"ACORN Under the Microscope" -- Huffington Post
Discussion list for COMM-ORG
colist at comm-org.wisc.edu
Tue Jul 22 14:55:37 CDT 2008
[ed: Eric continues the discussion.]
From: Eric Weir <eeweir at bellsouth.net>
On 7/19/2008 Discussion list for COMM-ORG wrote:
> I fear that we too often use the same conflict and confrontation
> tactics on each other that we use on our opposition. . . .
What else would you expect? What you do is what you do. What you get is
what give.
> I also worry that
> we often engage in an analysis of situations such as ACORN using the
> same theories that are often promoted by the opposition--namely,
> theories that single out organizations or individuals as the cause of
> a problem. Such theorizing, of course, is part of a time-honored
> tool of community organizing--pick the target, isolate it, and freeze
> it. It works. But it works dialectically, achieving short-term
> victories but potentially undermining long-term goals by reducing our
> ability to think in broader structural and cultural terms.
I don't see the dialectic. It does exactly what it was designed to do.
You keep thinking the way you thought. The dialectic would be if you
realized that maybe you needed to think differently. Why do we think it
is important not to learn?
> . . . . as Shannah alludes to, analyses of revolutionary
> movements are . . . instructive. Most of them reproduce at least some
> of the oppressions that they fought against, and most produce new
> oppressions. That is not a product of the individuals who lead
> revolutions, but part of the structure of the revolutionary movement
> process itself. . . . .
Maybe it's because they use the methods of the oppression. We can do
worse than learn -- *if* we can bring ourselves to learn -- from our
good old-fashioned American pragmatists: the means is the end. What you
will get is what you *do* -- regardless of what you *say* you're trying
to accomplish. Your real goals are in *how you go about* trying to get
what you *say* you want.
> The problem is that we have found neither an
> insightful enough analysis nor an effective enough strategy to
> prevent the negative influences of the existing oppressive social
> structure/culture from invading our efforts to end them. But I urge
> us to look for and attack those broader causes of internal problems
> before we attack each other.
The problem is that we have been relying on "insightful analyses." We
would do better to simply try as best we can to persistently *practice*
the virtues -- fairness, truthfulness, respect for others, etc., etc. --
we *say* we believe in. There is not other way to bring about a society
in which they are pervasive, in which they are respected and practiced.
If analysis is to have any utility it must be carried out within this
framework.
Instead of speaking of "the negative influences of the existing
oppressive social structure/culture invading our efforts to end them" we
might more accurately and more effectively say "we have been acting just
like them." It would be easier to understand and to remember. And in
*that way* to eliminate the oppressive structures.
The oppressive structure and culture "invades" our efforts when we
believe that our worthy goals are sufficient, that our actions and
strategies don't matter, in the sense that they are only means, that
they will leave no "residue," that they have no effect on our values. To
the contrary, they will become our values -- if they are not already.
Again, rather than trying to achieve "more insightful analyses," we
might, in our work, just do our best to be true to our best selves.
Regards,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA USA
eeweir at bellsouth.net
On 7/19/2008 Discussion list for COMM-ORG wrote:
> Only in the u.s. do we accept the outrageous idea
> that the tail (funding) wags the dog. . . .
Really!?
I consider myself a lefty most of the time, but sometimes I think the
rightys are onto something when they say only lefties would say
something like this.
If not more appreciative we could at least be more accurate.
Regards,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA USA
eeweir at bellsouth.net
Discussion list for COMM-ORG wrote:
> --------
> This is a COMM-ORG 'colist' message.
> All replies to this message come to COMM-ORG only.
> --------
>
> [ed: Shannah responds to Peter's article. A bit from me at the end.]
>
> From:
> Shannah Kurland <shannah_k at hotmail.com>
>
>
> It's not that we have to be squeaky clean because we're under scrutiny
> from the right - i really don't care what they think about us. The
> point is that we have to be squeaky clean, transparent, and accountable
> because this money is raised in the name of poor people - it belongs to
> the communities who organizations say they represent! Stealing money
> and covering it up is not just a case of "oh, whoops, mistakes will be
> made!" It's the same crap that so-called former revolutionary leaders
> around the world use to justify their plundering of resources that
> belong to the people, and there is no justification, no excuse.
>
> This is a good moment to plug The Revolution Will Not Be Funded: Beyond
> the NonProfit Industrial Complex, edited by INCITE Women of Color
> Against Violence. Only in the u.s. do we accept the outrageous idea
> that the tail (funding) wags the dog, and that social movements best
> occur in an NGO structure.
>
> One last thing - while I respect Dr. Dreier's many contributions to
> research and writing about organizing, i can't understand why an essay
> that attempts to offer a long-term and broad look at ACORN doesn't even
> mention the many, many, many violations of legal and moral standards in
> how it treats its own workers. The passing reference to "disgruntled
> employees" doesn't even pretend to do just to the former ACORN staff
> members who have been violated in terms of missing and late paychecks,
> exploitative salaries, and verbal and even physical abuse. And i'm just
> talking about people i know personally, not even beginning to count
> second and third hand stories i've heard, NLRB complaints, etc.
>
> We don't have blank checks by virtue of working on good issues, or
> having some good wins, that permit us to exploit and steal. Again, it's
> not about shielding ourselves from the right wing and those who prop up
> the systems of capitalism, white supremacy and patriarchy - it's about
> trying not to do their work for them.
