Dave Beckwith

e-mail: HN1158@handsnet.org
Center for Community Change
101 Main St., 2nd Floor
Toledo, OH 43605


Who I Am
The Top Ten Ways You Can Help: The "Skill Menu" for Useful Partnerships.
As I Read These Papers
Another Model
I'll End

Who I Am

My background as an organizer began when I left a perfectly good job in a curtain factory in Holyoke, Mass. for a $55/week chance at learning from Stan Holt in South Providence, RI what real organizing for change is about. I had ended up in the curtain factory after a two-year off-and-on tour of undergraduate duty at UMass in Amherst. I had a couple of interesting "close encounters" with sociologists there that shaped my attitude towards the field.

UMass was part of the "five colleges" collaboration with other schools in the area, and we were allowed to cross-register at the others. Many of my SDS cronies were taking Dr. Norman Birnbaum's "Class" class at Amherst, so off I went. ZOW! BAM! BOOM! this was the real thing. Intellectually stimulating, European-rigorous, Marx no longer the devil but a legitimate authority...school is for real!. I took the whole business so seriously that I worked my heart out. I hoped to unmask UMass' part in the ruling elite's secret plan. I snuck into the classified library at MIT and copied the secret directory of research contracts with the CIA, Dept. of Defense and others. I rooted around in the land-grant college histories. I wrote a paper called (ripping off the Harvard students who ripped off Domhoff) "Who Rules UMass." One sociologist at UMass, exposed as part of the CIA's targeting process in Cambodia, got in some trouble from us leftist antiwar, anti-assassination crazies. And Birnbaum liked it! He sent it off to the guy who "wrote the book" on state colleges, UMass in particular, David Riesman. He got back a scathing attack on my paper - "typical of the Old Mole, Ramparts Magazine yellow journalism" is the phrase that stuck with me. I knew then that, though I might have some fun in this business, sociology was not for the faint-hearted. I also learned that sociologists play both sides in the struggle.

My friend Randy Stoecker asked me to work on this project, though, not because of what I know about sociologists (I am, after all, the proud holder of a card issued for the 1991 Cincinnati ASA convention that certifies me as a 'non-sociologist'). Rather he knows I've toiled since 1971 as a migrant worker in the fields of social change. As a community organizer, I've done training and technical assistance, been an Executive Director and, for five years, was a part-time Research Associate at the University of Toledo's Urban Affairs Center. Our mission was to connect the University to the task of solving Urban Problems. With the other half of my time, I worked for the Washington, DC-based Center for Community Change, providing strategy, planning, organizing and development help to local community-based organizations around the country. This September, frustrated with the contrast between the fast rhythm of community action and the slow flow of the University world and tired of balancing a Toledo agenda with the rest of the work I was committed to through CCC, I went full time with the national job.

So I've seen the beast of Academe from pretty near the inside, and I've tried my darndest over the years to connect up good people to do good work. Randy Stoecker hopes I've learned something in the process.

So here goes.

back to contents

The Top Ten Ways You Can Help: The "Skill Menu" for Useful Partnerships.

1. Be quick. If you can't be quick, at least be honest. If the fight against the landfill needs the land value study in time for the hearing, and the hearing is a week from Tuesday, tell them if you can't deliver. Better yet, make the time. It'll be fun. When Abigail Fuller quotes the radical sociologists who did Movement work in the sixties and seventies, there's an energy and vitality that is undimmed even by the years.

2. Listen. If you invite activists to speak to your class, take them out for coffee beforehand and listen to what they say they need from you. If you volunteer with a movement group, listen for the opportunity to bring your academic and professional skills to bear. If you're really ambitious, put together an intentional system for listening to activists in your field - visit folks, hold a meeting, do a survey. But be prepared to follow through. Good relationships are built by delivering on what you say you care about. The community organizers and developers that Randy Stoecker worked with in Toledo's Working Group on Neighborhoods are forever going to expect to be taken seriously by their academic partners, as Randy took them seriously when he devised and carried out his study of the field of community development in Toledo in 1989. When Randy has students in his social movements course who need to talk to some real activists, he's now got a dozen folks to send them to.

