Shell Trapp is a wheelchair user and top trainer at the national training
information Center in Chicago.
kelly
URL: http://tenant.net/Organize/orgdyn.html
Dynamics of Organizing
In a series on Organizing and Neighborhood Preservation
published by National Training and Information Center
by Shel Trapp
_________________________________________________________________
Table of Contents
* Introduction
* Power Analysis
* Strategy and Tactics
* Developing an Issue Group
* Coalition Organizing
* Building Power & Victories
* The Myth of the Organizer
_________________________________________________________________
Copyright (c) 1976 by Shel Trapp. All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form by anyone
for profit. Any part of it may be used and distributed by community
groups. Permission is not required, but please credit National
Training and Information Center and the author. (Third Printing June,
1977)
Additional copies may be obtained from:
National Training and Information Center (NTIC)
121 West Superior Street
Chicago, Illinois 60610
_________________________________________________________________
"Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did, and it
never will. Find out just what people will submit to, and you have
found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be
imposed upon them; and this will continue till they have resisted
with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are
prescribed by the endurance of those who they suppress."
-- Frederick Douglass, 1849
_________________________________________________________________
Blessed be the fighters:
The unknown angry man at the end of the idiot-stick with his dream
of freedom;
Jawsmiths and soap boxers, gandy-dancers setting the high iron --
Toward the ultimate Medicine flat: blessed, blessed, blessed.
Blessed the agitator; whose touch makes the dead walk;
Blessed the organizer; who discovers the strength of wounds;
Blessed all fighters.
-- Thomas McGrath,
Letter to an Imaginery Friend
_________________________________________________________________
Introduction
Shel Trapp, an organizer for the past fifteen years, is regarded by
many as one of the best in the field. Having served as director of two
of the best known Alinsky style organizations: Organization for a
Better Austin (OBA) and the Northwest Community Organization (NCO), he
later organized a powerful coalition in Chicago known as the West Side
Coalition.
In 1972, the West Side Coalition sponsored the First National Housing
Conference which attracted over 2,000 delegates from 38 states and 79
cities. The purpose of the gathering was twofold--to share information
and organizing efforts related to neighborhood deterioration and
abuses of federal housing programs; and to develop ongoing local
organizations and strategies to deal with causes of neighborhood
deterioration and put together a national network of grassroots
organizations committed to the preservation of our greatest natural
resource: the neighborhood.
Since 1972 much has been accomplished. Local neighborhood
organizations have been developed throughout the country, such as the
powerful Metropolitan Area Housing Alliance in Chicago, to join with a
national network of organizations, National People's Action (NPA,
formerly National People's Action on Housing), as an
information-sharing, strategy-developing coalition to deal with issues
of concern to neighborhood people.
Currently, Shel Trapp serves as national coordinator of the National
Training and Information Center which provides training, information,
consultation and technical assistance for organizers, community
leaders and grassroots organizations. Mr. Trapp is also director of
Chicago Area Services Program.
In addition to his time spent consulting with organizations and people
around the country, Shel Trapp has put together some of his thoughts
on organizing, power and strategy. Some of these essays are included
in this pamphlet, Dynamics of Organizing.
Power Analysis
Whenever an organizer approaches a new community or a new group,
he/she should begin immediately to analyze the power structure in that
community or group. All communities, churches, clubs, organizations
have a power structure, real or assumed, out of which that group
operates.
Who appears to have the power?
This is relatively easy to determine. Who is on City Council; who was
honored at the "Good Citizen's Award Dinner"; who is on the Board of
Directors of the hospital, bank, largest industry; whose name appears
in the paper when an opinion is sought on an issue. Such person or
persons may or may not be the real power in the community, but, at
least on the surface, it appears so; and it may even be assumed by the
group and observers that these people are the actual power structure.
It is important for the organizer not to fall into this easy
assumption. The task of analyzing the power structure is not complete
at this point.
Who has the power?
In a city, this is not that easy to determine. Much like an organizer,
this person or persons prefers to remain a behind the scenes actor.
He/ She may well be a member of a family who at one time had great
wealth or is respected because of their "name". Quite often this
person turns up in the field of finances or organized crime. In a day
when political campaign contributions are becoming public knowledge,
that is a good place to begin ferreting out where the real power lies.
Also, as the organizer talks with those who appear to have the power,
a question such as, "Whose opinion do you really respect?" should be
asked. This question may begin to uncover names that previously have
not surfaced in the press or on the boards of directors.
Within a smaller organization or a community it is usually easier to
determine whether those who appear to have the power in reality do
have the power, because this person will surface at the time of a
decision or when an opinion is required. Also, in the smaller group
the person who has the real power usually does not have an ulterior
motive for remaining behind the scenes. If those who appear to have
the power--president, chairman, etc. are not the same as those who
really make decisions, it is usually because the real power of the
organization is temporarily out of office because of the constitution
of the group.
Who has power in specific arenas?
If an organizer is going to use the churches in his effort, he had
best be aware of who appears to have the power, as well as who has the
real power in any kind of clergy group, whether it be officially
organized or an informal network. In any small community as well,
there are usually some people that the organizer must know about
before making a move. If, in ringing door bells on a block, the name
of "Mrs. Jones" comes up as a person that three or four people
mention, then the wise organizer touches base with "Mrs. Jones" before
he makes a move. Similarly, if the name of the reputed power figure
rarely emerges, investigation into his/ her actions ought to be
pursued before false assumptions are made.
When and why does the organizer take on the existing power structure
in a community?
(A) When the power structure no longer, if it ever did, represents the
community.
A community organization discovered that there were 300 abandoned
homes in their community and 50 more close to foreclosure. People on
the streets were very concerned about the issue. However, the
organization board of directors, made up of two clergymen, one city
official, one county official, one individual who was running for
office, and two people who had stopped coming to meetings, did not
feel that this was a legitimate issue.
The organizer, without the sanction of the board, pulled ten community
people together and they scheduled a public meeting. Three hundred
people showed up and they began to deal with the issue of abandonment
and foreclosure. After the meeting, the board's position was, "Well,
it probably is an issue, but it should have been handled a different
way." The steering committee of the foreclosure issue has now become
the real power of the organization although they hold no seats on the
board. The organizer had read the issue correctly: there was a latent
power base that could be mobilized quickly to override the
un-representative position of the board of directors.
(B) When the power structure is incapable or unwilling to deal with
real issues.
A community was faced with slum buildings, 70 children in a classroom
at the public schools, racial tensions at the high school. The
community organization held a Memorial Day Parade to increase
community pride! Rather than dealing with the pressing issues of
concern to many community people, the existing organization (reputed
power structure) attempted to sidetrack reality. Community pride may
be essential in maintaining neighborhood stability, but it could not
change the hearts and minds of absentee landlords who were callous to
the health and welfare of their inner-city tenants; it would not
convince the Board of Education to ease crowded school facilities nor
could it erase the causes of the racial tensions at the high school.
