From my action project, I’ve learned a lot, and not just in the scope of what our project was primarily focused on, which was hunger in America. This class taught me a lot about hunger- what it looks like, what causes it, what it looks like depending on where you are in the world. But I didn’t quite understand why the issue was so deeply rooted in our food and political systems, why the cycle was so difficult to break. That is, until I tried to start a conversation about it.
There are people and organizations who wield certain amounts of power, which can be used to exact change. It’s difficult to change things for the better, even when your life depends on it, when you’re poor. For our action project, we tried to collaborate with the non-profit Farestart, which trains food-insecure and historically disadvantaged people to work in the food industry. While they seemed eager to collaborate to create a short film, the power ultimately rested with them. They had the discretion to reply when the wanted to, commit the time they wanted to.
This made me realize that when trying to discuss or solve rampant issues like hunger, the discretion on how quickly to move forward lies with both the party with the power and the party with the least to lose. To me, it felt like it was imperative we set up interviews- my grade could depend on it. I felt like there was a lot at stake, which was not a feeling on the other end.
I’m lucky I was able to have this realization in a low-stakes environment- I have food on my table, a roof over my head, and my grade hopefully won’t tank too much due to our original project plans falling through. But there are people who have this realization in environments when they do have a lot to lose, sometimes even their lives. This class, and more specifically, this project opened my eyes not only to real-world issues, but real-world consequences people face.