Active Resistance Community Organizing Core Section Participant Workbook August 21-31, 1996 Contents Introduction Agenda Small Group Activity Method Discussion Groups, Workshops, and Special Events Cooperative Games Introductory Session Basic Community Organizing Building an Anarchist Model of Community Organizing Using Organizing to Build Movements Implementing the Anarchist Model Resource Material Resource Guide for Books and Magazines on Community Organizing Articles "Ideology on the Table" by George Friday "Organizing Communities" by Tom Knoche Workbook This workbook is for you to use each day during the Community Organizing Core Section. The activities are designed for use during each day's workshops, so much of the information will only make sense in the context of those workshop sessions. Working on the activities ahead of time won't be productive. Acknowledgements The Community Organizing Core Collective would like to thank Tom Knoche for setting the stage for these discussions with his article, "Organizing Communities," Lorenzo Kom'Boa Ervin for initiating the Anti-Authoritarian Network of Community Organizers, George Friday for sharing her experience with us, the Training for Trainers Cooperative for the section on the Small Group Activity Method, and ourselves because, well, we rock. Introduction The Active Resistance Community Organizing Core Section is designed for anarchists and other anti-authoritarians to learn organizing skills that can be applied in a geographic or affinity-based community. Also, organizers currently doing community-based organizing will have the opportunity to develop a place and purpose for ideology in their work. This two way exchange will create a dynamic tension that draws participants through the basics of community organizing, develops an anarchist model of community organizing, connects organizing with movement-building, and begins projects that will facilitate the continuing development of these ideas. Organizing is a process that anyone can use to increase the capacity of their community to change society. It is about developing individuals, building projects and organizations, and winning real, concrete victories in people's lives. Organizing is a revolutionary process for the people, organizations, and communities that dedicate themselves to building an egalitarian society. The Community Organizing Core Section offers the tools with which you can transform yourself and your community. An anarchist model of community organizing will have cooperative ethics at its heart. It will be a tool to build a revolutionary movement. The Community Organizing Core Section is intertwined with the other two Cores of Active Resistance. We are not trying to build a new model of organizing because we have the correct answers. Rather, we are posing new questions which will challenge us to create a new organizing style and model. How can we build democratic organizations that truly reflect the will of the members? Can we address the fundamental issues of oppression in a manner that directly relates to real, concrete changes in our lives? The two "Race and Organizing" workshops will explore the questions of whom and where to organize, and will be a time to intensely challenge the white-privilege assumptions so prevelent in the anarchist scene. The Community Organizing Core Section offers a process for revolutionary social change. It is up to the participants to define how this process can be used to build a powerful movement. Facilitators Jess Alexander, Long Haul/INFOSHOP. Bill Burns, Autonomous Zone Infoshop and Free Skool. Matthew Capa-ra, Ann Arbor. Julie Davids, ACT-UP Philadelphia. Amanda Enoch, Long Haul/INFOSHOP, Free Skool, and SOUL. Adam Gold, Infoshop Berkeley, ACORN. James Mumm, Autonomous Zone Infoshop, Metropolitan Tenants Organization. Jeff Pinzino, Autonomous Zone Free Skool, Alliance of Logan Square Organizations. Emanuel Sferios, Long Haul/INFOSHOP. Jason Wade, Active Transformation, MUAN, and ARA. Sara Zia Ebrahimi, Civic Media Center Infoshop, Northampton Food Not Bombs. Resource People George Friday is a native North Carolinian from a working class industrial region. She recently launched Whole Works, and previously worked with the Piedmont Peace Project for six years. Lorenzo Kom'Boa Ervin is the author of "Anarchism and the Black Revolution," a long-time organizer against police brutality and the prison system. He is a former political prisoner and Black Panther. Tom Knoche is an organizer of 19 years. In 1993 he published the article "Organizing Communities" in Social Anarchism. Agenda The Community Organizing Core Section will have five sessions, 1:30-5:00 pm August 21-25 at the Spice Factory. There will also be continuing discussions planned on August 26-31. Goals The stated goals of this Core are: 1) Train people on the current theory and practice of community organizing. 2) Build a model of anarchist community organizing. 3) Develop projects to continue the discussion, training, and application of anarchist community organizing. 4) Apply community organizing strategies and techniques to building the revolutionary movement. Wednesday August 21 10:00 OPENING PLENARY 1:30 ALL CORE PLENARY 2:30 INTRODUCTORY SESSION Community Organizing Core participants will meet each other and have the opportunity to share their organizing experiences and expectations. Lorenzo Kom'Boa Ervin and George Friday will open the Core with a presentation on the importance and revolutionary potential of community organizing. Thursday August 22 1:30 SESSION 1: Basic Community Organizing This session will explore the basic theory and practice of community organizing. Several popular organizing models will be examined, and practical techniques for organizing in any community will be shared. George Friday will open the session. 7:00 Race and Organizing Workshop (Part 1 on the 22nd, Part 2 on the 24th). This workshop will address the relationship of white organizers and/or a predominantly white movement with communities of color. In addition we will also look at race as a dynamic in the organizing process. Friday August 23 1:30 SESSION 2: Building an Anarchist Model of Community Organizing This session will construct an anarchist model of community organizing by comparing the basic elements of anarchism with the basic tenents of community organizing. Tom Knoche will open the session. Saturday August 24 10:00 SESSION 1 (second offering) 1:30 SESSION 3: Using Organizing to Build Movements This session will explore the use of organizing in the anarchist movement, and the use of an anarchist model of community organizing in a geographically or affinity-based community. Lorenzo Kom'Boa Ervin will open the session. August 25 10:00 SESSION 2 (second offering) 1:30 SESSION 4: Implementing the Anarchist Model This session will feature planning for projects which foster the theory and practice of anarchist community organizing, geographic or affinity-based. We will also discuss the tools each of us need in order to become great organizers. George Friday will close the session. 6:30 ALL CORE SESSIONS PLENARY: Putting the Pieces Together Sunday August 26-29 Continuing Discussions August 30-31 Follow-up Discussions Small Group Activity Method 1. The Activity Process The goal of this section is to help new and experienced trainers gain greater clarity on the fundamentals of the Small Group Activity Method (SGA). SGA is based on the principle that people learn best by doing. This approach places the participants in a series of carefully constructed problem-solving or discovery situations where they are asked as a group to apply their own experiences to solving problems. The facilitators' role is to organize this process within the workshop and to add his/her experience and expertise to the process. During a workshop, participants can be divided into small groups (3-10). Each group chooses a group reporter or "scribe" to help facilitate the discussion, take notes and report back to the group as a whole. The groups work on a common written activity which requires them to make judgements and bring to bear their own experience. For example, an activity for a cooperative housing program might consist of asking each group to examine a list of building repairs. Their task might be to rank-order the list as to their importance and then justify their ranking. Each works on its task for 10-30 minutes. Then each scribe reports the group's findings and a master rank order list is assembled in front of the room by the facilitator. If the groups disagree, a discussion ensues as to whether or not the right principles were employed, etc. A summary sheet is then distributed listing the basic principles previous workshops have determined to be useful. Advantages 1) Maximizes participation without loss of structure: During the small group process virtually everyone gets a chance to participate. The report-back structure allows for well-defined discussions and structured intervention by the facilitator. 2) Places a high value on the sharing of information and experience: The small group format requires that the participants first bring to bear their own knowledge and experience on problem-solving. The facilitator-participant relationship becomes a two-way street where an exchange of information becomes the operating learning style. 3) Develops leadership skills: The role of the scribe is constructed to help foster reporting, public speaking, and small group leadership skills. 4) Develops a shared pedagogy: By creating written activities, this approach is much more transferable to new facilitators than the lecture approach. Like the workshops themselves, the creation and implementation of activities become shared processes among facilitators. The Small Group Activity Method breaks down the hierarchical structure common to most classrooms. It supports the notion that people can be equal partners in the educational process. It also stresses cooperative problem solving and minimizes individual competitiveness. 