In this case, the organization "looked the other way" as the
conditions became worse. The Memorial Day Parade, instead of
installing pride, brought about cynicism and anger towards the people
who supposedly had the power to improve the quality of life in the
community.
The organizer did not have to destroy or take on the existing power
structure, in this case. But its unwillingness to deal with the
crucial issues in the community it brought about its own destruction
when the rank-and-file community people became disenchanted with the
existing organization.
How does the organizer take on the existing power base?
(A) Never by himself, only with a developed power base.
(B) By putting the existing power base into a position of reaction.
When the organizer finds a group of people who have an issue and the
existing organization is not dealing with it, take that group into the
meeting of the existing organization. The reaction of the existing
organization is often, "We have been working on that for a long time.
Why haven't you come to our meetings before?" To put it bluntly, quite
often the newcomers get shit on. As they leave the meeting confused,
they are fertile ground for the organizer to build a base. If the
existing group accepts the newcomers and begins to move specifically
on their issue, the organizer should have good access to the existing
group because he has delivered new people into the existing
organization. If he plays his cards right, the entire existing
organization should soon be a power base.
(C) By avoiding the existing power base and the issues they are
working on, moving so fast that the existing power base cannot keep up
with the newly emerging group.
A local community had a very articulate group of people who dealt only
with school issues. The Board of Education was happy to deal with this
small group because they never held public meetings and the most
people that this group could deliver was twelve. This select,
articulate group viewed itself as the spokespersons for the community
and would not open up their group to participation by anyone else.
The organizer spent six months building forty-five block clubs that
dealt with housing and sanitation issues. Never did he attempt to move
on education issues. At first, the education people attempted to
disrupt his block club meetings, but within a month there were so many
block club meetings every week that they could not keep up with all
the activity. Since the block clubs did not deal with education
issues, the school group soon lost interest in their existence and the
efforts of the organizer. In a few months, the block clubs had
developed some very strong articulate leadership.
The Board of Education announced that a new school was to be built in
the community. The people who dealt with education issues said they
wanted the school built in the "middle of the community." If that site
was selected, it would mean that seventy-five homes would be razed to
make room for the school. The block clubs could not take this
seriously because, 1/4 mile away from this site, the Board of
Education owned 8 acres of vacant land. Despite this, the Board of
Education announced its plan to demolish the homes so the school could
be in the "middle of the community."
The block clubs reacted: they invited the Board of Education out to
the community and had 400 people at the meeting. The education people
came to the meeting and spoke in favor of the "middle of the community
site." The block clubs demanded the vacant land site. The Board of
Education said that if the community couldn't get together, there
would be no new school. The block club leaders requested that the
Board of Education come out to another meeting in two weeks, at which
time all the organizations in the community would testify as to their
position on the school site, and they would abide by the decision of
the majority. The Board of Education agreed.
At the follow-up meeting 600 people showed up. The blocks produced
forty-three of their clubs, two churches, a union and two other
organizations in favor of the vacant land site. The education people
produced themselves, one other group, and the owner of a large vacant
building that would be razed if the "middle of the community" site was
selected.
At the conclusion of the meeting, the leader of the block clubs
announced to the Board of Education that the block clubs now had an
education committee, and from now on the Board of Education would
contact that committee about any plans they might have for the
community. Today, a new school stands on what was once vacant land,
without one home having been demolished.
One is not always so fortunate as to have an existing power base react
in such a strong self-destructing manner as did this group.
One is not always so fortunate as to have an existing power base react
in such a strong self-destructing manner as did this group. However,
it is the organizer's job to force the existing power base, whether in
the church, community or political arena, to react. Existing power
bases make a habit of reacting against the people and the people's
issues. At that point the organizer has the beginnings of a new
people's power base.
(D) Form a coalition under a new coalition name.
Organizations with a history do not like to give up their history or
their autonomy. If they can see a way that they can maintain their
local base, the group may be more willing to give up its name when
dealing with a specific issue. This is particularly true if the issue
is one that the existing local power base has not dealt with or an
issue too big for the existing group to handle. Thus, the organizer
offers more participation through a coalition than the local group has
ever had before, and the possibility of winning on a big issue. The
only condition is that everyone flies under a new flag. That way all
groups see that they are all giving up something to participate in the
coalition.
When existing, but fragmented groups do not want to lose individual
identity and autonomy, an alternative is to form a coalition around an
issue common to all groups but too overwhelming for one group alone to
challenge.
Taking on the existing power base often requires a united effort by
diverse groups so that the people are not played off against each
other by the structure threatened by the idea of relinquishing its
"power".
Conclusion
It is important for the organizer to recognize that, once the analysis
of a power structure is done, this analysis must be continually
reevaluated and updated. Power is not static; it is continually
changing and rearranging quite like the rearranging shape of a bean
bag chair. The organizer must be aware of that, observe its shifts,
anticipate the shifts, and, hopefully, force the shifts in favor of a
people's organization. The organizer who cannot do this will find
himself reading the want ads.
Strategy and Tactics
"Deception is not enough -- the enemy's leaders must be confused;
if possible, driven insane."
-- Mao Tse-Tung
Strategy and tactics are a critical aspect of organizing. The issue
can be sharp, the people angry and ready to go to battle; but, if the
tactics are wrong or the strategy unclear, the entire battle can be
lost. Therefore, in organizing it is important that the organizer,
leaders and constituency be clear on the strategy. In developing
strategy the organizer should ask these questions:
1. Will the people accept it?
2. Will it dramatize and build the issue?
3. Will it throw the enemy off balance?
4. Will it personalize the enemy?
5. Will it be fun for the people?
6. What alternatives must be planned?
7. Will it get us to the bargaining table?
Will the people accept it?
A new organizer eager to prove his ability in getting groups into
action pushed the leadership very hard on a block that if the slumlord
did not come to the meeting they would go out to his home and picket.
The leadership was not ready for this move and thus reacted negatively
not only to the strategy but also to the idea of having a meeting. The
issue was lost because the people were pushed toward a strategy with
which they did not feel comfortable.
It is important that there be a logical progression in the strategy.
Thus, another organizer went into the same block and suggested a
meeting of just the people on the block to talk about what they wanted
to do about the slum building. At that meeting the residents decided
that they would hold another meeting and invite the slumlord. When he
did not come to the meeting, the people decided that they should hold
another meeting and invite him again because, "It may not have been
convenient for him to come tonight." When the slumlord did not come to
the second meeting, the people decided that they would go to his
house. Thus, the same group which initially had said "No" to going to
the slumlord's house ended up doing that very thing because now it
seemed to them a logical progression. People like to look upon
themselves as being logical. Thus, the organizer will build the
strategy in such a way that each escalation of activity seems very
logical. This is particularly true with new groups. As groups get
battle seasoned, they do not care as much about appearing logical as
they do about winning the fight. The strategy with new groups has to
build slowly and in a logical progression. This takes time, but if the
organizer wants the people to participate in the strategy, then they
must set their own pace and as they do so they will be a part of the
development of the strategy.