3. Don't just listen, participate. You should know what the right questions are and offer that knowledge. You should respect the goals of the group, but don't expect them to know the methods. You can write the survey questions that get the answers they need. You can find answers -- or better questions -- when they face barriers. The homeless coalition I work with in Columbus is trying to get money to organize the poor. They were told by the funders that there are no models, that it would never work. Somebody who knows about the base communities of South America and the Philippines' experience in the shantytowns could help them make their case.

4. Know the sources. When a group is in a battle over an issue, they want answers. You might not have them, but one of your skills is how to use the tools of research: use Lexus, Nexis, searchable directories and root around and find some help. Toledo's CDCs were struggling two years ago to get a handle on the problem of jobs. We thought that, if we could figure out what industry we have, maybe we could get the small manufacturers together. The University researcher that opened the door to the databases on manufacturing helped start a ground-breaking Flexible Manufacturing Network. His list was the first, critical step.

5. Use your priestly power for good. I know, you don't like to put that "Ph.D." after your name. A letter from Professor Jones, Ph.D., MS, M.S.W., XYZ" could convince people they've really got somebody on their side. In life, that matters. Ohio legislators funded a statewide Finance Fund for community development initially, but they balked at a second appropriation. The "market study" of Ohio non-profit, community based housing developers that came from the Urban Affairs Center at the University of Toledo was an important tool in the campaign. The study's legitimacy was as much a factor of the University connection as its content.

6. Be creative. In the Federal Hill neighborhood of Providence, Rhode Island, we had help from consultants and professionals to devise a way to stretch money from CDBG to get the maximum 'bang for the buck." We created a clever leveraging plan, to combine private market rate loans from banks with one-time grants from city and federal money. We used Internal Rates of Return, Leverage Ratios, lots of complex computations. That convinced the bankers. In organizing, simple is good. We needed to convince the people, in order to convince the politicians, so we needed simple. We came up with a slapstick style street theater piece with the priest holding a little box marked "city money", the mom holding a big box marked "bank loans" and the fuel oil delivery guy who chaired our housing committee holding a fulcrum labeled "Neighborhood Credit Plan", while three school kids waved a long plank marked "leverage". It communicated in a way that the twenty-page paper we had to back it up never could. Figure out dramatic ways to tell the story the community needs told.

7. Use people. Information we gather ourselves belongs to us. Stoecker, Gaventa and others have written about this. It takes longer, but it hits hard. Barry Greever wrote the organizing book on this -- "Tactical Investigations for Peoples' Struggles". We used it in Toledo when the city manager told 150 angry residents that the city budget just had to be slashed, and they could never understand its complexity well enough to understand why. This attitude pissed people off, and we began the City Budget Study Committee, twelve regular folks who met twice a week -- once with ourselves, once with the City Budget Director. We asked questions until we DID understand and developed six specific recommendations to loosen up funds to mitigate the cuts they'd offered. Our "experts" could talk their "experts" into the ground. Backed by angry fellow residents, we turned the cuts around, got written pledges of benefit to neighborhoods from a proposed tax, and passed the tax. If we had had the City Budget Study done FOR us, it would never have been our fight. We could have used help, but the "do with" kind.

8. Help us get ahead of the curve. Community organizing gets rapped as reactive. Most of the time people are exercised about the immediate, of course, but have a pretty good idea of the trends and the future. You could help test that sense and validate it. The best example I know of came from Boston. In the late '70s, economics and demographics combined to cause pyrotechnics. Vacant (and sometimes not completely vacant) buildings were burning by the dozen. The Symphony Tenants Organizing Project (STOP) got somebody with a computer and figured out a model that predicted with stunning accuracy the buildings at risk. They and the city and the insurance companies targeted the buildings first. The owners, under scrutiny and pressure, sold or renovated instead of burning.