2. Crafting Good Activitiies Each activity breaks down into four fundamental sections. The Overall Goal Example: To establish a basis for discussion about anarchism. Before beginning to craft any activity, it is essential that the trainer consider the overall goal. In other words, what is so important about this skill or piece of knowledge that these people attending the training should spend an hour or more of their valuable time completing it. Doing this creates the basis for the entire activity and is invaluable in assisting the trainer as s/he guides the participants through the activity. The Aim Example: Identify the major elements of anarchism. An activity begins with the writing of a clear concise aim. Activities are better when there is a clear and precise aim. The more general and vague the aim, the more chance there is for both the participants and the trainer to become lost or confused. The Task Example: Brainstorm a list of concepts, ideas, and theory that form the foundation of anarchism. The next step is to construct a task for the small groups. The task should be something that can be accomplished in approximately 10-30 minutes. The Summary Each activity should end with a summary sheet which is distributed to the entire workshop. The summary lists are not the "correct" answers. Rather, they are the sum total of relevant responses to the activity generated by the previous groups who attended the particular workshop. The summary sheet serves as a checklist with which to compare the lists generated by the current group. It is a direct way to make certain that the most important points were covered (it is uncanny how many of the points that a trainer originally hopes to make are derived by the groups themselves). The summary list gives the whole group a sense of accomplishment, and provides a quick review of the major points covered in the activity. Basic Types of Tasks a. Listing: Ask a group to make a list of problems or responses to a particular question. This kind of task works best when the list can be produced from the peoples own experiences. b. Prioritizing: Using a list already developed by the group, or one supplied by the trainers, the group is asked to place items on the list in priority order. This kind of task often encourages debate among groups. c. Analysis: Ask the group to break down a problem into manageable ideas issues. d. Research: The group must use their own experiences or resource materials to research necessary information. e. Role Playing: The most complex and creative activities involve role-playing. These tasks should be designed to recreate actual problem-solving and problem-creating situations. f. Writing: Participants can draft statements to address a given problem or issue. g. Rewriting: The groups are asked to rewrite an existing statement. h. Technical Practice: These tasks are designed to help people gain experience with practical skills that require technical knowledge. i. Individual Response: Although used only in special situations where the group is very small (3-5) and/or especially skilled or opinionated, this task can be useful. Participants are asked to give their personal opinion on a problem or issue. 3. Workshop Process Prepare the Workshop Space Use the Check Off Form as an outline. Set up the chairs in a manner conducive to cooperative learning (a circle, u-shape, oval, around tables, etc.). Prepare tape, newsprint paper and markers to be used. Review the goals and exercises of the workshop with fellow trainers. Introduction to Small Group Activity Method Take the time to have each and every person, including the trainers, in the room introduce themselves. Draw a diagram of the cooperative learning process, highlighting the SGA method. You would draw this: Starting an Activity a. Hand out activity and read aims and tasks out loud to everyone. b. Determine the small groups. c. Highlight the role of the scribes. d. Break down into small groups (stating time limits and location of small groups). If the activity tasks are clear and do-able, the small groups should be able to handle the task on their own. It is important for trainers to stay clear of the groups to give them the opportunity to work. When the trainer drifts too near, the small group discussion stops and turns toward the trainer. Sometimes, small groups have difficulty with the tasks or are confused about some aspect of it. The trainer should be available to help with these problems. Always observe the audio level of the discussion and break after the peak. There is no fixed time to stop the small group activity and begin the report-back process. If you wait too long, the groups will become restless. If you stop too soon, the groups will not have a chance to do the activity. One rule of thumb is to listen to the level of discussion and break after it seems to have hit a peak. In this way, people are not quite done, and are still eager to continue their discussions in the report-back process. The Report-Back Start with the scribes. To make the scribe system work, it pays to have the report-back begin with comments from each scribe. This also brings order to what could become a chaotic discussion. Decide on how much report-back to allow from each scribe. The trainer may want to limit the number of points each scribe makes during the report-back. If no time or item limit is set, the first scribe may leave nothing for the other scribes to add. For example, if the task requires list making, the trainer may want to ask each scribe to add two items to the list, rather than giving their entire list. Don't re-phrase report-back lists. It is very tempting for the trainer to rephrase the scribes' work when making master lists in front ot the room during the report-back process. Using the participants' own words helps to reinforce the self confidence of the participants. Translations send a negative signal to the group. Allow for general discussion after the scribes' report-back. After the last scribe reports, general discussion will usually occur. Again, it pays for the trainer to stay back from the discussion and allow debated to flourish, although facilitation will be necessary on the part of the trainer. It is neither necessary or desirable for the trainer to comment on everyone's comments. If the discussion wanders, the trainer should consider the overall goal of the activity. Directing discussion toward the overall goal will always ensure the discussion is valuable even if it isn't going in the direction the trainer anticipated. Often new information about the activity's structure and/or content emerges during the report back. Concentrating on the overall goal keeps it going in a productive direction. With the activity's overall goal and aim in mind, end discussion. The general discussion may head in many different directions. It's important for the trainer to remember what the purpose was in the first place. If that purpose has been achieved, it is time to end the discussion. Pass Out Summary Evaluation Evaluations are critical in crafting better activities. Always use a written evaluation form for every workshop. Try using a form that also doubles as your agenda. 4. Check Off Form 1. Logistics and Set-Up Training Activities and Agenda Copied Newsprint on Wall Masking Tape Name Tags Markers Pens/Pencils Chairs/Tables Set-Up Signs for Door Made and Put Up Sign in Sheets All Facilitators/Speakers Present 2. Welcome and Introductions Hand Out Agenda/Evaluation Sheet Explain Purpose of Sheet Ask if people need pens/pencils Make sure people have name tags and have signed in Introduction of Trainers Introduction of Participants Introduction of Training Method: Triangle, Role of Scribe, Report-Backs 3. Activity Read Activity Out Loud Make Sure People Are in Groups Hand Out Activity Ask Scribe to Re-Read Activity, Make Sure Every Group Has A Scribe Cut Off At Peak, or Just After Reconvene Whole Group Ask Each Scribe to Report 1 or 2 Items At A Time Get All Items Listed Out Summary: Look for Common Themes, Hand Out Summary Sheets, Highlight Missing Points 4. Ask People to Turn in Evaluations Discussion Groups, Workshops, and Special Events Timeline Project Ongoing @ Spice Factory AIM: To construct a timeline of radical organizing history. TASK: During any unstructured time, place important historical people, dates, places, events, etc. on the timeline. At the end of the Community Organizing Core Section we will look at our collective radical organizing history. Race and Organizing August 22 and 24, 5-7 pm @ Spice Factory This workshop will address the relationship of white organizers and/or a predominantly white movement with communities of color. In addition we will also look at race as a dynamic in the organizing process. Basketball Tournament August 21st and 28th, 8-10 pm @ Pulaski Park Fieldhouse (corner of Blackhawk and Noble) All ages, all skill levels. Get your team together for the historic kick-off of the ABA (Anarchist Basketball Association). People are encouraged to come with a five person team (people from your city, state, collective, etc.) and be prepared to play full court basketball. The basic rules of basketball will be in effect, and intentional fouls will get you kicked out of the game. This is not super competitive basketball, the goal is to have FUN! Space is limited, so sign up at the Azone. This is a "please bathe first" event. Emma Goldman Memorial Dance Party August 22nd, 9pm on.. @ Club Foot, 1824 W. Augusta DJs Jean and Michelle will spin Emma's favorite 80s, funk, disco, hip hop and new wave wackiness. You are cordially invited to an evening of revelry and dancing in tribute to the patron saint of anarchist dancing fools everywhere. This is a "please bathe first" event. 