Rules for Radicals, Chapters 2 & 3: Of means and ends
In reading these next couple of chapters of Alinsky, the following passages/citations stood out to me. As always, I would love to know your response on my take and what else stood out to you.
“Action is for mass salvation and not for the individual’s personal salvation” (p. 25). This strikes me as the heart of solidaristic work and reminds me of the aboriginal proverb, “If you have come to help me you are wasting your time, but, if you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together.” Our work is neither evangelistic nor missionary, which Matt Masucci and I describe in other work as serving one’s own needs and serving perceived needs, respectively. Rather, our work should be about dialogical and reciprocal action—with, not for. Alinsky is calling us, it seems, to make sure our work is done collectively, which requires us to move outside that rhetorical noise that Rachel and Milton have referred to. A question for us is, how can we better connect for this more liberatory movement? And, how can we better link our liberatory struggles? What will draw us into closer solidarity with those with whom we claim to be doing our work?
“The most unethical of all means is the non-use of any means” (p. 26). Here Alinsky takes another shot at the “do-Nothings.” How can we avoid getting lumped into this category? We know the stakes for kids in our schools, parents in our community, friends in our churches and other organizations. We see the systems (racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, nationalism) that structure their/our lives. What are we ready/willing to do about these? What movement away from our safe harbor can we make? What moment of creation are we ready to crack open? How can we find the right side of history?
Under the fourth rule of means and ends, “In the politics of human life, consistency is not a virtue” (p. 31). This speaks to me about the imperfectness of our actions, the impreciseness of our work. It also speaks to me in a similar way that Cornel West describes the “jazz freedom fighter”—we must be improvisational in our work, open to change. There is not one way to do our work—and because the systems we struggle against are so fluid, we must avail ourselves to improvisation and accept the imperfectness and imprecision of our actions. Thus, praxis is crucial to our attitude and philosophy. We must be ready to reflect on our work, theorize anew, and then jump back in with retooled and rejuvenated action.
“It is the power of active citizen participation pulsing upward, providing a unified strength for a common purpose. Power is an essential life force always in operation, either changing the world or opposing change” (p. 51). Along these lines, Paul Kivel suggests that change happens when people get together. So, our work is not work of leadership, but of organization, organizing ‘active citizen participation’: “The ego of the organizer is stronger and more monumental than the ego of the leader. The leader is driven by the desire for power, while the organizer is driven by the desire to create” (p. 61). What are we, as organizers, ready to create? Outside of our support for one another in the needed work we do, individually, what will characterize our collective action with the marginalized/disenfranchised/oppressed? What are the choke points of the systems we resist that we can exploit and expose in order for others to see the blatant injustices foisted upon us—that constrain all our lives, limit our human-ness, and keep liberation at bay. The Rouge Forum attempts to accomplish this through resistance to standardized tests and delinking schools and the military. Rethinking Schools attempts to do this through curriculum. Ed Action wants to take on NCLB (finally). Kentucky Youth Advocates has gone the way of research, exposing the problems to local and state school boards, and a focus on legislation in order to help families who are poor. Where does the PrESS Network fit into this calculus? How might our local work coalesce with these state and national movements?
“Action is for mass salvation and not for the individual’s personal salvation” (p. 25). This strikes me as the heart of solidaristic work and reminds me of the aboriginal proverb, “If you have come to help me you are wasting your time, but, if you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together.” Our work is neither evangelistic nor missionary, which Matt Masucci and I describe in other work as serving one’s own needs and serving perceived needs, respectively. Rather, our work should be about dialogical and reciprocal action—with, not for. Alinsky is calling us, it seems, to make sure our work is done collectively, which requires us to move outside that rhetorical noise that Rachel and Milton have referred to. A question for us is, how can we better connect for this more liberatory movement? And, how can we better link our liberatory struggles? What will draw us into closer solidarity with those with whom we claim to be doing our work?
“The most unethical of all means is the non-use of any means” (p. 26). Here Alinsky takes another shot at the “do-Nothings.” How can we avoid getting lumped into this category? We know the stakes for kids in our schools, parents in our community, friends in our churches and other organizations. We see the systems (racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, nationalism) that structure their/our lives. What are we ready/willing to do about these? What movement away from our safe harbor can we make? What moment of creation are we ready to crack open? How can we find the right side of history?