>
>
> Shannah Kurland
> Providence, RI
>
>
>
> Everyone knows the cause of war - it is capitalism. We can't just give
> those bad capitalists their supper and put them to bed the way we do
> with our children. We must fight them.
>
> Todos saben la causa de las guerras - es el capitalismo. No solo
> podemos darles a los malos capitalistas su comida y acostarlos como
> hacemos con nuestros hijos. Tenemos que luchar contra de ellos.
>
> Lulia Jackson, 19 34
>
> Discussion list for COMM-ORG wrote:
>
>> --------
>> This is a COMM-ORG 'colist' message.
>> All replies to this message come to COMM-ORG only.
>> --------
>>
>> From: "Peter Dreier" <dreier at oxy.edu>
>>
>>
>> Friends and Colleagues:
>>
>> In our article today's HuffingtonPost, "ACORN Under the Microscope,"
>> John Atlas and I examine the current controversy surrounding ACORN, the
>> country's largest and most successful progressive community organizing
>> group.
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-dreier/acorn-under-the-microscop_b_112491.html
>> Last week the New York Times reported that 8 years ago ACORN's chief
>> financial officer embezzled almost $1 million from the organization, but
>> that top staff agreed to keep it secret. ACORN put new financial
>> controls in place and the money has now been repaid. Even so, covering
>> up the embezzlement revealed poor judgement. Now that the story has
>> leaked, ACORN's allies and funders are understandably upset by this
>> episode. Most have already indicated their willingness to continue to
>> support ACORN, but with more scrutiny over its finances. ACORN has
>> chapters in 103 cities in 38 states and has played a key role in winning
>> victories for low-income people on such issues as living wages,
>> predatory lending, affordable housing, voting rights, public schools,
>> health care, and welfare reform. In its 38-year history, ACORN has
>> accumulated many enemies among corporations and conservative politicians
>> with whom it has done battle. These opponents, along with right-wing
>> media, are happy to use the current scandal to try to weaken ACORN and
>> undermine its reputation and political influence. ACORN is now
>> reorganizing its leadership and management structure, a process that is
>> certainly painful many of its veteran leaders and staff. Our article
>> puts this controversy in the larger context, exploring whether this
>> self-inflicted wound will do irreparable harm or will help strengthen
>> the organization in the long run.
>>
>> Peter Dreier
>>
>> _____________________________________
>> Peter Dreier
>> Dr. E.P. Clapp Distinguished Professor of Politics
>> Chair, Urban & Environmental Policy Program
>> Occidental College
>> 1600 Campus Road
>> Los Angeles, CA 90041
>> Phone: (323) 259-2913
>> FAX: (323) 259-2734
>> Website: http://employees.oxy.edu/dreier
>>
>> "The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in times of great
>> moral crises maintain their neutrality" - Dante
>>
>> *****************************
>>
> [ed: as a sociologist who shares the core values that unite the left,
> one of the things I most worry about are the internal conflicts that
> divide the left. I fear that we too often use the same conflict and
> confrontation tactics on each other that we use on our opposition, and
> they often work better on us than they do on the opposition. I also
> worry that we often engage in an analysis of situations such as ACORN
> using the same theories that are often promoted by the
> opposition--namely, theories that single out organizations or
> individuals as the cause of a problem. Such theorizing, of course, is
> part of a time-honored tool of community organizing--pick the target,
> isolate it, and freeze it. It works. But it works dialectically,
> achieving short-term victories but potentially undermining long-term
> goals by reducing our ability to think in broader structural and
> cultural terms. ACORN, whatever its problems, is embedded in a broader
> social structural and cultural context that makes it extraordinarily
> difficult, if not impossible, to do their work without contradiction. I,
> too, recommend The Revolution Will not be Funded, which begins to get at
> some of these issues. And, as Shannah alludes to, analyses of
> revolutionary movements are also instructive. Most of them reproduce at
> least some of the oppressions that they fought against, and most produce
> new oppressions. That is not a product of the individuals who lead
> revolutions, but part of the structure of the revolutionary movement
> process itself. If it was the product of individuals, we would see a lot
> more variation in outcomes. Likewise, in U.S. community organizing and
> social movement processes, the stories of factioning, conflicts between
> leaders and members, and organizational collapse exist for all the
> movements in our history. ACORN's problems are no more pronounced than
> the internal problems of the environmental movement, the past women's
> movement, the Civil Rights movement, labor union organizing, and even
> our own revolutionary war. You can even go back to Roberto Michel's
> "iron law of oligarchy" in Europe to learn the same lessons. The
> problem is that we have found neither an insightful enough analysis nor
> an effective enough strategy to prevent the negative influences of the
> existing oppressive social structure/culture from invading our efforts
> to end them. But I urge us to look for and attack those broader causes
> of internal problems before we attack each other. How many of would
> argue that we need tougher prison sentences rather than a more just
> economy to reduce crime? How many of us would say the poor must change
> their behavior before they warrant our respect? I likewise reject such
> an analysis when applied to social movement and community organizing
> efforts. The problem is, I don't have a better analysis that is more
> than a sociological abstraction. So, some work for us to do.]
> _______________________________________________
> Colist maillist - send messages to Colist at comm-org.wisc.edu
>
> To change your subscription, go to http://comm-org.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/colist
>
> All messages are archived at http://comm-org.wisc.edu/pipermail/colist/
>
> Please contact original message authors to request permission to forward messages.
>
>
More information about the Colist
mailing list