21 and over, $1.50 Rolling Rocks. If there are other activities or discussions related to the Community Organizing Core that need to happen, we will help plan a time and place for it. If there is something you want, let us know. Cooperative Games Check In Everyone in the group gets an opportunity to state their name, and/or other information (how they feel, where they're from, what group they belong to, etc.),and/or other questions (what is your favorite dessert, etc.). The Magic Glob Take out of your pocket an imaginary magic glob. Pantomine making something out of it, then shape it back into a ball or pass and pass it on to the next person. S/he makes a new object and passes it on again. It can be divided into two parts and sent both ways around a circle. Waking Up in the Jungle Ask people to think of their favorite jungle animal and its noise, and to pretend that they are that animal waking up. As they wake up, the noises should get louder and louder. The Hokey Pokey The old standby. "Put your right foot in, put your right foot out, put your right foot in and shake it all about. Do the hokey pokey as you turn yourself around. That's what it's all about." Elbow to Elbow Have an odd number of participants standing in a circle. One person begins by calling out "elbow to elbow," and everyone has to match their elbow up with one other person's elbow. Someone will be left out. That person will call out a new match, such as "ear to ear," and everyone will have to match their ear up with someone else's ear, but it can't be the same person they were just matched up with. Sing a Song Any song, preferably one everyone knows or can learn quickly. Telephone Standing in a circle, someone whispers a phrase to the person on their left, who then has to repeat that phrase to the next person, and so on until the phrase is passed all the way around and the last person says it out loud. Cinamon Roll Standing in a circle, holding hands, one person breaks the chain and spirals around the inside of the circle until the entire group is moving and spiraling in closer together. Ends up in a group hug. Name Game Form a circle. The first person says their name. The next person in the circle says thier name and the first person's name. The third person says their name, the second person's name and the first person's name. The fourth person says their name and the third, second and first persons name. And on around the circle. Back around to the first person who says everyones name in order. You can vary this game by having each person give their name and some other piece of information that the next person has to remember (I'm Emma and I like to dance...). You can play this game in a large circle by limiting the number of names each person says to the previous ten or so names. Introductory Session Wednesday August 21 10:00-12:00 Opening Active Resistance Plenary (@ the Ballroom) 1:30 - 2:00 Opening All-Core Plenary (@ the Ballroom) 2:30 - 5:00 Introductory Session (@ the Spice Factory) 2:30 Opening Community Organizing Core 3:00 Presentation by George Friday and Lorenzo Kom'Boa Ervin 3:45 Small Group Activity -- Sharing Experiences and Expectations -- Building a Common Language Facilitators: Amanda, James, Jess, Julie, Matt, Sara Workshop Type: Full Core to Clusters SHARING EXPERIENCES AND EXPECTATIONS AIM: To establish relationships with the other participants in the workshop. TASK: Each person in the group should spend two minutes describing themselves, highlighting their previous organizing experiences or interests, and their expectations for the Community Organizing Core Section. The scribe should record the expectations as a list, without names attached to each item. BUILDING A COMMON LANGUAGE AIM: To build consensus on the definitions of common community organizing words. TASK: Create a short, one sentence definition of the following words. From your own experience, define what each word means. Community Power Empowerment Organizer Leader Democracy Self-Interest SESSION 1 Basic Community Organizing Thursday August 22 1:30 - 5:00 Session 1: Basic Community Organizing (@ the Spice Factory) 1:30 Game, Focus, Goals 1:45 Presentation by George Friday 2:00 Small Group Activities -- Community Organizing Goals and Objectives -- Comparing Community Organizing Models 3:30 Break 3:35 - 5:00 Small Group Activities -- One-on-Ones Fishbowl -- Doorknocking 7:00 - 9:00 Race and Organizing Workshop, with George Friday and Lorenzo Kom'Boa Ervin Facilitated by Adam, Amanda, Emanuel, Jason, Jeff and Sara Workshop Type: Full Core to Clusters COMMUNITY ORGANIZING GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AIM: To understand the basic goals and objectives of community organizing. TASK 1: Brainstorm a list of goals for community organizing, remember -- the goal of a brainstorm is to make an exhaustive list, not debate the merits of each item. Goals refer to the end that you are trying to achieve. When you have finished your brainstorm, prioritize the three most important goals. EXAMPLES: Freedom, Peace, Happiness, Health TASK 2: Brainstorm a list of objectives for community organizing. An objective is the means to achieve the goal. When you have finished your brainstorm, prioritize the three most important objectives. EXAMPLES: Revolution (is a means of achieving freedom), Conflict Resolution (is a way of achieving peace), Having Fun (is a means of achieving happiness), and Eating Right (is a way of being healthy). COMPARING COMMUNITY ORGANIZING MODELS AIM: To understand concepts behind the major community organizing models, specifically Direct Membership, Institutional and Coalition models. TASK 1: List the disadvantages of the models. TASK 2: List the advantages of the models. ONE-ON-ONES This is a Fishbowl activity. The facilitator and workshop participants will perform the activity in front of the workshop, in the same manner as you watch fish swimming around in their bowl. AIM: To understand how to question and listen in order to understand someone's motivation and self-interest. TASK: If you have volunteered to be a participant in the activity, then you will play the role you are assigned. Otherwise, observe the role play and the interaction between the role play participants. DOORKNOCKING This is a Fishbowl activity. The facilitator and workshop participants will perform the activity in front of the workshop, in the same manner as you watch fish swimming around in their bowl. AIM: To understand how to establish a relationship in a very short amount of time, to understand someone's motivation and self-interest, and to find out what issues are hot in the community. TASK: If you have volunteered to be a participant in the activity, then you will play the role you are assigned. Otherwise, observe the role play and the interaction between the role play participants. Session 2 Building an Anarchist Model of Community Organizing Friday August 23 1:30 - 5:00 Session 2: Building an Anarchist Model of Community Organizing (@ the Spice Factory) 1:30 Game, Focus, Goals 1:45 Presentation by Tom Knoche 2:00 Small Group Activity -- Basic Elements of Anarchism 2:30 Small Group Activity -- Building an Anarchist Model of Community Organizing Part 1 3:55 Break 4:00 Small Group Activity -- Building an Anarchist Model of Community Organizing Part 2 Facilitators: Bill, James, Jess, Julie, Matt, Tom Workshop Type: Full Core to Small Groups BASIC ELEMENTS OF ANARCHISM AIM: To identify the major elements of anarchist theory. TASK: Brainstorm a list of concepts, ideas, and theory that form the foundation for anarchism. Prioritize the five most important elements. BUILDING AN ANARCHIST MODEL OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZING PART 1 AIM: To integrate the major elements of anarchism with basic community organizing principles. TASK 1: Using one major element of anarchism, rewrite the following statements about community organizing. Goals The goals of community organizing are to empower people, alter the relations of power, and win concrete victories. Empowering people is a process by which people learn the value of united action through real life experience, and build the self-confidence of the individual. Altering the relations of power means building strong, lasting organizations as vehicles of empowerment for individuals and as a conduit for their united action. Winning concrete victories implies real, immediate improvements in people's lives. Criteria for Success Success is measured by the number of people participating in the organization's actions (actions can be day-to-day organizational tasks, attending meetings, attending demonstrations, etc.), the ability of the organization to grow and exercise group power, and the number of concrete victories that are won. Picking Issues Issues should be selected which are 1) winnable, 2) involve advocacy, not service; and 3) build the organization's constituency, power and resources. Community residents are always the ones who pick the issue. Operation Community organizations have a Board of Directors that are responsible for the planning and implementation of the group. The goal is to have a staffed organization, with an Executive Director, Program/Project staff, and adminstrative support staff (accountants, secretaries, etc.). The Board will have officers (at least a President, Secretary and Treasurer, but often more) and committees (Financial, Personell, Membership, etc.). The organization may have institutional (other organizations) or individual members who participate on program/project committees. Each of these program/project committees usually has a chairperson. Other than special events (actions), the membership comes together at the annual meeting of the organization to elect the Board and affirm the group. Tactics Tactics are chosen that: 1) Focus on the primary or secondary targets of a campaign (an individual is usually chosen to personalize the issue), 2) Put power behind a specific demand (ask for something), 3) Meet organizational goals as well as issue goals (the tactics build the organization as well as helping to win the issue), 4) Are outside the experience of the target, and 5) Are within the experience of the organization's members and they are comfortable with the tactics. BUILDING AN ANARCHIST MODEL OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZING PART 2 AIM: To integrate the major elements of anarchism with basic community organizing principles. Task: Use the same element of anarchism from your last activity to rewrite or add new statements to the following categories. Draw from the paragraphs you produced in the last activity. These statements are taken from Tom Knoche's article "Organizing Communities." Goals 1. Help people experiment with decentralized, collective, and coopertive forms of organization. 2. Increase the control that people have over actions that affect them, and increase local self-reliance. 3. Build a counter-culture that uses all forms of communication to resist illegitimate authority, racism, sexism, capitalism, etc. 4. Strengthen the "social fabric" of neighborhood units -- the network of informal associations, support services, and contacts that enable people to survive and hold on to their sanity in spite of rather than because of the influence of government and bureaucracy in their lives. Criteria for Success 1. People learn skills needed to analyse issues and confront those who exert control over their lives. 