Will it dramatize and build the issue?
A community group could not get the alderman to respond to their
demands on rat abatement. Several meetings were held and the
frustration of the community continued to mount. When the alderman
refused to come to yet another meeting on the issue, seventy-five
people went to his office a dead rat up to the door by its tail. Word
quickly spread through the community, the alderman's office was
besieged with calls threatening more rats, the press picked it up and
did a series of articles on the rat issue in that community. Within
one week, rat abatement crews had been through the community twice. In
this case the issue was dramatized so well that there was not time to
build the issue and it was won without further confrontation.
Strategy should be dramatic so that it is evident even to an outsider
that people are upset and want something changed. Dramatization of the
issue which gets the organization press makes it easier to build the
organizational drive out on the streets, thus drawing more people in
to the fight.
Will it throw the enemy off balance?
A good tactic is one which the enemy is not expecting, something which
takes him out of his usual sphere of operation and puts him in an
unfamiliar situation. An organization had several very strong
confrontations with a city agency. It was felt that the city officials
were becoming too accustomed to the confrontational tactics so it was
time to develop a different tactic. It was decided that a priest would
open the meeting with prayer and in the prayer would speak of the
concern of the city officials and their dedication and self
sacrificing for the community. This strategy so unnerved the city
officials that the organization won its Rght. The unexpected had
thrown the enemy so off balance that they could not regain their
composure throughout the entire meeting.
In another case, a Spanish group went to meet with the Board of
Education about the need for more Spanish programs in the school
system. They went into the meeting and only spoke Spanish, forcing the
school administration to get an interpreter and carry on the entire
meeting in Spanish. Again, the enemy was thrown so off balance that he
acquiesced to the demands of the delegation.
Another means of throwing the enemy off balance is to fuse his worlds.
The human animal likes to live in logic tight compartments: in the
office he may be a tough businessman, but on Sunday morning he is an
usher in the local church, or on Tuesday night he is the coach of a
Little League team. The good organizer will develop strategy that will
mix those worlds together.
A contractor had built some very poorly constructed homes and refused
to make any of the needed repairs, despite the fact that under law he
was responsible for those repairs. The organizer found that he was a
highly respected member of his church and, in fact, had often preached
when the minister was on vacation. The group went to the church with
flyers that had a picture of the contractor, his name, the facts about
the poor housing, and then several quotes from scripture, such as,
"Thou shalt not steal", "Thou shalt not bear false witness." The
builder's life was hopelessly mixed, no longer could he be the
respected church man, for now his fellow church members knew that he
had built poor homes.
When you mix the enemy's worlds, he is thrown off balance, giving the
organization an advantage in the battle. "An army cannot be run by
rules of etiquette." (Ts'ao Ts'ao). By not playing by the "rules of
etiquette" the strategies developed fit the circumstances and are
designed to hit the enemy when he least expects to be hit, thus giving
the organization an advantageous position. Saul Alinsky included as a
tactical rule: "Whenever possible go outside of the experience of the
enemy", to cause confusion, frustration and fear.
Will it personalize the enemy?
When an organization goes into battle, it is very important that they
come to understand that the enemy they are fighting is a specific
person. It is much easier to focus the issue and gain participation if
the organization comes to understand that there is someone within the
structure that they are fighting who can give what they want. It is
the chairman of the board, the head of a department or a specific
official. It is not all of city hall, or the entire banking industry.
It is a specific person. For that reason, the strategies are developed
to focus around one person, until that person says that someone else
has the power to make the decision or gives the organization what they
are seeking.
A Latin Coalition was seeking jobs from the telephone company. They
were fighting the personnel department of the phone company, then the
training department of the phone company. It seemed that each new week
brought a new enemy and they were going around in circles. Then the
coalition decided that they would not deal with the entire phone
company but would focus their entire efforts on its president. Cutting
the issue simply: this man is president and he can give us what we
want. The next two months saw a series of activities focusing on the
president. Visits to his office, his home, his church, his private
club, it even included forty people following him around the golf
course one Sunday morning. Needless to say, his game was somewhat off
that day. After two months, the coalition won 2,700 jobs for latinos
to be spread over a two year period.
It is key to the organizing drive that the issue be cut and the
strategies be developed to focus on specific personalities. That way,
people see their problem as having its resolution not in some
bureaucratic system, but in a specific individual.
Will it be fun for the people?
All of our lives are basically quite boring. That is why people watch
so much TV, to live vicariously for a few hours in a different world.
Thus, if at all possible, strategies should be fun for the people who
are participating. That way, they will come back and in telling their
friends and neighbors will become recruiters for the organizer for the
next action.
The people had been trying to meet with a banker whom they were
accusing of not making loans in their community (a practice known as
"red lining"). Finally, they decided to go to his home in one of the
affluent suburbs. In addition to passing out flyers to his neighbors,
several people brought with them red streamers of crepe paper. This
crepe paper was tossed over the roof of the banker's house, wrapped
around the shrubs in the front yard. When the action was over, and
despite the fact that at the front door the banker had agreed to meet
with a group of neighborhood people the following week (which had been
the purpose of the visit), the thing that the people talked about most
in the following week was the fun they had had tossing the red crepe
paper around the banker's yard. By the time the meeting came the
following week, it was very easy to get people to the meeting because
everyone wanted to come to see the banker who had been "redlined" by
the community.
What alternatives must be planned?
Before going into a public meeting or an action it is imperative that
the organizer has gone through with the leadership what their
alternatives are going to be. What are we going to do if the enemy
says "Yes" to demands one and two, but "No" to the third demand? What
are we going to do if he says "Yes" to one and "No" to two and three?
What are we going to do if he doesn't show up? What are we going to do
if he walks out of the meeting? The initial strategy of the group
mentioned earlier that nailed the rat to the alderman's door was to
present the rat to the alderman in his office. Fortunately, they had
thought through what they were going to do if he was not at his
office. When they got there and the office was closed, the alternative
plan of action was put into operation and the hammer and nail was
gotten out of the car and with a great deal of ceremony the rat was
nailed to the alderman's door. If they had not had an alternative
strategy, someone may have thought of that on the spot, but it might
also have resulted in the group deciding to go back home and come back
at a later date, a sure way to kill an organizing drive.
Alternative strategies are key to an organizing effort so that even if
the circumstances change, the leadership is prepared as far as
possible with a variety of plans to meet the changing circumstances.
It is the enemy that we want to catch off balance and keep off
balance, not the leadership.
Will it get us to the bargaining table?