Under the fourth rule of means and ends, “In the politics of human life, consistency is not a virtue” (p. 31). This speaks to me about the imperfectness of our actions, the impreciseness of our work. It also speaks to me in a similar way that Cornel West describes the “jazz freedom fighter”—we must be improvisational in our work, open to change. There is not one way to do our work—and because the systems we struggle against are so fluid, we must avail ourselves to improvisation and accept the imperfectness and imprecision of our actions. Thus, praxis is crucial to our attitude and philosophy. We must be ready to reflect on our work, theorize anew, and then jump back in with retooled and rejuvenated action.
“It is the power of active citizen participation pulsing upward, providing a unified strength for a common purpose. Power is an essential life force always in operation, either changing the world or opposing change” (p. 51). Along these lines, Paul Kivel suggests that change happens when people get together. So, our work is not work of leadership, but of organization, organizing ‘active citizen participation’: “The ego of the organizer is stronger and more monumental than the ego of the leader. The leader is driven by the desire for power, while the organizer is driven by the desire to create” (p. 61). What are we, as organizers, ready to create? Outside of our support for one another in the needed work we do, individually, what will characterize our collective action with the marginalized/disenfranchised/oppressed? What are the choke points of the systems we resist that we can exploit and expose in order for others to see the blatant injustices foisted upon us—that constrain all our lives, limit our human-ness, and keep liberation at bay. The Rouge Forum attempts to accomplish this through resistance to standardized tests and delinking schools and the military. Rethinking Schools attempts to do this through curriculum. Ed Action wants to take on NCLB (finally). Kentucky Youth Advocates has gone the way of research, exposing the problems to local and state school boards, and a focus on legislation in order to help families who are poor. Where does the PrESS Network fit into this calculus? How might our local work coalesce with these state and national movements?
posted by adam at 12:58 PM
3 Comments:
Concluding my revision of Of Means and Ends , Alinsky brought forth the evidence that as nuanced as our actions are, we tend to justify our own and others means using very limited end-qualifications. Of course, if our actions are for the good of humankind then our ends would most likely achieve that. But that is as specific as "if you're not for us you're against us." As far as the PrESS acting for (general?) mass salvation as opposed to personal, I feel rather passive. Based on my inexperience with group organizing, "professional" dealings, and being realistic when it comes to means, I find myself wondering if PrESS is engaged in a liberatory movement what are the short-term ends? A reading of the mission statement tells much about what I believe is internal to all of us, yet how to bring that out in the form of action is lost to me. Not wanting to come off as a cynic, I do feel that work on PD, Fairdale's outdoor classroom, Rouge Forum prep., Jamaica, and the everyday practical work that each member engages in- especially teaching- is a struggle within itself. Still, I know that all must within them have the desire to see PrESS "gain solidarity with those with whom we claim to be doing our work for." It is here the value of Alinsky's words come to fruit. From his analysis of Gandhi and Nehru to moral rationalization, Alinsky calls for a critical examination, less only the actual historical facts, to bring our minds from the limited micro vision to one of the macro-encompassing ideas beyond our structured mentality. Keeping in faith with the American Revolution that can never really stop because it would even advocate for the end of America. It seems this is the global ill we, as a bordered land, have brought upon ourselves. What ends drive the structural violence we see domestically and internationally? Indeed, how can we find the right side of history? The do-nothings have a thriving membership, do we feel we subscribe? The choke points will be made apparent when a genuine resistance to the specific system is obtained. This is my struggle- simply obtaining the information that overwhelmingly drives me seek its change. I believe that if I am to come to disagreement with someone, something-it is my obligation with others to find it's alternative. Our aims through education carry strong possibilities as areas of greatest effect.
Wow. Good stuff!
Remembering, thought this kind of touched on some of the common ground of last night’s book discussion.
To quote adam from an excerpt of his poem My Brother is Love:
It
Is
process
Not an arrival--
A departure
Not salvation--
But survival
If we think we’re there
We’re not
We’re lost
We have lost
Justice demands
that
we
remain
So glad to know and love a group such as all of you.
Post a Comment
<< Home