2. People learn to interact, make decisions and get things done collectively -- rotating tasks, sharing skills, confronting racism, sexism, hierarchy, etc. 3. Through the organizing work, community residents realize some direct benefit or some resolution of problems they personally face. 4. Existing institutions change their priorities or way of doing things so that the authority of govenment, corporations, and large institutions is replaced by extensions of decentralized, grassroots activity. 5. Community residents feel stronger and better about themselves because of their participation in the collective effort. Picking Issues 1. Service and advocacy work must go hand in hand, especially in very need communities. 2. Issues that pit one segment of the community against another should be avoided. 3. An informal involvement in broad political issues should be maintained on a consistent basis. 4. Avoid the pitfalls of electoral politics. Operation 1. Have a political analysis and provide political education. 2. Be collectively and flexibly organized; decentralize as much as possible. 3. Maintain independance. 4. Reach out to avoid isolation, but keep the focus local. 5. Do not foster cross-class ties. 6. Have a cultural and social dimension. 7. Staff the organization, to the greatest extent possible, with local workers and volunteers. Tactics 1. Be disruptive. 2. Clear, precise and measurable demands are the cornerstone of any organizing campaign. 3. Address different targets simultaneously. 4. Avoid legal tactics. 5. Use direct action. Session 3 Using Organizing to Build Movements Saturday August 24 10:00 - 12:00 Intro/Session 1, with Presentation by Tom Knoche (@ the Spice Factory) 1:30 - 5:00 Session 3: Using Organizing to Build Movements (@ the Spice Factory) 1:30 Game, Focus, Goals 1:45 Presentation by Lorenzo Kom'Boa Ervin 2:00 Small Group Activity -- Anarchist Model Analysis -- Examining Anarchist Projects -- Visioning 7:00 -9:00 Race and Organizing, with George Friday and Lorenzo Kom'Boa Ervin Facilitators: Adam, Amanda, Emanuel, Jason, Jeff, Sara Workshop Type: Full Core to Cluster ANARCHIST MODEL ANALYSIS AIM: To review the newly constructed anarchist model of community organizing. TASK: Using the handout produced from the previous workshops, make a list of recommendations that would change, delete or add to the anarchist model of community organizing. EXAMINING ANARCHIST PROJECTS AIM: To analyze a current anarchist project using the anarchist model of community organizing. TASK: Choose a current anarchist project to analyse. Using the headings below, write statements about that project that incorporate the anarchist model of community organizing. Note the significant differences and new strategies that the anarchist project would have to adopt (understanding that many anarchist projects were not designed to use community organizing as their primary stategy). Examples: Infoshops, Anarchist Black Cross, Anti-Racist Action, Food Not Bombs (FnB), etc. You can use the paragraphs below about FnB as your example if you want. Goals The goal of Food Not Bombs is to feed all people free, healthy, vegetarian food, especially poor and oppressed people and to change how society allocates its resources. FnB would re-allocate resources into human needs areas, like food and housing, and away from militarism, prisons, police repression, corporate subsidies and patriotic fanfare (like the U.N. Anniversary Celebration or the '96 Olympics). Serving free food is a way to proclaim food as an essential human right. Criteria for Success FnB measures its success in the number of people who eat their food and how many meals per week are served. FnB is succesful when it is able to win a campaign to concretely protect the interests of poor and homeless people (example: to stop an anti-homeless law from being passed). Picking Issues Beyond sharing meals with people, FnB takes on political activity when it is necassary to protect their ability to feed people. Also, FnB works specifically on issues that affect poor and homeless people. FnBoften takes on solidarity work with Native American people in a logistical way-- providing food and material support to reservations. FnB does support work for hot issues of the larger left: militarism, anti-war, political prisoners, women's rights -- most often by serving food at demonstrations organized by other people. Operation FnB is a non-hierarchical open collective. Decisions are made at regular meetings by consensus of everyone present. Everyone is invited to particpate, especially the people who eat the food. There are no leaders, officers or spokes-people. In some cases, individuals are in charge of specific projects or specific regular activities (such as being coordinator for a particular meal, or responsible for a regular food pick-up), though there is no authority to make decisions beyond the group consensus. Tactics To match the dual goals of providing food and challenging the failure of a system to recognize food as a human right. FnB acquires food by any means necessary, and prepares and serves it to as many people as possible. To challenge the system for not allocating more resources toward food, FnB serves food in public and visible places to call attention to the fact that people are hungry and the system is wasting resources on projects that do not meet human needs. The tactic is to expose the issue and embarass the system into responding to its shortcomings. VISIONING AIM: To identify what it is that people need to be able to put the anarchist model of community organizing to use. TASK: With your new undertanding of community organizing and the recently developed anarchist model, imagine what organizing work you would like to do. It could be any organizing: geographic or affinity-based, with an existing anarchist project or an existing community based organization or a new organizing project. Figure out what barriers exist that keep you from doing that organizing and what tools or resources would help you engage in that organizing. Explain to your small group the organizing you are imagining, and the tools or resources you need. The scribe records the tools or resources on newsprint-- they will be used to plan the next day's workshop. Session 4 Implementing the Anarchist Model Sunday August 25 10:00 - 12:00 Session 2, with Presentation by Lorenzo Kom'Boa Ervin (@ the Spice Factory) 1:30 - 5:00 Session 4: Implementing the Anarchist Model (@ the Spice Factory) 1:30 Game, Focus, Goals 1:45 Small Group Activity -- Vision to Project -- Evaluation 3:55 Break 4:00 Community Organizing Core Closing Presentation by George Friday 4:30 General Discussion 6:30 - 8:30 All Core Sections Plenary (@ a location T.B.A.) Facilitators: Amanda, James, Jess, Jeff, Julie, Matt Workshop Type: Full Core to Clusters VISION TO PROJECT AIM: To develop a strategy to create the specific tools and resources people need in order to use the anarchist model of community organizing. TASK: Use the strategy chart below to identify the resource people needed, material resources needed, timeline and priority (low, medium, high) for specific tools and resources. Tool/Project Resource People Material Resources Timeline Priority EVALUATION AIM: To reflect on your experiences in the Community Organizing Core Section. TASK: Go around the room and have each participant contrast their expectations and experiences in the Community Organizing Core Section. List specific recommendations on the effectiveness of the content and the process. Resource Guide for Books and Magazines on Community Organizing (A very uncomplete list...but a good start!) Alinsky, Saul D. Rules for Radicals. New York: Ransom House, 1971. _____. Reville for Radicals. Baldelli, Giovanni. Social Anarchism. New York: Aldine-Atherton, 1971. Benello, C. George. From the Ground Up. 1992. Bobo, Kim; Kendall, Jackie, and Max, Steve. Organizing for Social Change: A manual for activists in the 1990s. Seven Locks Press, 1991. Bouchier, David. Radical Citizenship. New York: Schocken Books, 1987. Boyte, Harry. Community is Possible. New York: Harper & Row, 1984. Burghardt, Steve. Organizing for Community Action. 1982. Cawley, Kaye, Mayo and Thompson (eds.). Community or Class Struggle? London: Stage 1, 1977. Center for Third World Organizing. Third Force - Issues & Actions in Communites of Color. (Magazine) Collette, W. Roots to Power: A Manual for Grassroots Organizing. 1984. Coover, Virginia, et al. Resource Manual for a Living Revolution. New Society Publishers, 1981. Delgado, Gary. Organizing the Movement: The Roots and Growth of ACORN. Temple University Press, 1986. Ehrlich, Ehrlich, DeLeon and Morris (eds.). Reinventing Anarchy. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979. Fisher, Robert. Let the People Decide: Neighborhood Organizing in America. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1984. Fisher, Robert and Romanofsky, Peter (eds.). Community Organizing for Urban Social Change. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1981. Foner, Phillip S. (ed.). The Life and Writings of Frederick Douglass. New York: International Publishers, 1975. _____ Beyond the Politics of Place: New Directions in Community Organizing in the 1990s. Applied Research Center, 1994. Glen, John M. Highlander: No Ordinary School, 1932-1962. University of Kentucky Press, 1988. Goodwyn, Lawrence. The Populist Movement. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981. Goodwyn, Lawrence. Democratic Promise: The Populist Movement in America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981. Horton, Aimee Isgrig. n.d. The Highlander Folk School: A History of Its Major Programs, 1932-1961. Carson Publishing. Horwitt, Sanford D. Let Them Call Me Rebel: Saul Alinsky His Life and Legacy. Alfred A. Knopf, 1989. Kahn, Si. Organizing. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1982. _____. How People Get Power. National Association of Social Workers Press, 1994. Lamb, Curt. Political Power in Poor Neighborhoods. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1975. Max, Steve. "Why Organize?" Chicago: Steve Max and the Midwest Academy, 1977. McKnight, John. "Regenerating Community," in Social Policy, Winter 1987, pp. 54-58. Mondros, Jacqueline B. and Wilson, Scott M. Organizing for Power and Empowerment. 1994. Morris, David. "A Globe of Villages: Self-Reliant Community Development," in Building Economic Alternatives, Winter 1987, pp. 7-14. National Organizers Alliance. The ARK - Membership Newsletter of the National Organizers Alliance. (Magazine) Robinson, Chris. Plotting Directions: An Activist's Guide. Philadelphia: Recon Publications, 1982. Roussonpoulos, Dimitrios (ed.). The City and Radical Social Change. Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1982. Russell, Daniel. Political Organizing in Grassroots Politics. ACORN, 1990. Piven, Frances Fox and Cloward, Richard A. Poor People's Movements. New York: Vintage Books, 1979. Schecter, Stephen. The Politics of Urban Liberation. Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1978. Speeter, Greg. Power: A Repossession Manual. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Citizens Involvement Training Project, 1978. Staples, Lee. Roots to Power. New York: Praeger, 1984. Zinn, Howard. SNCC: The New Abolitionists. Beacon Press, 1964. Ward, Colin. Anarchy in Action. New York: Harper & Row, 1973. Ideology on the Table by George Friday >From July 1996 "Ark," the newsletter of the National Organizers Alliance I've been asked to reflect on the panel discussion, the small groups, and what I've heard over lunch and in the hallways [after the Ideology and Organizing Workshop at Gathering II of the National Organizers Alliance]. The people at this Gathering are a diverse group. There are people here who have never used the word [ideology]. There are people who think you'd better not say it out loud. Most folks, though, feel that ideology is a part of who we are, and the work that we do, and very important to explore. Because not talking about it undermines the effectiveness of our work. If we don't conciously name what we are building, and how we have been shaped by capitalist vision, we automatically lose to the right. I think it is often those furthest away from traditional seats of power who have the most to teach us about what we want to create. There are some parallels between the ideology discussion and the reality of privilege. I'll give an example from my life. In my community of origin, I carry educational privilege, because I went to college, and I have to be responsible for that. I also carry heterosexual privilege, and I have chosen how I use that. Then when I think I've got it figured out, I work on it again. Now I'm thinking, I'm a US citizen, what are all the things I take for granted that other folks have to struggle for? So again, I keep working on it. This is an ongoing project. If we're organizing together, when we're done, neither of our ideologies will have stayed unchanged, if we are doing good work. It's not like someone said, we need a list of everything we stand for. We can have a list today, but we might need to talk about it again next week. Building trusting relationships is key. When we use political education to help move people, we must honor where they are, and expect then to honor where we are. We have to take some risks, put something on the table. I'd like to encourage you to look at it as a sort of maintenance, exploring your ideology with your staff or board, or in your community. I think of it like clipping toenails. You don't have to do it everyday, but if you don't keep on clipping them, nobody wants to play footsie with you. Organizing Communities by Tom Knoche >From Social Anarchism Journal, 1993 Many anarchists probably cringe at the notion of any person or group being "organized" and believe that the very idea is manipulative. They point to countless community organization leaders who ended up on government payrolls. They can't see how winning traffic lights and playgrounds does any more than help the system appear pluralistic and effective. Such skepticism makes sense. Community organizing has always been practiced in many different ways to accomplish many different things. In reviewing the history of neighborhood organizing, Robert Fisher summed it up this way: While neighborhood organizing is a political act, it is neither inherently reactionary, conservative, liberal or radical, nor is it inherently democratic and inclusive or authoritarian and parochial. It is above all a political method, an approach used by various segments of the population to achieve specific goals, serve certain interests, and advance clear or ill-defined political perspectives. (Fisher, 1984; p. 158) If we just look at some of the progressive strains of community organizing thought, we still face a lot of confusion about what it is and how it is used. Saul Alinsky, a key figure in the development of community organizing as we know it today, wrote: We are concerned about how to create mass organizations to seize power and give it to the people; to realize the democratic dream of equality, justice, peace, cooperation, equal and full opportunities for education, full and useful employment, health and the creation of those circumstances in which man can have the chance to live by the values that give meaning to life. We are talking about a mass power organization that will change the world. (Alinsky, 1971, p. 3) The Midwest Academy, a training institute for community organizers founded by some ex-civil rights and SDS leaders, asserts that: More and more people are finding that what is needed is a permanent, professionally staffed community membership organization which can not only win real improvements for its members, but which can actually alter the relations of power at the city and state level. These groups [citizen groups] are keeping government open to the people and are keeping our democratic rights intact. (Max, 1977; p. 2) A senior member of ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), a national association of mostly urban community organizations, describes the goal of organizing as strengthening people's collective capacities to bring about social change (Staples, 1984; p. 1). ACORN organized local communities, then employed its constituency at the national level, attempting to move the Democratic Party to the left. Finally, a participant in a workshop on community organizing I conducted a number of years ago characterized community organizing as "manipulating people to do trivial things." In this article, I will focus on how community organizing can be useful in advancing an anarchist vision of social change. Community organizations that build on an anarchist vision of social change are different from other community organizations because of the purposes they have, the criteria they have for success, the issues they work on, the way they operate and the tactics they use. My experience with community organizing spans a 16-year period including four years in Baltimore, Maryland and twelve in Camden, New Jersey. I have primarily worked with very low income people on a wide range of issues. I will draw heavily on my personal experience in this article. I use the term "community organizing" to refer to social change efforts which are based in local geographically defined areas where people live. This is the key distinction between community organizing and other forms of organizing for social change which may be based in workplaces or universities, involving people where they work or study instead of where they live. Some issue-oriented organizations are considered community organizations if their constituency is local. Goals of Anarchist Organizing Anarchist community organizing must be dedicated to changing what we can do today and undoing the socialization process that has depoliticized so many of us. We can use it to build the infrastructure that can respond and make greater advances when our political and economic systems are in crisis and are vulnerable to change. The following purposes illustrate this concept. 1. Helping people experiment with decentralized, collective and cooperative forms of organization. We have to build our American model of social change out of our own experience; we can't borrow revolutionary theory in total from that developed in another historical and/or cultural context. Community organizations can help people log that experience and analyze it. Because of our culture's grounding in defense of personal liberty and democracy, social change engineered by a vanguard or administered by a strong central state will not work here. David Bouchier is on the right track when he says, "For citizen radicals evolution is better than revolution because revolution works" (Bouchier, 1987; p. 139). We must learn new values and practice cooperation rather than competition. Community organizations can provide a vehicle for this "retailing." "This means that a cultural revolution, a revolution of ideas and values and understanding, is the essential prelude to any radical change in the power arrangement of modern society. The purpose of radical citizenship is to take the initiative in this process" (Bouchier, p. 148). Any kind of alternative institution (see Ehrlich, et al., Reinventing Anarchy, p. 346), including cooperatives, worker managed businesses, etc., that offers a chance to learn and practice community control and worker self-management, is important. We must experience together how institutions can be different and better. These alternative institutions should be nonprofit, controlled by the people who benefit from their existence. Most charities and social service agencies do not qualify as alternative institutions because they are staffed and controlled by people who usually are not part of the community they serve; they therefore foster dependence. The recent proliferation of community land trusts in this country is an exciting example of community-based, cooperative and decentralized organizations. Through these organizations, people are taking land and housing off the private market and putting them in their collective control. I have been a board member of North Camden Land Trust in Camden, New Jersey since its inception in 1984. The land trust now controls about thirty properties. A group of thirty low income homeowners who previously were tenants without much hope of home ownership now collectively make decisions concerning this property. The development of the land trust embodies many of the elements that describe community organizing grounded in a social anarchist vision for society. 