The purpose of all strategy is to get the organization to a bargaining
table so that they can negotiate out their demands. Thus, strategy is
not developed which will detract from the issue and take the focus off
the main issue. In a battle over an overcrowded school, the leadership
decided that they would stage a boycott to show their power. To
increase the effectiveness of the boycott, it was decided to pass out
flyers to the students the day before saying "No School Tomorrow". As
the flyers were being passed out, a policeman drove up and said that
he was going to arrest the group for contributing to the delinquency
of minors. An attorney in the group wanted to protest the officer's
right to make such an arrest. But immediately the organizer and top
leader gathered all the flyers from the people and gave them to the
policeman. This satisfied him and he drove off. Had someone been
arrested, the battle of the overcrowded school would have been clouded
by the arrest. At this time the police were not the issue, the school
was; and thus nothing could come into the activity that would detract
from the organizing drive on the school issue. The purpose of any
strategy is to lead the organization to the bargaining table, not away
from it.
Conclusion
Recognizing the amount of power the organization has and the amount of
power it is going against, it is critical that sound strategies be
developed which will answer the above questions. In speaking of
strategy Meng states: "Drive him crazy and bewilder him so that he
disperses his forces in confusion." Thus, the organizer attempts to
use strategy in such a way that the organization's power is maximized
and the enemy's power minimized.
Having dealt with these questions in his own mind, the organizer then
sits down with leadership and forces them to go through the same
questions and works with them as to the strategy which they will
select for the meeting or action. If carefully thought out and backed
by enough power, there should be victory at the end of the battle.
Developing an Issue Group
1. Identify an issue.
2. Test the issue.
3. Find a leader or leaders.
4. Hold leadership meeting. Determine: a) meeting place b) agenda and
alternatives c) assignments
5. Hold meeting. Determine: a) action b) needed follow-up c) next
meeting date
6. Put the kill in.
7. Move group to another issue.
Identify an issue.
This occurs in many ways. Someone may call the organization's office
and complain of an abandoned car or a dead tree. As you are talking
with people, whether it's in a laundromat, their front door or at an
ice cream social, the good organizer is continually looking for
issues. A casual gripe like, "Our streets haven't been cleaned in
months." can be the seeds of an organizing drive. The organizer may
see an abandoned house on a block and begin to talk with people in the
area about the danger of that vacant building.
When probing for an issue, it is important to push to the point where
people articulate a specific issue, not a glaring generality. An
organizer doesn't accept a response of "I don't like all the slum
buildings." The organizer at this point pushes, "Which one is the
worst?" or "Would you say that that one across the street is the
worst?"
The organizer is continually fishing for issues, when one seems to be
hooked, it must be identified and made as specific and clear as
possible so that when the organizer is testing the issue it is clear
what is being tested and to what people are responding.
Test the issue
Just because one person brings up a problem or the organizer sees
something that looks like an issue does not make it an issue. To an
organizer an issue is that around which people can be mobilized. So
that when something comes up, be it painting the garbage cans red or
that there are rats in the alley, the issue is immediately tested.
"Some of your neighbors are concerned about the rats in the alley; if
we have a meeting, would you be interested in coming to the meeting?"
If everyone in the area says, "There are no rats in the alley" then
the organizer can be reasonably sure that a dead end on that issue has
been reached. However, if several people respond that they are sick of
seeing rats or afraid that children will be bitten, then it appears
that an issue has been found and enough people are concerned that a
meeting can be held.
Find a leader or leaders
Particularly with new groups, the organizer has to trust instinct and
luck. Who brought up the issue? In talking with people who seemed to
be the most angry about the issue, is there someone on the block or in
the area whose name has come up several times as someone who knows the
community?
When such a person (or persons) is found, the organizer attempts to
get a couple of people together to discuss what they want to do. When
talking to people at this point, the meeting is not billed as a
leadership meeting--rather just a couple of people from the block are
getting together to talk about what we can do about the rats in the
alley.
Hold a leadership meeting
This is the first step in the training of leaders. The organizer must
make the ground rules clear. Involve as many people as possible. The
organizer doesn't speak for the group. The people make their own
choices about how to move on the issues. We must move on issues, not
just talk about them. The following quote of Alfred North Whitehead
reaffirms this point. "We cannot think first and act afterwards. From
the moment of birth we are immersed in action and can only fitfully
guide it by taking thought."
After introductions are over and, if the organizer is lucky, a can of
beer has been popped, it is time to get down to business.
* What is the issue?
* What are the things we can do about the issue?
* Of these things, which one do we want to do first?
* When and where do we have a meeting of more people so we can get
support for this action?
* Who is going to chair the meeting?
* What is the agenda?
* Who is going to pass out flyers or ring door bells?
* Do we want to notify churches or other groups in the area about
the meeting?
* Do we want to notify the press?
With new groups and people who are not accustomed to community
meetings, it is important that the leadership understand that this is
their meeting and they have responsibility for making sure that it
comes off. It is also important that the meeting be held as close
physically to the issue as possible. A home, a church, an agency or
lodge, or as was the case in one community, a vacant lot on the
street. Whatever is easiest and most convenient and comfortable for
the people.
Hold a meeting
When the notices for the meeting have gone out, phone calls made and
door bells rung, the agenda made up, the organizer can only chew gum,
smoke, pace and, in some rare cases, pray that people will show up.
If the prayers are answered and people begin to show up, the task of
the organizer is to meet people as they come in and prepare them for
the meeting. So that if the leadership has decided that after
discussion of the issue they are going to suggest that the group sweep
the trash out of the alley and take it to the front yard of a city
official, the organizer tests the idea.
"What do you think we ought to do about the trash in the alley?"
"Gee, I don't know."
"Well, some people are talking about sweeping it up ourselves."
"Sounds good to me."
"You know, when we get all that trash together at the end of the
alley, some people are even suggesting that we dump it in "Jones'",
the commissioner of sanitation, front yard."
"Terrific idea!"
With several positive responses like this, the organizer keys in the
leadership that it looks like the people are ready to accept the
battle plan. If the organizer gets a negative reaction to all or part
of the proposed strategy, the leadership is informed that the going
may be rough and perhaps a fall back position would be to invite
"Jones" to a follow-up meeting.
At this meeting, several things are very important.
1. Make sure you get a sign-in sheet.
2. Make sure that the leadership forces the group to make some
decision about the issue. They are going to ask someone who can do
something about the issue to come to the next meeting. They are
going to write someone about the issue. It is critical that some
step toward resolving the issue be taken, so that they don't
decide to meet next week to decide what we are going to do about
the issue. That was the purpose of this meeting.
3. Just before the meeting is over, there should be a re-cap of the
decisions that have been made so everyone understands what the
next steps will be. Also in the re-cap, the date, time and place
of the next meeting should be set.
Put the kill in.
The issue has been cut, a meeting held, a course of action determined.
Now the organizer's task is to continue to work with the leadership
and group to win the issue.
Move the group to a new issue.
