Note by Hunterbear: My basic vocation -- life-long -- has been that of a working organizer. I've done this in many varied settings -- and with all sorts of people who make up "those of the fewest alternatives.". Although this piece is focused primarily on two lists that I moderate [Redbadbear, Marxist] and one of which I'm co-moderator [SocUnity], I'm obviously giving this broader coverage.
There's an old sort-of joke in Indian Country about "Native Conferences and Conference Indians." When the Conference arises, there are always two givens: Factionalism and the Unity Speech -- and often the former follows the latter. Well, anyway -- that's hardly the monopoly of we Natives [whose basic unity I really would argue is inherently very strong -- even if one has to sometimes look hard for it.] The challenging efforts toward socialist unity in Australia [and UK] have, naturally enough, added some fuel to comparable thinking in the 'States [and elsewhere as well.] Along with a multitude of others in Radical Humanity, I certainly support Unity -- a unity based, of course, on mutual respect between organizations and movements and very much between individuals. I strongly feel that -- for a long, long time, of course -- most unity efforts on the American Left at least will involve functional "inter-tribal" alliances around a certain specific issue or a specific complex of issues. Personally, I welcome and support reasoned -- and, again, mutually respectful -- work in that realm. I tend to have an ecumenical view of things and, like most of us, I try to take seriously the words in "Solidarity Forever." But I much think we have to be very careful not to confuse simply "organizing" organizational spokespersons and leaders with the far more fundamental and critically compelling matter of organizing at the grassroots -- in new turf, on the frontiers. To me, grassroots organizing -- getting and keeping people together for action and, in that context, developing vigorous and on-going local leadership -- is the toughest, most tedious and all-around hardest work there is in the Creation. [And it's also the most satisfying!] But it sure as hell isn't done by press release and wistful thinking alone. This is obviously true whether we're talking about radical or labor or social justice community organizing or whatever good cause. But this -- Real Grassroots Organization -- is Genesis. No more, no less. "Organizing" existent leaders isn't grassroots organizing -- any more than the more pervasive matter of union mergers automatically results in the "organization of the unorganized." Of course, with careful, deft, and committed grassroots work, a gathering of existent leaders [or merger] can certainly stimulate new growth.. Sometimes the organization of existent leaders alone can be extremely problematic over the long pull. Over a year ago, there was an interesting discussion on the Marxist list -- then very ably moderated by John Lacny. At his request, I posted some critical reflections on the Saul Alinsky "top down" organizing style -- based on my own personal observations in and around the Chicago scene. It's part of a larger section on our website called "CHICAGO ORGANIZING: Tough, Cat-Clawing, Bloody [With New Material -- Posted 6/28/01]" http://www.hunterbear.org/chicago_organizing.htm I'm not seeking to confuse the problematic Alinsky approach with the on-going and developing talk on these several lists about socialist unity in America. I'm aware of the dangers in "apples and oranges" mixing and even too-close analogizing. But -- like the Deep South -- where issues and lessons are often writ large and very clearly, Chicago certainly offers some very valuable insights -- and very often "warning insights that are frequently written literally in "blood, sweat, tears." AND A FURTHER HUNTER GRAY NOTE ON CHICAGO ORGANIZING: THE GOOD GRASSROOTS-UP APPROACH VS. THE ALINSKY TOP-DOWN "COALITIONING" STYLE [Posted on Marxist list, 6/12/01.] I'm very much interested in and encouraged by Dave Grenier's discussion of DARE [Providence, RI], its grassroots nature and its democratic and effective ethos. John Lacny's thoughtful analysis of all of this: i.e., healthy organizing approach vs. top-down, old-line political stuff -- "the mass line and the "concrete victory" -- is extremely solid and very much on target. John mentions -- as I, too, have -- the Saul Alinsky approach. It's about 2 am in Idaho but I have a few comments. Even my faithful one-half Bobcat cat and companion has gone to sleep by this computer. The history of Chicago is wild and turbulent: a flood of ethnicities from the four directions; racism and ethnocentrism like the leaves on trees and the smog in the air; pervasive Boss political traditions where machiavellian use of race and ethnicity to create and maintain grassroots divisions -- and, hence, control -- is a fine and wicked art; traps everywhere --especially patronage payoffs; remote stratospheric elites like the myriad of stars in the sky -- all of these and much, much more are generally known. It was in all of this, of course, that Saul Alinsky developed his basic top-down, coalitioning and narrowly pragmatic organizing approach which eventually became the dogma of his Industrial Areas Foundation -- and was carried into many other urban areas. The pioneer Alinsky effort in the old Stockyards/Packinghouse district -- the Back of the Yards Neighborhood Council -- was essentially built by bringing together a broad range of existent leadership groups, some better and many worse. BYNC, run in traditional Chicago style from the top down, initially won significant short-range victories, was quickly courted by high up politicos and just as quickly entered into Faustian alliances at that level. There never was a radical vision on the Alinsky trail. In time, Alinsky moved on into other pastures with his "model" and BYNC, bereft of any substantive grassroots involvement and vigour, degenerated [under Alinsky's protégé Joe Meegan] into an increasingly reactionary appendage of the Democratic machine. Although in time, Alinsky denounced BYNC as a "Frankenstein," his basic flaw -- organizing existent leaders and Visionless short-term pragmatism [often devoid of a moral foundation and context] , led to a situation where many of his subsequent efforts -- e.g., The Woodlawn Organization --followed the same progression of the BYNC: tub-thumping coalitioning of leaders, short-term victories, political alliances and payoffs, ossification and corruption. And Alinsky has had many imitators. