Although experts’ experience tells us that this approach does not work, and that giving people the opportunity to be supported in their own language actually empowers them, repression is increasing. As in: ‘you speak Dutch or you will be punished’. That is not only antisocial and counterproductive, it is also interesting. Because the two largest budgets of the Flemish government, Education and Welfare, are at the same time the two places where that repression will be most present. And therefore also the places where resistance to that repression is within reach. Let me clarify.
Getting moving
In the welfare sector and education, there is traditionally policy influence through the umbrella organizations — the organizations or schools largely implement the policy. If the policy becomes more antisocial, then on average they do too. And that is often subtle. I myself was once surprised by the waiting list in the sector for people with disabilities and how that waiting list was managed for years by the welfare institutions themselves.
But then the question is what you should do as a teacher or social worker. How far is too far? When does implementing make you complicit? When do you say no, this is not acceptable to me, this is not why I took on this task. Are you merely a service organization, or can you also be a movement? And when is the indignation great enough to get moving?
In my view, the most successful organizations — those that grow, make an impact, gather more members or money, and receive broad support — are those that are both a service and a movement. If you present yourself ideologically as a school and set yourself against the policy, you become very attractive. Organizations that show their true colors attract the best employees. Not unimportant with such scarcity on the labor market.
Is that even allowed?
You should not ask that question. You should not ask whether you are allowed to start a movement. The right question is: how do you do it, and how explicitly? Because resistance is often found in small things. What do you do, for example, as a school, if it is decided tomorrow that pupils with insufficient knowledge of Dutch will have fewer rights, or that teachers may no longer wear a headscarf? Do you implement that blindly, or do you deal with it creatively and freely?
There is always an opportunity to respond, always room to formulate a position. Or even to oppose a measure. There is always an opening, even though many organizations and schools think there is not. Thinking of yourself as less free than you actually are leads to disaster. In history, evil has been done all too often because doing good fell outside someone’s job description.
There are advantages too
As a welfare organization, an actor in education, or a social organization, you do not have to implement policy unquestioningly. Where you disagree, you have to get moving. Incidentally, you can do that much more easily than other initiatives. As an organization, you have the advantage of direct contact with your target group; they are already involved. You have address databases — of teachers, parents, or people on waiting lists — that a movement without service provision can only dream of.
In Flanders, moreover, we have given a number of central tasks, such as education and welfare, to civil society. For example, unemployment benefits are handled by the trade union, and sickness benefits by the health insurance fund. That extensive set of tasks gives civil society more authority and influence. And the broader civil society is, the more the door is open to being politically present in society as well. As a social space, civil society really should dare to engage in politics.
Scary is possible too
I understand that it is scary; to bite the hand that feeds you. To antagonize your subsidy provider. Because if you resist the policy, the policymakers will not be pleased about it. Still, there is a point at which that policy can alienate you from your original mission. If you believe that through education you can give children opportunities, but the policy asks you to exclude, do you still feel you are in the right place? When you work in a social organization because you want to support vulnerable people, but policy makes that difficult or impossible, what is left of your mission or motivation?
It is scary to resist, especially against your client. But if the policy touches the core of your mission, or stands between you and your mission, it may well be the only logical move. You once started with a conviction, with belief in your contribution. If you are restricted in that, then allow the indignation, stay true to yourself, and let your anger feed the resistance, even if it is sometimes scary.
