privilege laden to see others as humans and build relationships accordingly. My belief is that this process does not end; there is no point of enlightenment. And, it is a path littered with mistakes and errors that can be painful to the self and others (as is true of all learning paths). Most importantly, this pursuit of critical consciousness can be taught. There are faith communities and schools and families throughout our world that value inquiry over definitive answers. They value empathy over judgement. Our most revered social change leaders — Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Prof. Yunus, and others — have called us to practice these skills and to see even the most violently oppressive has humans deserving our love.

Courtney is correct that there are many organizations facilitating young people to volunteer and “serve” in problematic ways in communities that are not their own. I would say that this is more common than not in the field of student travel and service learning. But, our aspiration should not be to stop facilitating opportunities for students to engage with foreign communities or critical issues related to justice, equity, and sustainability. Rather, that engagement should be structured to be one that ethically facilitates the formation of humanizing relationships across barriers of privilege, both those that are external and those that are internal. These should be learning opportunities carefully designed for the outcome of supporting students as they begin their pursuit of critical consciousness.