9. Look to all your work for opportunities to help. Many of these papers refer to research as the only tool available to sociologists. Certainly organizing takes lots of research. But an organizational development specialist could do an organizational checkup or a training for a Board of Directors. A writer could help put our grant reports together. Most academics are teachers, too. Both Lee Williams and Sam Marullo refer to this part of the work. The most serious shortage in movements for social change and building community is the people to make it happen. Teachers can help open minds to injustice, they can hold up true pictures of successful change that give hope, they can motivate individuals and open up the possibilities. When I left UMass, I went to Mike Best, the economist whose job the students had fought to save. I told him I had to get out, to start making a difference right now. He suggested the United Farmworkers. If I'd taken him up on that, I might have avoided a year in the curtain factory.

10. Pecca Fortiter! Sin bravely! Revolution, rebellion, even community organizing are all messy. People will misinterpret your motives, they'll blame you unfairly, you'll get it wrong sometimes. Engage with those who are engaged, and push for real results to your work. The education is satisfying. The mess is worth it.

back to contents

As I Read These Papers

As I read these papers, I was seized with a nearly uncontrollable urge to shout "Lighten Up!" With a couple of exceptions (Fals-Borda, Gedicks) nobody here seems to be having any fun! Most frightening of all to me was the tendency to adopt the stance of the martyr. Participatory Research as a field is probably not going to come into its own around a slogan like "Join us, suffer and get canned"!

It seems to me, there are three important questions that a person asks as a sociologist concerned about change. First, what's the best place to be to accomplish social change? Second, what's the best place for ME to be? Finally, what can I do from where I am?

The last is probably the most important for this journal, and for those reading it. I might argue that we need bright, committed folks as full-
time organizers, but I know that the investment that people have in their career and their pride in their work say they're going to stay with a sociology job, teaching, researching something, working when they can with a network of like-minded folks. I respect these constraints, and I like the writers of these papers best when they show self-respect and political realism like Amy Hubbard: "Activist work can be grand and glorious. More often, it is simple and, one hopes, occasionally satisfying."

These papers sometimes offer very direct contrasts. There are two paradigms. One presents the activist academic, valiant and valorous, risking and often harming their career by controversial involvement outside their field of academic pursuit, properly humble, politically subordinate to the outside partner (Hubbard, Fuller). The other (Fals-
Borda) offers the picture of lively, shameless intellectuals, able, negotiating the application of skills in a way that is mutually useful to themselves and the outsider, open to learn but also to teach. I think the latter represents a more sustainable approach.

The sustainability of the activist is certainly one of Randy Stoecker's concerns. His sense of time hearkens back nostalgically to social movements that swept us up in their energy, and drew stark contrasts and forced hard choices. Certainly there have been wild times, and veterans are often forgiven their nostalgia for the 'big war'. My experience with his work belies the tone of wan longing for the good old days that I hear in some of his writing. Randy has always seen his job as supporting today's social justice and community groups, and building the skills of activists who can build tomorrow's Movement. Every real life organizing experience is messy - maybe the kind of documentation of the 'mess' that Stoecker and I have done regarding Toledo's community groups leads people to believe that these have been failures, that they don't live up to the standards of the '60's. As he says: "Many of these efforts, perhaps mine in particular, do not look like the heady high-tension social activism of the 1960's." To really power the engines of change, though, we need a less explosive fuel. It's step by step, issue by issue, leader by leader, member by member community and issue organizing that will change this country, and the right wingers' have found their way into this maze. The progressive activists who sit around waiting for the past to re-emerge will be left behind. The energy that Randy Stoecker has shown for the practical as well as the theoretical is what sets him - and others like him - apart for me.

Stoecker hits the core of the question for me in his article when he says that, "When only the victims know the situation and only the sociologist know the theories, both forms of knowledge are weakened." It's this mutual need that forms the basis for a dignified, respectful, useful relationship between activists and academics. If we each acknowledge the possibility we might learn from the other, we'll get along fine.

It's also clear from many of these papers that there's a cross- cultural aspect to the communication between academics and activists. Gedicks had to negotiate a way through the outsider status of being a non-
native. Peller and Parks recognize that, being FROM the community they serve, there's less of this. I wondered, though, whether they are still OF that community. Do people treat them differently to their face? Do they see the tension of inside/outside as applying to themselves? Gedicks was legitimized, in part, by the ham-handed thugs from Kennecott and RTZ corporation who went after his job. I'd bet that the Native American partners he serves saw the admiration he got from like minded colleagues as part of the "compensation" he gets for his work. I wonder if they care or know about his academic struggles?