2. Increasing the control that people have over actions that affect them, and increasing local self-reliance. This involves taking some measure of control away from large institutions like government, corporations and social service conglomerates and giving it to the people most affected by their actions. David Bouchier describes this function as attaining "positive freedoms." Positive freedoms are rights of self-government that are not dependent on or limited by higher powers (Bouchier, p.9). In the neighborhood where I live and work, residents are starting to demand control over land use decisions. They stopped the state and local governments' plan to build a second state prison on the waterfront in their neighborhood. Instead of stopping there, the residents, through a series of block meetings and a neighborhood coalition, have developed a "Peoples' Plan" for that waterfront site. Control of land use has traditionally rested with local government (and state and federal government to a much more limited extent), guided by professional planners and consultants. Neighborhood residents believe they should control land use in their neighborhood, since they are the ones most directly affected by it. The concept of self-reliant communities described by David Morris (1987) also helps us understand the shift in power we are talking about. Self-reliant communities organize to assert authority over capital investment, hiring, bank lending, etc. all areas where decision making traditionally has been in the hands of government or private enterprise. 3. Building a counterculture that uses all forms of communication to resist illegitimate authority, racism, sexism, and capitalism. In low-income neighborhoods, it is also important that this counterculture become an alternative to the dominant culture which has resulted from welfare and drugs. The Populist movement can teach us a lot about building a counterculture. That movement used the press, person-to-person contact via roving rallies and educational lectures, an extensive network of farm cooperatives and an alternative vision of agricultural economics to do this (Goodwyn, 1976; 1981). Every movement organization has to use the media to advance its ideas and values. Educational events, film, community-based newspapers, etc., are all important. The local community advocacy organization in North Camden has done a good job of combining fundraising with the development of counterculture. They have sponsored alternative theater which has explored the issues of battered women, homelessness and sexism. After each play, the theater group conducted an open discussion with the audience about these issues. These were powerful experiences for those who attended. The question of confronting the dominant culture in very low income neighborhoods is one of the greatest challenges facing community organizations. Many families have now experienced welfare dependence for four generations, a phenomenon which has radically altered many peoples' value systems in a negative way. People must worry about survival constantly, and believe that anything they can get to survive they are entitled to, regardless of the effect on others. It has not fostered a cooperative spirit. The response of low-income people to long-term welfare dependency is not irrational, but it is a serious obstacle to functioning in a system of decentralized, cooperative work and services. One experience in this regard is relevant. A soup kitchen called Leavenhouse has operated in Camden for 10 years, during nine of which it was open to anyone who came. A year ago, the soup kitchen changed into a feeding cooperative on weekdays. Guests now have to either work a few hours in the kitchen or purchase a ticket for five dollars which is good for the entire month. Daily average attendance has dropped from 200 to about 20. The idea of cooperating to provide some of the resources necessary to sustain the service is outside the value system of many people who previously used the kitchen. Leavenhouse realizes now that it must address the reasons why people have not responded to the co-op, and is planning a community outreach program designed to build some understanding, trust and acceptance of the idea of cooperative feeding. The 20 people who have joined the co-op have responded favorably. They appreciate the more tranquil eating environment and feel good about their role in it. The co-op members now make decisions about the operation of their co-op. Friendships and information sharing (primarily about jobs) have been facilitated. Fewer people are being served, but meaningful political objectives are now being realized. 4. Strengthening the "social fabric" of neighborhood units that network of informal associations, support services, and contacts that enable people to survive and hold on to their sanity in spite of, rather than because of, the influence of government and social service bureaucracies in their lives. John McKnight (1987) has done a good job of exposing the failure of traditional social service agencies and government in meeting people's needs for a support structure. They operate to control people. Informal associations ("community of associations"), on the other hand, operate on the basis of consent. They allow for creative solutions, quick response, interpersonal caring, and foster a broad base of participation. A good example of fulfilling this purpose is the bartering network that some community organizations have developed. The organization simply prints a listing of people and services they need along with a parallel list of people and services they are willing to offer. This strengthens intraneighborhood communication. In poor neighborhoods, this is especially effective because it allows people to get things done without money, and to get a return on their work which is not taxable. Concerned Citizens of North Camden (CCNC) has supported the development of a Camden "Center for Independent Living" an organization that brings handicapped and disabled people in the city together to collectively solve the problems they face. Twelve step groups are another example of informal, nonprofessional associations that work for people. Criteria for Success Many community organizations measure success by "winning." The tangible result is all that matters. In fact, many organizations evaluate the issues they take on by whether or not they are "winnable." The real significance of what is won and how it is won are of less concern. For organizations that embrace an anarchist vision, the process and the intangible results are at least as important as any tangible results. Increasing any one organization' size and influence is not a concern. The success of community organizing can be measured by the extent to which the following mandates are realized. 1. People learn skills needed to analyze issues and confront those who exert control over their lives; 2. People learn to interact, make decisions and get things done collectively rotating tasks, sharing skills, confronting racism, sexism and hierarchy; 3. Community residents realize some direct benefit or some resolution of problems they personally face through the organizing work; 4. Existing institutions change their priorities or way of doing things so that the authority of government, corporations and large institutions is replaced by extensions of decentralized, grassroots authority; and 5. Community residents feel stronger and better about themselves because of their participation in the collective effort. Picking Issues Much of the literature about community organizing suggests that issues should be selected which are: 1) winnable; 2) involve advocacy, not service; and 3) build the organization's constituency, power and resources. "Good issue campaigns should have the twin goals of winning a victory and producing organizational mileage while doing so" (Staples, 1984; p.53). These guidelines have always bothered me, and my experience suggests that they are off the mark. Issues should be picked primarily because the organization's members believe they are important and because they are consistent with one of more of the purposes listed above. Let me offer a few guidelines which are a bit different. 1. Service and advocacy work must go hand in hand, especially in very needy communities. People get involved with groups because they present an opportunity for them to gain something they want. It may be tangible or intangible, but the motivation to get involved comes with an expectation of relatively short-term gratification. The job of community organizations is to facilitate a process where groups of people with similar needs or problems learn to work together for the benefit of all. Through this process, people learn to work cooperatively and learn that their informal association can usually solve problems more effectively and quickly than established organizations. I will offer an example to illustrate this point. When Concerned Citizens of North Camden (CCNC) organized a squatter campaign in 1981, the folks who squatted and took all of the risks did so because they wanted a house, and because they believed squatting was the best way to get one. Each one of the original 13 squatter families benefited because they got title to their house. The advocacy purpose was served because a program resulted that allowed 150 other families to get a house and some funds to fix it up over the subsequent five years. Because CCNC has stayed involved with each family and facilitated a support network with them (up to the present), 142 of the houses are still occupied by low-income families. The government bureaucracy tried to undermine this program on numerous occasions, but without success. Participants willingly rallied in each crisis because they benefited in a way they valued deeply. The squatter movement allowed them to win something that they knew they would never realistically be able to win through any traditional home ownership programs. The squatters were poor, most had no credit histories and most were Hispanic. Official discredit, for whatever reasons, was meaningless because people knew the effort had worked for them. In my experience, I have never been a part of a more exciting and politically meaningful effort than the CCNC squatting effort in 1981. The initial squatting with 13 families was followed by five years of taking over abandoned houses which the City reluctantly sanctioned because of the strength and persistence of the movement. 