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I was privileged to play the key directive role in a very large-scale grassroots community organizing effort on the bloody Chicago South/Southwest Side from the late 1960s into the 1970s. Starting at the most basic level, the house-to-house city block, and working primarily but not completely with racial minorities, we organized around 300 block clubs plus related groups in two large grassroots umbrella organizations. In a wild and cat-clawing melee that went on and on, we had to fight the Daley Machine, the Republicans, racists and realtors, police at all levels, some gangs, urban renewal, part of the Catholic Church, and Joe Meegan and his Back of the Yards Neighborhood Council [and much more.] Red-baiting was prevalent, our offices were set afire, our organizers framed up [we had solidly effective volunteer lawyers.] Violence was rife everywhere. We struck a good balance between the grassroots and the organizers' involvement -- with the tilt going very strongly with the grassroots. And we struck a pretty good workable balance between pragmatic [with a reasonably moral foundation and framework!] short term "civic improvement" stuff and longer-term visionary goals. [From the safe, far edges we were picked at by some uninvolved Progressive Labor elements as not being explicitly radical enough but this was purely mosquito sniping.] Early on, I bailed out several key leaders of the Disciples youth gang who had been cruelly assaulted by "riot" police. From that point on, the Disciples -- a grassroots approach in its own right -- provided us with considerable protection and much support. And, in due course, our own fast-developing grassroots block club organizational work joined, in one ward, with the Disciples and, together, we ousted the Daley alderman and installed a Black woman Independent Democrat. One of the internal organizational provisions grassroots people wisely insisted on was a prohibition against serving as an organizational officer and as a paid [e.g., assistant precinct captain] operative of any [but basically we're talking about Democratic] political party. All of this has lived on and, over the years, the community people themselves took on more and more of a direct organizing role -- moving grassroots efforts effectively into new turf. Our efforts on the Chicago South/Southwest side weren't perfect. There was factionalism, back-biting, power struggles. But, these were vigorous grassroots organizations and there was an essential solidarity. They worked and they've lived effectively. Here and there, there were examples of Alinsky projects in which an ignited grassroots , often with younger idealistic organizers, could take things over -- and , at least to some extent, turn the initial top-down organizational effort around "toward the Sun" and democracy. These tended to be rare because of much of the founding baggage and people proved heavily inhibiting. In due course, I had direct and acrimonious contact with a very key Alinsky honcho over many of these issues. At a large inter-tribal urban/reservation Native conference held on the Mill Lacs Chippewa reservation in Northern Minnesota, I and a colleague, Bill Redcloud, conducted a workshop on Native American community organization -- and accountability to the Indian community. When that was done, we went over and sat in on another workshop being conducted by the late Alinsky's successor, Ed Chambers from Industrial Areas Foundation. Everyone was Indian except Chambers [who did not know me.] His approach seemed even more elitist and rigid to me than that of his prophet. Initially, I said nothing, just listened. When an elderly Chippewa man very politely questioned whether this kind of an approach would fit Native situations, Chambers simply and rudely hammered him down, indicating the Alinsky approach was a proven one for all people. The room grew quiet and very tense. At that point, I arose and did [fairly civil] battle. Chambers, taken aback by someone who had warred against Joe Meegan and BYNC, reddened and floundered but maintained his rigidity. We debated heatedly and I carried things well. Chambers abruptly declared a break in the workshop and, when it resumed, he was immediately attacked verbally by young Indians who then forced him physically from the room and then from the conference itself. There is always something worse and, in Chicago, Jesse Jackson's very top -down Operation Push -- a largely empty, Daley-captured entity with much verbal militancy and nothing beyond the end of the old-line Democratic leash -- would be it. Alinsky, at least, in his own way, was a fighter. The DARE effort in Rhode Island sounds great to me -- and it strikes, as do John Lacny's solidly analytical reflections, a strong note of resonance with me. Effective social justice organizing has to be fundamentally grassroots in nature; has to build enduring and increasing grassroots power; has to generate vigorous grassroots leadership; has to maintain a sensible focus on the here-and-now and, concurrently, on the Better World Over The Mountains Yonder -- and keep those two critical dimensions integrally related to one another and each rooted solidly in the grassroots. That's what makes any "Save the World" endeavour -- labor, civil rights, community organization, whatever -- strong, sharp, vital. And, to its enemies, dangerous. Time to hit the sack. In Solidarity - Hunter Gray [Hunterbear] www.hunterbear.org Hunter Gray [Hunterbear] www.hunterbear.org (strawberry socialism) Protected by Na´shdo´i´ba´i´ _______________________________________________ Leninist-International mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international