Thomas Jenkins talks about insider baseball, and it looks to me like the kind of specialization that leads to the kind of job creation that old-line unions and guilds have always been good at. It made me wonder: are planners just planners, or does it matter for whom you work? Some of the "Applied Sociology" he cites sounded so top/down, like the capitalist/social work of Henry Ford's "welfare" system for workers that pried into and prescribed every aspect of life. In the end, I wonder if these planners were driven as much by their commitment to their profession as their commitment to social justice.

Sam Marullo recognizes the teaching aspect of the academic job description. Service learning, though not all that new, is certainly a good way to test skills, learn street wisdom and do some good. It makes me wonder, though: if service learning is the laboratory equivalent of a liberal arts program", what does that make us, the dead frogs? Service learning must always heed Fals-Borda's attitude of mutual respect, "The results of Participatory Research are open to validation and judgment...not only by fellow scholars and bureaucrats...but also by the opinion of the subject peoples themselves." It is certainly useful to have the menu of approaches to service learning laid out. It would be helpful to hear more about how he sees folks deal with the patronizing attitude of teacher/social worker/helper/expert and what tools have been used to overcome this tendency. I agree with Marullo that service learning can be revolutionary for both the community and the academy, but only if each party learns from the other and from the experience.

Lee Williams challenges activist academics to turn back towards their function as teachers, not just researchers who work with community groups on the side. He quotes one of the giants of popular education of this century, Myles Horton: "You have to trust the people, you have to love the people, and you have to care for the people." Powerful guiding words for this whole endeavor. Williams has a lot of good ideas about how to teach and learn at the same time, for example listening to culture to find the seeds of resistance. He calls this, "taking seriously the cultural capital of the oppressed." Williams takes a step, in all this democracy talk, that may frighten some. He suggests, "We must stop reproducing existing power relations and move toward the goal of promoting democracy in the classroom, the community and in society at large." Fighting words, and well worth listening to.

Park and Pellow write two interesting stories. Certainly both stories ring true. Nobody works in a community group without confronting the factionalism, interpersonal dynamics, mistakes and disagreements that make for reality. This topic -- what role the activist academic might play in these situations, and how the presence of an "observer" changes the action -- deserves a lot more thinking. No group is perfect. In the environmental movement, the race and class tensions that erupted into the "Environmental Justice" movement have been exploited by polluters and government to drive a wedge between groups that could have more power if they worked together. Activist academics need, as Park and Pellow say so well, "intimate knowledge of [the] arenas of loyalty."

Gedicks gives us a story of his own journey from a naive politics of crisis to a more mature, equal, dignified, mutual relationship with community. "We assumed that, if the American people understood exactly what American corporations and the American military and the CIA were doing in Latin America, they would demand fundamental change..." later becomes: "This citizen activist victory stunned the nation's largest copper company and reinforced my belief that informed and politically organized communities could in fact challenge the power of multinational corporations." What an education! I respected Gedicks for his humility and openness. He shares with us the mistakes as well as the victories, and we learn about how he learns from his work. One key factor in his successful relationship with the Sokaogon Chippewa was the invitation, which grew over time. He was asked to help, he helped, he was asked to help some more, and the relationship built. The legitimacy and trust he built must also have been helped by the resistance he faced from the powers that opposed the community. He reports that the COACT research team was passionately attached to the cause. This clearly helped, too. The whole effort was marked by building capacity within the community -- the experts not only testified but held training conferences to teach the activists and organizers what the science was telling them. I was fascinated by his frank admittance that his own values and agenda sometimes conflicted with some Native American leaders. I wanted to hear more. I'd bet these were powerful, and mutually educational, battles.

Amy Hubbard focuses on the power of the priesthood and the relationship between the doers and the talkers. She has clearly enlightened us that an academic visiting a community organization is engaged in a cross-cultural experience. Like any such encounter, a person first needs to understand the culture she's visiting. Who sets up the chairs here? Do the men touch each other? Do the women speak out? Then she needs to measure these cultural norms against the core values she holds, and against the purpose of the relationship. Does this end justify these means? Should I wear the chador to get the interview? Do I let them pick up the coffee cups I leave behind? Do I want to "join" -- be one of "them" -- or "help" -- do a task? Certainly part of the answer is in the invitation - who asked me here, and to do what? Whose needs are being met, mine or theirs? I can say from experience that the question most often asked about a researcher who we have lined up to help a group is "is their work getting done", not "does she do her own typing".