As the group is celebrating its victory, the organizer is attempting
to get them to take the next issues. This can be something that has
come up at one of the meetings or something that the organizer has
heard while on the street. Then the process starts over again.
Using this outline, let's take a case history and apply the previous
outline to the case.
Case Study
Identifying an issue
An organizer working in a changing neighborhood has found three homes
that whites had sold for under $20,000 and within two weeks blacks had
bought for over $30,000, the realtor walking off with the difference.
A school built for 800, with an enrollment of 1,600 (one class was
even meeting in the boys' lavatory). A slum building where a child had
lead poisoning. All of these seemed like good issues to him. It was
impossible to get people to buy into any of these issues. Finally, he
began to ask people what they thought was the issue.
Finally, at one door the lady said that the thing that was wrong with
the neighborhood was that shopping carts from the supermarket on the
corner were being taken out of the store and left around the
neighborhood. Children were playing with them in the street,
scratching parked cars and someone almost hit a child last week. In
addition, they were left out in the alley and you had to stop your car
and get out to move the cart.
Testing the issue
The organizer could not believe that anyone would be interested in
such a petty issue, particularly since he had identified so many major
issues in the community. In talking with other people on the block, he
mentioned that some of the neighbors were talking about the shopping
carts which were out in the community. The response was unanimous --
people wanted to do something about the issue and were willing to come
to a meeting.
Finding a leader or leaders
The organizer went back to the woman who had originally brought up the
issue and told her that several people were interested in coming to a
meeting. He asked the woman if she and a couple of her friends and the
organizer could sit down tomorrow night and talk about the meeting.
Leadership meeting
The organizer introduced himself and stated that a lot of people were
concerned about the shopping carts and that they had to plan a meeting
and an agenda for the meeting and a location for the meeting. It was
decided that the meeting would be at the woman's home who had
originally brought up the idea and that she and a neighbor would
co-chair the meeting. They would try to get out of the meeting a
committee to go up to the supermarket to talk with the manager about
the problem. The three people present agreed to bring two neighbors
each and pass out flyers on their block.
Hold a meeting
Twelve people came to the meeting and spent a great deal of time
discussing the fact that the Chicago Bears didn't have much of a team
this year. Finally, the organizer had to say, "I thought we came to
discuss the issue of the shopping carts." After much discussion, it
was agreed that a committee would go to the supermarket the next
Saturday morning to talk with the manager. It was agreed that only six
people would go because they were sure that the manager was a nice guy
who would be helpful in solving the problem. Six people signed up to
go. They agreed to meet at the woman's home at 10:00 a.m. Saturday.
Put the kill in
Five people showed up Saturday morning so the group stopped by the
sixth person's home on the way to the supermarket and picked him up.
When they got to the supermarket, the manager kept them waiting for
twenty minutes. Then, when they told him what they were there about,
he looked at the blacks in the group and said, "I didn't have this
problem until you people moved in." This triggered the group and they
began to shout at the manager; he ordered them out of the store or he
would call the police. Immediately, the organizer suggested that they
go to someone's house and plan their next step. The people said they
wanted a meeting on Tuesday night and they would suggest to the group
that the next week they go to the supermarket and everyone would buy
one item and take a shopping cart home with them.
The meeting was held, 21 people came. The committee made its report of
what had happened and suggested the battle plan. Someone volunteered
their garage to store the shopping carts. It was also decided that
everyone would meet the next Saturday morning to return the shopping
carts to the store.
The group was so successful that by Saturday morning the supermarket
had no shopping carts and the garage was full. Seventeen people showed
up to return the carts. So a parade was held taking a very indirect
route to the supermart. By the time the group reached the supermart,
there were over 75 people -- each one pushing a cart. The manager saw
them coming and called the police.
When the police arrived, it was explained that they were law abiding
citizens and were returning this man's property to him and that if he
couldn't figure out a way to keep the shopping carts in the store then
they would have to do this every Saturday morning. Immediately, the
police were on the side of the people and became an ally in the
confrontation. The manager called the district office and obtained a
promise that by Monday poles would be installed 18" apart so that
carts could not leave the area in front of the supermarket.
Move on to the next issue
On Monday, the organizer drove by the supermarket and saw the poles
going in. He bought a case of beer and went to the block and an
impromptu victory party was had. After people had shared their victory
stories, the organizer asked if there were any other issues that the
group felt they should be working on. Someone suggested that the
building on the corner was really looking bad and maybe they should
have a meeting to decide what to do about it. A meeting date was set
and the group was on to a new issue, the very building that the
organizer had tried, unsuccessfully, to force on the people in the
first place.
Often times, issues which seem crucial to the organizer and a few
people must be temporarily set aside because of "petty" issues. The
shopping cart issue outlined above served as a training vehicle that
introduced people to roles of leadership and the process of organizing
and winning. Too often, organizers and some leaders try to reach for
the stars too soon. Unless an organization is built gradually with
steps of progression it may face an early death. In developing an
issue group it is important to allow people independence in selecting
initial issues so that when larger issues come up they are not totally
dependent upon or controlled by the organizers or certain leaders.
Coalition Organizing
Coalition -- A temporary alliance of factions, parties, etc., for some
specific purpose.
Alliance -- A close association for a common objective.
As the definitions state, it is the commonality of issues which pull
various groups together who otherwise might not work together and in
some cases may even be antagonistic to each other. Thus, the purpose
of coalitions is to amass enough power to win an issue that could not
be won by one group or organization alone.
Protecting Integrity of Coalition Members
Community organizations increasingly find themselves in a position of
facing issues which they cannot win by themselves and therefore must
coalesce with other groups. This is difficult for an established power
organization in that it means they must give up some of their local
autonomy. There are several ways to overcome this problem.
First of all, it is necessary for every member of the coalition to be
represented on the leadership or steering committee. This way, as
strategy is developed, each group is participating in its planning.
When the coalition is having a public meeting it is also good policy
to have at the front table a representative from each of the member
groups. Thus, members of each organization see that they are
represented at the leadership table. Hopefully, each of the leaders
have a demand to give or a statement to make. As these leaders
identify themselves they say, "Mr. Smith, representing Roseland
Organization of Citizens Coalition Against Rent Increases."
In addition, many coalitions list their members on the agenda so that
every organization sees its name. There are two dangers in this.
First, you may reveal to your enemies your weakness, by only listing
three groups when the enemy thought you had 20 (Remember, the illusion
of power is many times beneficial). Secondly, make sure that you list
everyone or you will have some very angry people on your hands because
the name of their organization did not appear.
In a coalition, those organizations which have staff should have staff
meetings concerning coalition efforts, in addition to leadership
meetings so they are clear on the direction the coalition is going and
who is responsible for what. Most problems occur in a coalition when
leadership and/ or staff is confused as to what the next steps of the
coalition are to be. Touching base with each member of the coalition
cannot be stressed enough.
Types of coalitions
Within an organization. This is the easiest type of coalition in that
people and leaders are probably accustomed to working with each other.