2. Issues that pit one segment of the community against another for example, issues which favor homeowners over renters, blacks over Puerto Ricans, etc. should be avoided. Most issues can be addressed in ways that unify neighborhood residents rather than divide them. 3. An informal involvement in broad political issues should be maintained on a consistent basis. While I believe the kind of decentralized associations which form the basis for any anarchist vision of social change are most easily formed and nurtured at the local level (neighborhood or citywide), people must also connect in some way with broader social change issues. Social change cannot just happen in isolated places; we must build a large and diverse movement. We need to integrate actions against militarism, imperialism, nuclear power, apartheid, etc., with action on local issues. They often can and should be tied together. This requires getting people to regional and national political events from time to time, and supporting local activities which help people to connect with these broader issues. 4. Avoid the pitfalls of electoral politics. This is a very controversial area of concern for community organizations. The organizations I have worked with in Camden have vacillated in their stance vis-a-vis electoral politics. The danger of cooptation through involvement in this arena is severe. Whenever a group of people start getting things done and build a credible reputation in the community, politicians will try to use the organization or its members to their advantage. I have yet to witness any candidate for public office who maintained any kind of issue integrity. Once in the limelight, people bend toward the local interests that have the resources necessary to finance political campaigns. They want to win more than they want to advance any particular platform on the issues. We delude ourselves if we believe any politicians will support the progressive agenda of a minority constituency when their political future depends on them abandoning it. I have participated in organizing campaigns where politicians were exploited because of vulnerability and where one politician was successfully played off against another. It is much easier for a community organization to use politicians to advance a cause if neither the organization nor its members are loyal to any officeholder. My experience says that any organized and militant community-based organization can successfully confront elected officials regardless of whether they are friends or enemies. Operation For organizations committed to the long term process of radical social change, the way they operate is more important than any short-term victories that might be realized. The discipline, habits and values that are developed and nurtured through an organization's day-to-day life are an important part of the revolutionary process. Some guidelines for operation follow. 1. Have a political analysis and provide political education. Lower-class and working class neighborhood organizations must develop long-range goals which address imbalances in a class society, an alternative vision of what people are fighting for, a context for all activity, whether pressuring for a stop sign or an eviction blockage. Otherwise, as has repeatedly happened, victories that win services or rewards will undermine the organization by "proving" that the existing system is responsive to poor and working people and therefore, in no need of fundamental change. (Fisher, 1984; p.162) Any organization which is serious about social change and committed to democratic control of neighborhoods and workplaces devote considerable energy to self-development building individual skills and self-confidence and providing basic political education. The role of the state in maintaining inequality and destroying self-worth must be exposed. This is particularly necessary in low income and minority neighborhoods where people have been most consistently socialized to believe that they are inferior, that the problems they face are individual ones rather than systemic ones, and where poor education has left people without the basic skills necessary to understand what goes on around them. Self-esteem is low, yet social change work requires people who are self-confident and assertive. This dilemma is another of the major challenges in community organizing. The socialization process that strips people of their self-esteem is not easily or quickly reversed. This problem mandates that all tasks be performed in groups (for support and skill-sharing), and that training and preparation for all activities be thorough. 2. Be collectively and flexibly organized; decentralize as much as possible. Radical organizations must always try to set an example of how organizations can be better than the institutions we criticize. All meetings and financial records should be open and leadership responsibilities rotated. Active men and women must work in all aspects of the organization office work, fundraising, decision making, financial management, outreach, housekeeeping, etc. Teams of people should work on different projects, with coordination provided by an elected council. Pyramidal hierarchy with committees subordinate to and constrained by a strong central board should be avoided. The organization must remain flexible so that it can respond quickly to needs as they arise. 3. Maintain independence. This is extremely important and extremely difficult. No organization committed to radical social change can allow itself to become financially dependent on the government or corporations. This does not mean that we can't use funds from government or private institutions for needed projects, but we can't get ourselves in a position where we owe any allegiance to the funders. In 1983, the Farm Labor Organizing Committee was involved in a march from Toledo, Ohio to the Campbell's Soup headquarters in Camden, New Jersey. They were demanding three-party collective bargaining between Campbell's, the farmers it buys from, and the farm laborers who pick for the farmers. A coalition of groups in Camden worked to coordinate the final leg of the march through Camden. Many community-based organizations in Camden, however, refused to participate because they were dependent on donations of food or money from Campbell's Soup. The bankruptcy of such behavior was driven home last year when Campbell's closed their Camden plant and laid off 1,000 workers. They made no special effort to soften the impact on the workers or the community. All resources come at a price even donations. We simply cannot accept funds from individuals or groups who condition their use in ways that constrain our work, or we must ignore the conditions and remain prepared to deal with the consequences later. Alternative funding sources are providing a badly needed service in this regard. In Philadelphia, the Bread and Roses Community Fund raises money for distribution to social change organizations. In 1983, it spun off the Delaware Valley Community Reinvestment Fund, an alternative lending institution which provides credit for community-based housing and community development projects. Social change organizations in the Philadelphia/Camden area are extremely indebted to these two support organizations. They play a vital role in helping organizations to maintain their independence. 4. Reach out to avoid isolation, but keep the focus local. Community-based organizations must maintain loose ties with other grassroots groups. Progressive groups should be able to easily coalesce when that makes sense. We can always benefit from ideas and constructive criticism from supportive people who are not wrapped up in the day to day activity of our own organization. This is another way in which left-wing fundraising/grantmaking groups like the Bread and Roses Community Fund in the Philadelphia area play an important role. They identify and bring together those groups in the region with a similar political agenda. Through Bread and Roses, the community advocacy organization in North Camden (CCNC) has maintained a very loose but productive relationship with the Kensington Joint Action Council (KJAC) in Philadelphia. KJAC squatted first, and helped CCNC plan its squatter campaign. CCNC spun off a land trust first and assisted KJAC in the development of their own land trust, Manos Unidas. Some ideas they developed for their land trust in terms of building comraderie among members are now being considered by North Camden Land Trust. Statewide and national organizations try very hard to pull in active local organizations and get leaders involved in issues at the state level. Be wary of the drain this can place on the local work. Cloward and Piven, in their Poor People's Movements, do a wonderful job of illustrating this danger in their discussion of welfare rights organizing. Successes are won via direct action, not via formal organization. 5. Do not foster cross-class ties. This applies especially to community organizing in low income areas where the local resources are extremely scarce. Many well-to-do "do-gooder" organizations like to have a ghetto project. It makes them feel good. Community organizations do not exist to alleviate ruling class guilt. Dependency on upper-class skills and money is a problem. Poor and working people must wage their own struggle. An illustration of this is provided by the soup kitchen in North Camden. Suburban church folks, once they heard about Leavenhouse, were more than willing to send in volunteers each day to prepare and serve the meal. Leavenhouse told them not to bother, except perhaps occasionally with two or three people at a time. This allows the soup kitchen to develop local ownership, and for neighborhood residents to feel good about taking care of each other. It avoids the traditional social service model where one group comes into the city and delivers a service to another group of people who live there and takes it. Leavenhouse does accept money and food donations from outside the neighborhood, but its basis operating costs are covered with the rent of the community members who actually live at Leavenhouse. The outside income is extra; without it Leavenhouse will not shut down. 6. Have a cultural and social dimension. Cultural and social events not only help to build a counterculture, but they help people feel good about who they are and where they came from. This is an important dynamic in overcoming powerlessness. Political music and film are especially effective in building class unity and strength, and in providing basis political education. 