Abigail Fuller's paper was the most excruciating of all for me to read. I was there, in the "New Left", and I remember all that angst, all that intellectualizing, all those meetings, statements, position papers, manifestoes! I think the Revolutionary Sociology Movement connected loosely to the sense of "Movement" of the times. Like most of the "Movements" that connected thusly to 'The Movement", it fell into internal strife and factionalism and failed to connect to an effective organization working to accomplish specific goals. As Tom Lehrer sang about the Spanish Civil War, though, "They won all the battles, but we had all the good songs." The stirring rhetoric, the Big Arguments, all seemed so important at the time. Maybe they were. It's hard to believe, though, that the practical examples here of good work done in a good cause -- writing the real story of the Black Muslims, surveying readers of a community paper, studying banks and grocery stores for a community group -- weren't a welcome relief from the ideological Sturm und Drang. The FBI and the administrations that hammered Radical Sociologists probably did us the most serious damage of all. They made the most controversial work the most serious, and we spent time defending jobs and principles, and missed the chance to build a practice of sociology useful to social change. Fuller hits the nail on the head: "We must continuously reflect on how we purport to further social change."

Orlando Fals-Borda talks to the Southern Sociological Society as a group of old friends and tells some important stories. He is honest: "the hard, earthquake realities encountered in the South had the effect of nibbling at and undermining the neat Parsonian structure of action which we were taught." He is clear: his four guidelines for field research and scientific reporting made me want to dump my ten rules as too loose and unfocused. He is unselfconsciously intellectual: I find his parallel between the chaos theory and social science developments fascinating, and I wanted to run out and grab a dozen books he mentions in passing. He has, finally, the two best lines of this whole collection. "...I could not consider myself a scientist, even less a human being, if I did not exercise the 'commitment" and felt it in my heart and in my head..." I'll quote the second at the end of this paper. First, I'll introduce another sociologist I've worked with.

back to contents

Another Model

Mark Lindberg was nowhere near the stature of Norman Birnbaum, my teacher at Amherst. Mark taught at Holy Cross College in Worcester, Mass., and was the teacher who covered for an internship program that I ran as Director of the New England Training Center for Community Organizers (NETCCO). Undergraduates worked for a semester and a summer full-time as community organizers in one of the Providence groups that were part of NETCCO. Once a week Lindberg met with them, and they got full course credit and low wages. A number of truly great organizers came out of this effort - - Ellen Ryan of Rural Organizing is one. Lindberg had a curious attitude, new to me at the time. He was truly excited about what the groups were doing. He wanted to learn more, to talk to the do-ers, to write up what they were learning. He respected the skills and interests of the volunteers in the groups, of the organizers, of the students. I was intrigued. When the Holy Cross internship program looked doomed, I offered him half what he could make in academia for the chance to be the "Director of Training" for NETCCO. He jumped. For the next year, Mark worked like a dynamo. He wrote training manuals -- mostly interviews with practitioners, practical guides with lively stories. He collected the "literature", published a bibliography and worked to make community organizing of the door-to-door-agitation-kick-butt-raise-hell type more broadly recognized by the people that study that sort of thing. He trolled the halls of the Academy for like-minded comrades and hooked them in to internships, externships, released time, all kinds of schemes. When I lost him, it was to the Community Development program at Springfield College in western Massachusetts where, for a time, he helped Scotty McTaggart build a truly useful net of relationships that fed and nurtured social change efforts in the region for many years.

back to contents

I'll End

I'll end these reflections with the second quote from Dr. Fals-Borda, which expresses the best instincts of the activist, sociologist or not. "The study of society is not worth the trouble if it does not help its members to grasp the meaning of their lives and to move to action for progress, peace and prosperity for all." Now that, I could march behind!

back to contents