ZNet Articles
ZMag Articles
ZCommentaries
ZAudios
ZVideos
Blog Posts
Books
A New Organization?
By Michael Albert at Apr 13, 2011 |
|
Since you are reading this in the ZBlog system, then you have certainly seen the alternate top page of ZNet with the description of a possible organization for you to imagine, and a set of three questions about how you would likely relate to it.
You might wonder, what silliness is this? First we should imagine an organization. Then we should imagine our reaction to it. As per the poll instructions.
Well, think down the road a bit. How far? I don't know. Maybe soon. Maybe further. That's actually the issue. How far?
At some point in the hopefully near, or maybe less near, or perhaps more distant future, some people will start working on, and then with many others will actually establish a new organization, spanning countries and with national instances in each.
At that point, unless you were already on board, you would face the choice the poll raises. To join or not. To participate or not. The choice would become pressing if this new organization were to become important, maybe even profoundly important, in a process of change around the world.
Do we know that any of the above will happen? No. But is some or most of this quite plausible? Yes. But how far off?
And could an international organization with branches in countries - and also chapters locally, all around the world - have a very positive effect, even right now, or soon, if it existed? Of course it could. But when?
Think about the Arab Spring, about the wars all over the the Middle East and Northern Africa and around the world, about the profound transformations under way in Latin America, about the growing struggles sweeping Europe and the U.S. too around income distribution and government functions and budgets and foreclosures and so on.
Think about the anti corporate globalization movement and imagine it gearing up again and about another international movement - with national components, challenging corporate media, or seeking a worldwide shorter work week, and so on.
Imagine that a new international organization had sufficient members with sufficient commitment for the branches in different countries to assist one another's campaigns, and within countries, for chapters to do likewise for each other's more local agendas.
One could go on and on with the potential benefits.
The poll seeks to determine whether folks would relate to a particular type of new organization if it were to exist, grow, and become compelling. If the answer is no, at least at this time, then why should anyone currently try to create such a thing? But if the answer is yes, for sufficient numbers of people, then certainly some folks ought to consider making the effort. Let's find out.
How far off? When? Maybe now.
The main purpose of this blog post, however, is a not only to say - come on, take the poll so we can all see where we are broadly at on this key issue - but to say, as well, if you read the organizational description and you have things you want to say about it - concerns, other issues, or whatever else - why not write a comment or if you want to say more, post your own blog? Similarly, if you take the poll and you feel like you would like to enlarge upon your preferences, or discuss some aspects further, or raise some questions, again, why not comment or blog?
The first 500 people taking the poll have been so positive it is very hopeful.
But will the next 500 be similar. What about the 100,000 free members? What about the 300,000 who use the site at all. What about - beyond our users?
Please answer the poll, whatever you feel! The more answers, the more information, the more may be possible.
Here are the first batch of results...
Supposing such an organization did exist, would you... (Total Answering: 502)
Expect the organization to have a positive impact. (percent choosing: 53%)
Hope, with doubts, for a positive impact. (percent choosing: 44%)
Fear the organization might do more harm than good. (percent choosing: 2%)
Expect the organization to do more harm than good. (percent choosing: 0%)
Given your feelings noted above, would you: (Total Answering: 503)
Promptly join. (percent choosing: 63%)
Consider joining but hold back pending future results. (percent choosing: 34%)
Definitely not join. (percent choosing: 2%)
Finally, if you were to join, how would you most likely relate to the organization? (Total Answering: 499)
Pay dues and also participate in programs, try to recruit, etc. (percent choosing: 52%)
Pay dues, but barely participate beyond that. (percent choosing: 18%)
Participate, but not be able or willing to pay dues. (percent choosing: 10%)
Hope it would warrant your time and dues, but wait for evidence. (percent choosing: 19%)
making it work
By Wilson, Brad at Apr 17, 2011 06:11 AM
My thoughts on making such an organization work start with succcessful organizing. Are there successful models for such an organization. I am most motivated by an organization that's close enough to home that i can be involved in negotiations with policy makers, or prior to that, getting them to the table. That's what I find builds movements. You need to know what to do with the peole once they join. When there's a hot issue, and people show up, know what to do. We've had hot issues in Iowa like hog factories, where 500 people showed up at a county meeting, then 500 more in another county, but the group in charge didn't necessarily know how to mobilize them well. Another group got my name and I was soon at meetings with people who have the power to decide. I've posted some information on organizing that is related to this at my page.
Iowa has a problem on farm issues of getting out away from Des Moines and Ames, in the center, because it's 2 hours or more each way for staff. It would be great to hook up with z folks around here, 140 miles east of Des Moines, but then we need to find some common issues that we care deeply about. We can't do it all.
A big barrier, however, is to agree on methods. We have people in the state who get arrested in politicians offices, so they do go to who has the power to decide, instead of passing cars, but they don't seem to believe in asking a Senator, for example, to do anything except listen to them talk for a while. I see this as an issue of despair.
One issue on this is to have an effective strategy for when they say "no" to "demands," as they almost always do. Most activists seem not to understand that, in my experience. There's a big difference between those who have been helped to win a series of victory steps and some big victories, and those who have only ever lost during their activism. (I once took a call, in Iowa, from the Chairman of a Congressional Banking Committee, conceding to us on the Community Reinvestment Act! That made an impression on me.)
Related to this is motivation, related to the growth experience of movement work. My academic background is in advanced development and social problems (something in a program developed out of the 1960s student activism). I think good organizing does that. It motivates.
I recommend Charles Hampden-Turner's "Radical Man: The Process of Psycho-Social Development" on this topic of motivational psychology. In part, it's a psychology of paradigm change. It's hard to change paradigms of activism, or of issues. I'm working to change the food movements paradigm that says farm subsidies caused low prices, and, by implication, that a free market fixes them. In each case, it's hard to change a paradigm. But a successful movement, the one that really wins, is not what we've been able to do so far. It requires that we change.
Reply this comment