7. Staff the organization, to the greatest extent possible, with local workers and volunteers. This seems obvious enough, but many community organizations draw on outsiders to perform the bulk their work. In Camden, nonprofit community organizations which provide affordable housing do it in three different ways. One organization matches suburban church groups with vacant houses. The church groups then purchase materials and provide volunteer labor to do the rehabilitation work. Another group relies on contractors to perform the work, few of which are in Camden. A third group has hired and trained neighborhood residents to do all rehabilitation work. The workers are paid a decent wage for what they do. The latter approach develops skills in the neighborhood, allows neighborhood residents to feel good about improving their community, and fosters cooperative work habits which the construction crew members will carry into other organizations in the community. Since the crew employed by the third organization is paid a decent wage, the first organization mentioned above rehabilitates more houses for less money. Again, when the commitment is to social change, the short-term tangible results are not the most important measures of success. Tactics A considerable body of literature has been written about tactics in organizing and political work. I do not want to rehash all of that here, so I'll offer just a few guidelines about tactics that have consistently proven themselves. The discussion here is relevant to advocacy campaigns designed to take some measure of authority from government or private interest and put it in community control, or to force a reallocation of resources (public or private) in the interest of the community. 1. Be disruptive. The tendency today is for community organizations to be less militant and confrontational, working through established community and political leaders to "engineer" the changes they want. No tendency could be more dangerous to the future of community organizing. The historical record and my experience say the opposite. We must be disruptive. No guideline is more important in the consideration of tactics. We can't move the system by testifying at hearings, negotiating at meetings and lobbying elected officials. We must defy the rules of the system that fails to meet our needs. We must use guerilla tactics that harass, confront, embarrass and expose that system and its functionaries. 2. Clear, precise and measurable demands are the cornerstone of any organizing campaign. A group must know exactly what they want before they begin to confront the opposition. 3. Gradually escalate the militancy of your tactics. The tactics in a campaign should gradually escalate in militancy, so that people new to political struggle are not intimidated. Let the militancy of the tactics increase at about the same pace as the intensity of the anger. 4. Address different targets simultaneously. The tactics should be simultaneously directed at different parts of the system that are responsible for the injustice or grievance that needs to be resolved. In the campaign to stop construction of a second State prison in their neighborhood, North Camden residents directed tactics at the Commissioner of Corrections, the private landowner who was willing to sell the waterfront land to the state for the prison, local politicians, the governor and the two gubernatorial candidates. 5. Avoid legal tactics. Legal challenges are difficult. They take a lot of energy and money, people who aren't trained in the law have a very difficult time understanding the process, and they are easy to lose. I have never experienced success with a legal challenge. When North Camden residents opposed construction of the first State prison in their neighborhood, they sued the state on environmental and land use grounds because the state planned to use valuable waterfront land for the prison. After a year of preparations, the case was heard before an Administrative Law judge. He threw the case out on a technicality. Understand that he was appointed by a governor who had made a public commitment to construct 4,000 more prison beds during his term in office. Our legal system is set up to protect the interests of private property. Using it to dismantle the institutions that thrive on private property is obviously problematic. 6. Use direct action. Direct actions are those that take the shortest route toward realization of the ends desired, without depending on intermediaries. A simple example might help to clarify. If a group of tenants is having a problem with a landlord refusing to make needed repairs, they can respond in several ways. They could take the landlord to court. They could get the housing and health inspectors to issue violations and pressure the landlord to make repairs. Or they could withhold rent from the landlord themselves, and use the money withheld to pay for the repairs. Along the same vein, they might picket the landlord's nice suburban home and leaflet all of his neighbors with information about how he treats people. The first two options put responsibility for getting something done in the hands of a government agency or law enforcement official. The latter course of actions keeps the tenants in control of what happens. At a major state-funded construction project in Camden, residents wanted to make sure that city residents and minorities got construction jobs. Following the lead of some militant construction workers in New York City, they organized people who were ready for work, and blocked the gate to the job site at starting time. Their position was simple; they would move when local people were hired. The group got talked into negotiating and supporting an affirmative action program that would force the contractor to hire local people whenever the union hall couldn't provide a minority or city resident to fill an opening. The enforcement of that program was so mired in red tape that only a handful of local workers got hired. The group would have fared much better if they had stuck with their original tactic the most direct one. 7. Have fun. The tactics used should be fun for the participants. This isn't always possible, but often is. Street theater can often be used to challenge a routine action into a fun one. Let me provide a few examples. When Concerned Citizens of North Camden (CCNC) ran its homeowner program (the program which resulted from the squatting in 1981), the City tried various mechanisms to discredit it. On one occasion when they threatened to cut some of the public fund involved in it, CCNC conducted a funeral march with about 100 people and carried a coffin from North Camden to City Hall where a hearing was being held on the Community Development Block Grant funds. Right in the middle of the hearing, a squatter came out from inside the coffin and told the crowd how the people's movement could not be silenced and make a mockery of the whole hearing. The effect was spectacular, as was the press coverage the next day. When trying to stop the second prison, residents circulated a special issue of the community newspaper that made fun of the land owner, the mayor and the Commissioner of Corrections. The front page of the paper included photos of the three, captioned with the names of the Three Stooges (the resemblance was striking). The text on the front page made fun of each person's role in the project. We circulated the paper at a big public meeting which all three of these individuals attended. It helped give people courage and set the atmosphere for people to freely speak their minds. When people talk about the prison campaign, they laugh and remember "the three stooges." Finally, when the homeless problem started to escalate in Camden (1983), we learned that people were being turned away from available shelters because there was not enough space. Leavenhouse, a local soup kitchen, then started to serve its meals on the steps of City Hall one day each week. This created a party atmosphere; a couple hundred people would gather to eat and hang out every Wednesday at noon. As the weather got colder it because less fun, but the persistence was important. Three months after we started, in December, the City agreed to make a public building available as a shelter and agreed to adopt a policy that no homeless person would be denied shelter in Camden. The good aspect of this action was that homeless people were able to participate and help make it happen. It was a concrete way that they could have fund and feel good about helping to improve their own situation. Concluding Comments The kind of community described here is not easy or straightforward. It can be extremely frustrating, with many pitfalls, temptations and diversions pushing it off the track and allowing it to assume a more liberal posture. This article described some of the main challenges: overcoming the welfare/drugs culture; maintaining independence; and working with people with few skills and low self-esteem. One other deserves mention mobility. In our society, mobility is expected. People are supposed to move to take a better job, to find a better house, etc. It isacceptable to displace people to build new expressways and universities. The average American moves once every five years. This mobility attests to the stability of community organizations. Leaders and workers may get trained, get involved and then leave before they have been able to give much back to the organization. The drug traffic in many low-income neighborhoods exacerbates the stability problem; families face crises on a regular basis which take priority over community involvement. The revolutionary work of community organizations, would be enhance with more population stability. Why aren't jobs created for people where they are? Why aren't a mix of housing types and sizes available within all communities? Why isn't displacement avoided at all cost? We need to address these questions if our communities are going to be more fertile areas for community organizing. Community organizing from an anarchist perspective acknowledges that no revolution will be meaningful unless many Americans develop new values and behavior. This will require a history of work in cooperative, decentralized, revolutionary organizations in communities, workplaces and schools. The task before us is to build and nurture these organizations wherever we can. There are no shortcuts. ---------- End of Document