Black and Brown Leadership in Crisis: Investing Where It Matters
For Black and Brown leaders, prolonged crises—whether political, economic, or institutional—can wear us down. The constant push to stay engaged, advocate, and resist can leave us exhausted. And when institutions continue to demonstrate harm rather than transformation, disengagement can feel like the only path forward. But disengagement isn’t always apathy. There is a critical difference between checking out completely and choosing not to invest in institutions that actively harm us.
Recognizing the Difference Between Apathy and Self-Preservation
Apathy is often framed as indifference, a lack of care or concern for what happens next. But for many of us, what looks like apathy is actually a conscious decision to protect ourselves from spaces that deplete, disregard, or tokenize us. The difference is not in whether we care but in where we choose to place our energy when systems show us they are unwilling to change.
Institutions that uphold inequity often rely on our continued investment—our labor, ideas, networks, and credibility—to maintain legitimacy. They depend on our participation, even as they resist shifting power or resources. The moment we withdraw our investment, the cracks begin to show. Refusing to keep fueling harmful spaces is not apathy—it’s strategy.
Where Are You Placing Your Leadership Capital?
Equity-Responsive Leaders (ERLs) understand that leadership capital—our time, expertise, and influence—is valuable. Every meeting we attend, every project we drive forward, and every partnership we legitimize is an investment. When institutions refuse to center equity in real, material ways, we have to ask:
- Is this system worth my leadership capital?
- Am I being asked to participate without power or decision-making authority?
- Is this institution extracting from me without accountability or meaningful change?
- What would it look like to invest my leadership capital elsewhere?
Instead of staying in spaces that harm us, ERLs assess where our energy can have real impact. Sometimes that means building new institutions, strengthening grassroots movements, or investing in networks that prioritize collective care and justice.
Reframing Disengagement as a Leadership Choice
We’ve been conditioned to believe that disengagement is failure. That if we step away, we’re letting “them” win. But walking away from harm is not surrender—it’s a leadership choice. Institutions that refuse to change are betting that we’ll either burn ourselves out trying to fix them or remain too exhausted to challenge their authority. Refusing to play that game is a power move.
Choosing where and how we show up is part of sustaining our leadership. It ensures we can continue doing the work—not on their terms, but on ours.
Where Are You Placing Your Leadership Capital?
For Black and Brown leaders navigating prolonged crisis, the question is not whether to care—it’s how to care strategically. Where will your leadership capital have the most impact? Where can you build, nurture, and lead without being diminished? These are the questions that define not just our survival, but our ability to thrive.
Because at the end of the day, leadership is not about proving our endurance in broken systems. It’s about ensuring that our energy is invested in the futures we actually want to see.