Several block clubs may band together and hold a slumlord compliance.
Thus, each block club invites one slumlord and brings 15 people from
the block. That way, the slumlord finds himself facing 100 people
screaming about his bad building. He is not aware that perhaps only
10-15 people live on the block where his building is located. Because
of the numbers of people he is more inclined to fix up his building.
Thus, by forming a coalition, a block club stands a better chance of
getting the slum building on their block fixed up.
Citywide coalition. This type of coalition is much harder to develop
and maintain in that a variety of groups may be members all of which
have varying amounts of experience. Also, in all likelyhood, the
leaders and the staff have not worked together in the past and thus
are suspicious of each other. However, if all the members are
concerned enough about the issue, they can overcome historical
boundaries, race, geography and economic differences.
The Metropolitan Area Housing Alliance (MAMA) in Chicago had its birth
when staff from eight organizations got together and discovered they
all were having the same problem with Housing Court--no results. They
decided to ask their leaders to come together and see if they wanted
to work together on the issue. They sponsored a public meeting and won
a monthly citywide day in court for member organizations. This day in
court has been quite effective for the local organizations and they
have seen real benefit in participation in MAHA. Through this
experience leadership got to know each other and MAHA has gone on to
win victories on a variety of other issues.
National coalition. This is a very new and untested type of coalition
for community groups. Fortunately, the first two national coalitions
formed by community organizations have resulted in victories. A loose
network of organizations around the country, National People's Action,
(NPA) has created tremendous impetus. Two pieces of federal
legislation have been passed, one requiring HUD to reimburse families
who had bought substandard homes, and one requiring all financial
institutions to disclose their lending patterns. We see this effort as
a creative and necessary step in the development of community
organizations. Hopefully, the years ahead will hold many more
coalitions of community organizations on a national level giving more
input by community groups into national policy.
Building a coalition
There are no set rules in building a coalition. Some happen as MAHA
did when several organizations decide out of necessity that they will
band together. More often, one organization finds itself facing an
issue which a few initial probes reveal to be too complex and that the
organization must have more power if it is going to win the issue.
Thus, the or ganization begins to look around for other groups with
whom they can coalesce around that issue to win.
An organization in Pontiac, Michigan learned that the local General
Hospital was going to move and that there was a move to take it out of
the hands of city control and make it a private hospital. Thus, there
were two issues: 1) who would control the hospital, and 2) would the
hospital move. After one public hearing in which they were not allowed
to present their case, they immediately began to seek ways to expand
their power base.
In this drive, they built a very interesting and diverse coalition. A
large segment of Spanish were concerned that the hospital had no one
in the emergency room who spoke Spanish. Thus, they came into the
coalition via the route of demanding a Spanish speaking person in the
emergency room. A welfare rights organization joined the coalition
because, if the city lost control of the hospital and it became
private, they feared that the hospital would no longer accept welfare
recipients.
The organization did research and discovered that the plan of moving
the hospital called for the city to pay for a large portion of the
cost of relocation and construction. Thus, the middle class homeowners
came into the fight on the basis that their real estate taxes would go
up if the hospital were allowed to move. The people who lived near the
hospital did not want it to move because it was close to them and it
was unclear what would happen to the vacant building once the hospital
moved out. So they came into the fight. The organization's research
showed that the proposed new hospital was to have a psychiatric ward.
When the people who lived near the proposed new site learned that,
they were opposed to the hospital moving into their community. The
senior citizens joined the coalition because there was no
transportation to the proposed new site.
By this time, the coalition was very strong and had several
confrontations with the hospital and city. With this kind of exposure
behind them, they approached the United Auto Workers to join and the
UAW came into the fight. A politician running for a state office
suddenly became very "interested" in the issue and came down on their
side of the issue, thus giving the issue more exposure. Result: the
victory was won.
The research and the organizer's ability to find the self interest of
each group was key to the building of this coalition. Each group came
from a different motivation and were able to be focused on the one
issue of stopping the hospital from moving.
As one gets into organizing on broad based issues that require
coalitions, research becomes a very important part of the organizing
drive, first of all, because the issue is probably more complex than a
block club issue. Secondly, the more research one has, the easier it
is to determine ways that additional groups can be attracted into the
coalition.
Building Power & Victories
The goal of every community organization is to build power, people
power, so that the community can determine its needs, articulate them
and fight for them. To build power there must be victories, only the
masochist will stay on in a losing cause. For involvement in a
community organization to make sense, community residents must see
results or victories. Victories seem fairly easy to define, the
football team with the most points wins, the golfer with the lowest
score is victorious. In community organizing it is not quite so easy.
Goals are changing, negotiations take place, a victory leads to
another goal.
Definitions
1. Intermediate Victories: These are the small victories along the
road to the primary victory. They help build the organizing drive
so that when the primary victory is reached the largest possible
number of people are involved, feeling the victory is theirs.
2. Primary Victories: These are the goals that have been set by the
organization that have major meaning for the residents of the
community, such as getting a new school built, stopping a rezoning
by an outside developer.
3. No Final Victories: Just as intermediate victories lead to the
primary victory, primary victories lead to a whole new set of
organizing drives and a whole new set of intermediate and primary
victories.
Illustration of a very local issue:
An organization may set for itself the goal of cleaning up a slum
building. The primary victory is not reached until the building is
fixed up. Intermediate victories are usually achieved along the route,
as for instance when the absentee owner agrees to a meeting with the
residents after a picket line has been at his office.
Intermediate victories are very important because they keep the issue
alive, and they are used as organizational tools in building toward
the primary victory. The interpretation of these intermediate
victories is very important to the people, so that they see that there
is some movement in the issue and they are getting closer to the final
goal.
An organizer had been working on a slum building and having little
results. The owner refused to meet with the group even though they had
been to his home and church with a large delegation. The leadership
was discouraged and the people were losing interest in the issue
because they could see no movement in the issue. The organizer brought
ten clergymen from around the community to a leadership meeting. The
leaders took the clergymen on a tour of the building so they could see
first hand what the conditions of the building were. It was also
arranged that when the clergymen walked out of the building there was
a reporter from the local neighborhood newspaper. The headline next
week in the paper read "Local Clergy Pledge Support to Beleaguered
Tenants". The article was duplicated and distributed throughout the
neighborhood. People took hope from the fact that a new element was in
the fight and there was new support for their fight. The clergymen and
members from their churches came to the next public meeting and when
the slumlord did not show up the group went again to the slumlord's
home, the clergy went with them. With the added power of the clergymen
and more people, the leadership was more aggressive and there
developed a strong confrontation on the slumlord's front porch which
resulted in his agreeing to a time table of fixing the building. The
building was fixed up and the primary victory was achieved. Yet it
would never have been reached had there not been the intermediate
victory of the tour of the clergymen and their joining the fight. This
intermediate victory was used to the utmost in building the issue and
gaining exposure for the issue.
