Maurice Mitchell’s article Building Resilient Organizations: Toward Joy and Durable Power in a Time of Crisis provides a critical framework for understanding the challenges facing social justice movements today. His analysis highlights structural and ideological weaknesses within activist spaces, particularly the ways in which identity politics, organizational dysfunction, and internal conflict can undermine collective action. As community developers and social workers, we must explore how these insights apply to our work and how we can build stronger, more sustainable organizations in the face of these modern challenges.
Understanding the Current Landscape
The past decade has seen profound shifts in social justice work. Movements that emerged from grassroots efforts have increasingly become formalized, often aligning with nonprofit structures that, while providing resources and legitimacy, can also stifle radical change. The tension between urgency and sustainability, activism and administration, has led to burnout, disillusionment, and, in some cases, organizational collapse.
Mitchell identifies several key tendencies that hinder movement growth and effectiveness:
Neoliberal Identity Politics: The reduction of political strategy to individual identity, which can obscure broader systemic goals.
Maximalism: A tendency to demand the most idealistic position, leading to internal purges and fractured coalitions.
Anti-Leadership Attitudes: A skepticism toward leadership that prevents the development of experienced, accountable leaders.
Organizational Instability: A failure to build structures that endure beyond immediate crises, leading to reactive rather than strategic movements.
Applying These Lessons to Community Development and Social Work
As professionals engaged in community work, we must recognize the relevance of these challenges within our own organizations and initiatives. The work of supporting communities—whether through direct services, advocacy, or organizing—demands resilience, adaptability, and intentional leadership.
1. Building Ideological Clarity Without Dogmatism
One of the greatest takeaways from Mitchell’s article is the need for ideological clarity within movements and organizations. However, clarity should not translate into rigid orthodoxy. Instead, we should encourage open dialogue, ensuring that strategy is guided by shared values rather than imposed litmus tests of ideological purity. Social workers and community organizers can benefit from fostering spaces that prioritize collective learning and adaptive approaches to social change.
2. Reframing Leadership as Collective Stewardship
Mitchell warns against the rejection of leadership, which can result in informal hierarchies and decision-making processes that lack accountability. To build stronger organizations, we must cultivate leadership that is transparent, accountable, and rooted in service. This means developing mentorship structures, supporting emerging leaders, and ensuring that leadership is not merely performative but deeply engaged in the mission of the organization.
3. Practicing Sustainable Organizing
Many of us have witnessed the cycle of burnout in activist spaces, where the urgency of the work leads to overextension and emotional exhaustion. Sustainability must be a foundational principle of our organizations. This involves setting realistic goals, respecting work-life boundaries, and acknowledging that long-term transformation requires endurance. Community workers must push for structures that support well-being, ensuring that organizations do not merely demand labor but invest in the people who make the work possible.
4. Strengthening Institutional Resilience
Mitchell outlines how many movement spaces lack institutional durability. Nonprofits and grassroots initiatives alike must invest in structural stability—developing clear decision-making processes, securing financial independence where possible, and establishing governance models that ensure continuity beyond individual personalities or funding cycles. Social workers, who often navigate both service provision and advocacy, must advocate for sustainable frameworks that allow movements and organizations to thrive beyond crisis moments.
5. Balancing Identity and Strategy
While identity plays a crucial role in shaping perspectives and experiences, it should not be weaponized in ways that fragment movements. Rather than using identity as a test of legitimacy, we should embrace it as a tool for coalition-building. Social work and community development demand an intersectional approach—one that acknowledges diverse lived experiences while focusing on shared goals and systemic change.
The Impact on College Campuses in the Current Political Climate
The challenges outlined in Mitchell’s article are particularly relevant to college campuses, which have historically served as hotbeds for activism and social change. However, in the current political environment, universities are facing intensified scrutiny, both from external political forces and from internal ideological conflicts. The rise of legislative interference in higher education, increased polarization, and financial instability are straining the ability of colleges to serve as spaces for critical discourse and community-building.
Cornell University, for example, has recently implemented a hiring freeze in response to financial uncertainty driven by potential federal research funding cuts and tax legislation affecting endowment income. This hiring pause reflects broader concerns within higher education about sustainability and strategic budgeting in an increasingly volatile economic landscape. Faculty hiring, staff appointments, and administrative roles are now subject to strict evaluation, with only mission-critical positions advancing through a central review process. These measures, while necessary for financial stability, can also hinder the university’s ability to support student needs, maintain academic excellence, and invest in diversity and inclusion initiatives.
If college movements are to remain effective, they must navigate these constraints with strategic foresight. Building alliances across disciplines, ensuring financial independence through diversified funding sources, and prioritizing coalition-building over ideological purity can help student organizations remain impactful despite institutional and political challenges.
Moving Toward Stronger, More Joyful Organizations
If we are to build organizations that are resilient, strategic, and joyful, we must heed Mitchell’s call for transformation. This means moving beyond reactionary tendencies and toward proactive, well-structured, and deeply principled work. The goal is not simply to survive organizational challenges but to create spaces that empower individuals, uplift communities, and sustain movements for the long haul.
By integrating these principles into our work as social workers, community developers, and campus organizers, we can help shape a future where activism is not just about resistance but about building durable, impactful institutions capable of leading real change.
What would it look like to create organizations that prioritize joy alongside justice? How do we ensure that our movements not only fight against oppression but also build models of liberation? These are the questions we must continue to ask as we work toward a more sustainable, equitable world.
Comments