Illustration of a broad based issue:
A Chicago based organization, Metropolitan Area Housing Alliance, set
for itself the primary goal of getting all savings and loans regulated
by the Federal Home Loan Bank to disclose their loans and deposits by
zip code in the Chicago metropolitan area. A series of local meetings
were held around the city and in neighboring suburbs. Each local group
went to its local savings and loan association to request disclosure.
The story was the same at each S&L. "We can't do it without
authorization from the Federal Home Loan Bank." The question was then
asked, "Would you be willing if the FHLB said to do it?" The answer
was invariably "Yes".
The leaders of the local groups were pulled together and after
reporting their experiences the decision was made to hold a meeting
with the president of the Chicago Federal Home Loan Bank. He was
invited to a meeting and refused to come. A large delegation went to
his home and passed out flyers to his neighbors. The president agreed
to a meeting. The first intermediate victory had been won. Word spread
through the communities that their efforts were having results,
because the president of the Federal Home Loan Bank had agreed to meet
to discuss disclosure.
At the meeting the president said that if all the local institutions
had said what the people were reporting, (i.e., that they would be
willing to disclose if asked by the Federal Home Loan Bank), then he
could see no problems with disclosure. But he wanted to check with his
superiors in Washington. It was agreed that the following week
officials from Washington would be at the meeting. Another
intermediate victory! Washington was responding to the demands.
At the next meeting the officials from Washington said they felt a
pilot disclosure study would be of no value and that they could not
authorize anything of the kind. After much shouting back and forth, it
was decided that there would be another meeting with officers of local
savings and loans and officials from the Chicago and Washington
Federal Home Loan Banks. Another intermediate victory--"Washington
officials are so frightened they are coming back to meet with us
again."
Prior to the next meeting the local groups went back to their local
savings and loans and reconfirmed that if asked by the Federal Home
Loan Bank they would be willing to disclose. Some of them even went so
far as to say they thought it would be good. So several local groups
again scored intermediate victories.
When the meeting occurred, local officials of savings and loans faced
with community residents were forced to say publicly what they had
been saying in private to the community residents. The ranks of the
bankers were hopelessly broken and the leadership of MAHA stepped into
the breach demanding a pilot program of disclosure. Since
representatives of several larger local institutions had said they
would not oppose such a pilot program, the officials of the Federal
Home Loan Bank agreed that there would be such a study. The primary
victory had been won! But in no way did that mean that the issue was
over. MAHA leaders immediately demanded a meeting to work out the type
of questionnaire to be used and the timetable for disclosure.
From that came a flurry of activity around local institutions who were
not making loans, and, on the basis of the pilot data, a city
ordinance was enacted to require disclosure by any financial
institution desiring to hold city funds. From there to a State and
Federal Disclosure Law.
The important aspect is that as soon as the primary victory had been
reached, the organization set new goals for itself and the primary
victories developed into new issues and new organizing drives and
eventually new victories. This means that there are no final
victories.
The human animal is continually searching for the Holy Grail--that
which when achieved will solve all problems and be the end of the
struggle. People tend to view issues in that manner. "If we get a new
school, then the kids will get a good education." "if we get
disclosure, then redlining will stop." Yet, the seasoned leader and
organizer know that every victory leads to another organizing drive.
So that when MAHA won a pilot disclosure program, that primary victory
turned into an intermediate victory on the road to Federal Disclosure.
Now that Federal Disclosure has been won, that victory has turned into
an intermediate victory along the road to reinvestment which now has
become the primary victory being sought. Thus it may appear to some
that there is no end to organizing and that is true, not only about
organizing but life itself. The football team that wins on Saturday is
planning for the next game by Monday.
Conclusion
Since victories lead to new battles, that means that victories carry
with them the responsibility to go on to new and perhaps uncharted
areas. Thus victory scares some people. If you lose, then not much is
expected of you and you don't have to take the next step. The
organization that wins knows that victory will lead to new organizing
lines and new fights, that with each new victory, come new
responsibilities.
The Myth of the Organizer*
Historically man has had myths by which he lived. These myths were the
sign posts of his existence. They were his attempts to make sense out
of non-sense and to give meaning to his life. Myths assisted him in
dealing with a world that confused him, frightened him, and over which
he had no control. Myths also fulfilled the role of calling upon
members of the cult or community to extend themselves beyond their own
estimation of themselves or their energies. Thus, initiation rites of
pain, suffering or sacrifice and dedication.
Religion has fulfilled that need in man. Thus, the demands of most
faiths for total commitment. Patriotism has met that need in others;
thus, the right of the country to demand and receive the lives of its
people in time of war. Movements have served that role for some. The
early union organizers, under threat of death, faced each new day with
the myth of the "one big strike" in which the balance of power would
be shifted. The Freedom Movement of the 50's and 60's demanded and
received full commitment from many for the myth of equal rights for
all men.
All these and many more were and, in some cases, remain man's attempt
to give meaning to his existence and drive him beyond his limitations.
Participation in the myth will make me a better person, will make the
world a better place to live, will make me part of a power structure
which can bring about the changes that I want to see happen.
We find ourselves in a time in history when myths are hard to come by.
Religion does not have appeal for us today that it had for our
parents. In the wake of Watergate, few, if any, look upon politicians
with anything other than distrust; patriotism has little meaning,
particularly when it is called for by an elected official. The shaky
economy and increasing shortages have destroyed the myth of a totally
prosperous world that would be without want and need.
Myths, to give life meaning, have for a large segment of the
population become the annual two or three week vacation, college
education for the children, the mortgage paid off, a good pension
plan. If these myths give meaning to an individual's life, all well
and good, albeit rather boring myths to keep a person going.
A rather unromantic, but very pragmatic individual has stated, "Life
is a shit sandwich, without bread, and every day we take another
bite." Is there a myth which can make any sense out of the shit
sandwich?
The professional organizer is one who looks at the world the way it
really is and deals with it. He sees the oppressed and the oppressor,
those with power and those without power, and works toward the day
when the roles shall be equalized or reversed--full well knowing from
history that when the powerless become powerful the process will have
to begin again. He sees not only the viciousness of the oppressor,
although cloaked in white collar and wrapped in a $500 suit. He sees
also the smallness and pettiness of the oppressed. He sees the
ruthlessness of the power and the submission of the powerless. He
knows that if he is lucky or history is kind to him he will have, at
best, two organizing campaigns in his life that will have social
impact of any magnitude. What are some of the ingredients of the myth
that keep the organizer going?
Life is to be exciting. The organizer's stock in trade is change.
Change of the existing power structure of a precinct, ward, city,
state. Change of the financial community. Change of the existing roles
of oppressor and oppressed. Change of things as they are. Such change
does not happen without excitement. Excitement for the
organizer--excitement for the people he works for and the people he
works against. In the movie "A Thousand Clowns", Jason Robards, in
talking about his adopted nephew, says, "I want him to give the world
a goosing before he dies". A goosing is a very exciting experience,
either negatively or positively for all involved. Thus, he is
committed to the excitement of change in his own life and all the
lives and structures with which he comes into contact.
This excitement can be at the level of organizing a group of welfare
recipients to the point where they change roles with the welfare
office and make demands that are honored. Or at the level of
organizing a community so that it has enough power to say to the city
planner, "Screw your plan. Here is our plan," and win. Or the
excitement of seeing a person's image of himself change because of his
involvement with the issue and organization.
An organizer who developed a senior citizens' coalition worked very
hard with his leadership before the confrontation, in which they were
demanding a special dial-a-bus program from the city. In the midst of
the negotiation, it was obvious that his leaders were not going to win
the fight. Just at the moment when it looked like the mayor had them
so confused and bickering among themselves, to the extent that the
issue would be lost, a woman who had not previously been a strong
leader stood up and shouted, "Mayor, you have a mother and father. Do
you want them to have to walk six blocks with a bag of groceries, or
not go to the doctor because they don't want to spend the cab fare?
You know this program is for your parents too, and some day it will be
for you". This was the unifying battle cry which sparked the seniors
and pulled them together, destroying all of the mayor's reasoned logic
on why the program wouldn't be instituted. Fifteen minutes later the
seniors walked out with a victory and today the bus program is working
in that community. The people elected the woman their permanent
spokesperson. When she shows up with her constituents at a city
office, they are immediately ushered in and their demands, more times
than not, are met. When a new state or federal issue on aging comes
up, the press calls her for a statement of the opinion of the senior
coalition on the new proposal. She confided to the organizer, "You
know, no one ever used to care what I thought or listen to my
opinions, and now they do. This has been the most exciting two years
of my life." It might be added that life was also not dull for those
whom the senior coalition confronted during those two years. As he
told the story, the organizer relived the excitement of that
organizing campaign. A big portion of the organizer's myth is that
life is to be exciting.
A second major tenet in the myth of the organizer is his belief in and
respect for people. This belief and respect is expressed in many ways.
It is first exhibited when he enters the arena in which he is
organizing. He samples as many opinions and ideas as possible from
every economic, educational and ethnic strata of his arena. He does
not judge the person who presents him with a concept contrary to his
own, but accepts it as part of the mosaic that he is called upon to
build. It is further exhibited in the selection of the issues to be
worked on by the people. When a staff charges into the office saying,
"I've got a great new issue," the lead organizer's immediate response
is, "Did you check it out with people?" Once it has been determined by
the people what issues will be worked on, then the organizer's job is
to express his belief in and respect for people by allowing them to
set the timetable, the tactics and the goals. He may lay out
alternatives, but in the end it is the people who make the decision on
what course of action is to be taken.
A white organizer working in a black community was continually told by
his leadership, "We have to do something about the prostitutes in the
community". He felt quite uneasy about the whole issue, but, finally,
a meeting was organized with the police and a series of demands were
made. The police promised to pick up all the prostitutes; however,
they warned the people that the prostitutes would be back out on the
street in three hours. The crowd decided to see what would happen and
pushed the police to do their job, setting up a steering committee to
meet in two weeks to see if they had gained any results. It didn't
take two weeks for leadership to see that, indeed, the police were
picking up the women; but that they were back from booking the same
night in most cases, the next night in all cases. The organizer,
desperate to come up with a solution of the issue, went to the police
and talked with them about the problem. He was told by the police that
over ninety per-cent of the patrons of the black prostitutes were
whites from a nearby suburb. Since these people were from outside his
arena, the organizer had his strategy: station people on the corners
and, whenever you see a white male pick up one of the women, copy down
the license number, trace the license number to registration and send
a letter to that residence addressed to Mrs. Smith asking if she knew
where here husband was on such and such a night. Coupling this with a
news release that this was going to happen would cut the trade and
thereby get rid of the prostitutes.
Gleefully, he went to the leadership meeting with this strategy. For a
variety of reasons, some of which were not too hard to see through,
the strategy was turned down. The people decided instead to picket the
prostitutes. As distasteful as this was to him personally, the
organizer had chosen his arena and now was called upon to respect the
people above his own feelings.
At this point, all kinds of rhetorical questions are thrown out. "How
far do you let people go? Would you organize for segregation? Doesn't
the organizer have a moral right to take a personal stand on issues?"
On and on. Once the organizer has analyzed the arena in which he
intends to organize, and, if he accepts that arena, then the myth by
which he lives dictates that he is bound to respect the decisions of
those people within the arena. For from his experience he has seen
that when people are given the opportunity in a democratic arena to
wrestle with their lives and the life of the community, the way in
which people look at themselves and others changes, horizons broaden,
self-interest expands beyond myself to my community and my city. He
has seen homeowners fight for the right of the tenant; he has seen
tenants fight for an issue that only benefits homeowners. He has seen
people lose a day of work to fight for issues that will not directly
affect them.
A third basic ingredient in the organizer's myth is that no
institution is to be trusted. This is easy for the novice to accept as
he organizes an attack on city hall, or the bank, or the board of
education. The professional knows that this applies also to the power
base that he is organizing. Thus, he is constantly on the prowl for
new ideas, new people, new segments of the community to bring into his
organizing campaign. An institution that is not challenged with fresh
people seeking leadership, with new issues to replace the old, soon
becomes senile. Once senility starts, death is not far behind. Thus,
the organizer knows that he cannot trust institutions; they must be
challenged on every front, not only those that are attempting to
oppress his arena, but his own arena as well.
An organizer was hired to direct an organization which was working in
a multi ethnic community. As he looked over the make-up of his
executive board, he discovered that the ethnic group which made up 60%
of the community only had 2 members on the twenty-five member board.
Knowing that a reaction would result from the existing power
structure, he used the constitution which said, if a board member
missed three board meetings without excuse, he/she could be replaced.
In six months nine new board members had been added to the board, all
from the disenfranchised ethnic group. As a result, several other
board members resigned because there were too many of "those people"
on the board. Yet, the organizer knew he had to change or kill the
arena in which he was working if he was to be true to his myth.
The myth of the organizer, that which pulls him up out of bed in the
morning to face another shit sandwich, is his belief in the excitement
of life--that which he wants to create and that of which he wants to
be a part. His belief in and respect for peoples" ability to make
decisions about their lives and their ability to be cognizant of more
than their limited self-interest in making those decisions. His
distrust of all institutions and, thus, his drive to bring new ideas
and new people to all institutions, thereby bringing excitement to
those institutions.
* "A myth is a way of pulling together the raw and contradictory
evidence of life as it is known in any age. It lets people make
patterns in their own lives, within the larger patterns"
-- Theodore H. White, Breach of Faith, 1975
# # #
_________________________________________________________________
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
|
