 |
Topics:
Community
Reweaving
the Fabric
The Iron Rule and the IAF Strategy for Power and Politics
Ernesto
Cortes, Jr.
Reprinted with permission from Interwoven Destinies: Cities and
the Nation, Henry G. Cisneros, ed. pp. 295-319. (New York: W.W.
Norton & Company, 1993). Copyright © 1993 by The American Assembly.
All rights reserved.
Introduction
The Industrial
Areas Foundation (IAF) is the center of a national network of
broad based, multiethnic, interfaith organizations in primarily
poor and moderate-income communities. Created over fifty years
ago by Saul Alinsky and currently directed by Ed Chambers, it
now provides the leadership training for over thirty organizations
representing nearly 1,000 institutions and over I million families.
The central role of the IAF organizations is to build the competence
and confidence of ordinary citizens and taxpayers so that they
can reorganize the relationships of power and politics in their
communities, in order to reshape the physical and cultural face
of their neighborhoods. The IAF works with organizations in the
New York City area, Texas, California, Arizona, Maryland, Tennessee,
and the United Kingdom, and is assisting the development of about
a dozen more in other regions.
Challenges
of the 1990s
There is
a consensus that the quality of life in our cities has seriously
deteriorated over the last twenty years. This thesis runs through
a number of popular works, including Robert Reich's The Work of
Nations, John Kenneth Galbraith's Culture of Contentment, William
Julius Wilson's The Truly Disantavantaged, and William Schneider's
Atlantic Monthly article on the growing suburbanization of American
political life. Clearly what has occurred is Reich's "secession
of the successful," that is, the distancing of the wealthy and
fortunate from the fate and communities of the less fortunate.
As a result, there has been a deterioration in the quality of
life of our cities that has profoundly affected the economic,
social, and political health of this nation.
There are, in fact, a number of serious crises affecting our society:
(1) the decline of our cities, particularly the exodus of meaningful
employment and leadership opportunities; (2) the crisis of our
educational system; (3) the changing structure of our economy;
(4) a pervasive cynicism and withdrawal from public life; and
(5) an attenuated moral, cultural, and civic infrastructure. Unfortunately,
to the extent that these issues are addressed at all, well-meaning
people tend to develop solutions that deal with crises in isolation
from one another, thereby limiting understanding of the mutually
reinforcing and cumulative impact. This conceptual failing contributes
to our political incompetence and lack of political imagination.
There has
been widespread agreement heretofore that our politics and our
political leaders have been unable to address these problems in
any effective, relevant fashion. As a result, most of our adult
population believes that politics is largely irrelevant to them.
Our public discourse has become impoverished amidst a growing
disillusionment and stasis inhibiting our ability to act collectively
to acknowledge and confront urban decay.
At first
glance, the decline in political institutions and public discourse
may seem to have little place in a discussion on poverty. Yet
clearly, one of the most significant causes of poverty in the
United Sates is the inability of working people to absorb the
costs of change in the economic and political institutions of
the United States.[1] There are always costs to change in a dynamic
economy, and invariably those who are the least articulate, least
connected, and least well organized bear an inordinate share of
the burden of these costs.
Reagan economics,
excessive financial deregulation, the acquisition of enormous
corporate debt, and the burden of financing that debt have disproportionately
affected the poor and working people in the United States. The
globalization of economic competition has left U.S. firms facing
intense competition from lower-cost producers in other countries.
These lower production costs are frequently due to lower wages
paid by Third World employers. Additional competition is due to
more efficient, higher-quality production methods by producers
in industrialized nations like Germany and Japan that may actually
pay higher wages than U.S. firms. U.S. companies are under intense
pressure to cut costs, which usually means cutting jobs.
As documented
in Frank Levy's Dollars and Dreams [2], real income in the United
States has been declining since 1973, affecting most seriously
the incomes of the less well educated. Whereas one job used to
be sufficient to keep a family above the poverty line, a similar
standard of living now requires two or more such jobs. Families
that used to survive on the income of just one adult worker now
have to have at least two, and possibly three or four—the third
or fourth often being children. This development has driven more
and more families below the poverty line, leaving even those above
poverty without the time or the energy for their children, their
families, or their communities.
The potential
impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is another
case in point. Even though in the long run NAFTA will probably
be beneficial to people who live in the United States and Mexico,
in the short term there will be tremendous costs on both sides—costs
that will once again be borne primarily by the least powerful
and least articulate. For example, the immigration that is expected
to result from NAFTA, particularly as Mexico phases out corn farming
subsidies, will affect most severely the urban poor in the United
States and the rural poor in Mexico. The influx of immigrants
willing to work long hours for low wages has already depressed
wage levels and increased competition for relatively unskilled,
low-wage jobs in the Los Angeles area. As Jack Miles articulated
in his disconcerting Atlantic Monthly article, the African-American
underclass in Los Angeles has been largely squeezed out of the
unskilled labor market by Latino immigrants, who in turn are forced
to compete with even more recently arrived immigrants. By the
end of the 1980s, 40 percent of all Los Angeles residents were
first-generation immigrants.[3] Aside from the economic tension
this situation has created, the lack of shared values or common
history has made the Los Angeles community increasingly vulnerable
to fragmentation. The resulting polarization makes it very difficult
to identify shared interests.
Despite the
obvious political nature of issues such as the costs of change
in a dynamic economy and the divisiveness of competition for a
limited pool of resources, political and social renewal is rarely
discussed as a means of alleviating poverty. Instead, society
focuses on the results of the crises rather than the causes, results
such as hunger, homelessness, unemployment, violence, and so forth.
Although attention to the immediate needs of the poor is an important
facet of the resolution of these crises, such a short-term solution
will have only limited success without corresponding long-term
changes in social and political institutions.
Importance
of Political Renewal
The premise
of the IAF is that the most important strategy for the alleviation
of poverty is one that is imbedded in the re-creation of cultural
and civic institutions that identify and mentor people capable
of exerting the leadership to organize constituencies for the
development of stronger, more active and cohesive communities.
Such an approach recognizes that the problem of poverty is more
than the lack of sufficient income. It is a crushing burden on
the soul. Yet because such pressure is so deforming to the human
spirit, the impoverished often view themselves as incapable of
participating in the life of the civic culture and political community.
This makes creating broad based institutions extraordinarily difficult.
Yet there can be no transformation of the human spirit without
development of practical wisdom and meaningful action through
the practice of collaborative politics.
Politics,
properly understood, is about collective action initiated by people
who have engaged in public discourse. Politics is about relationships
enabling people to disagree, argue, interrupt one another, clarify,
confront, and negotiate, and through this process of debate and
conversation to forge a compromise and a consensus that enables
them to act. Practical wisdom is equivalent to good judgment and
what the Greeks called praxis, the action that is aimed, calculated,
and reflected upon. People must be given the opportunity to develop
practical wisdom, to develop the kind of judgment that includes
understanding and responsibility. In politics, it is not enough
to be right, that is, it is not enough to have a position that
is logically worked out; one also has to be reasonable, that is,
one has to be willing to make concessions and exercise judgment
in forging a deal. Elections understood in this sense are not
to discover what people want, but to ratify decisions and actions
the political community has reached through argumentative deliberations.
Aristotle
said that we are political beings: there is a part of us that
emerges only to the extent that we participate in public life.
Sheldon Wolin, in Presence of the Past, describes as our birthright
our political identity, which involves our capacity to collaboratively
initiate action with other human beings.[4] This kind of action
enables us to open schools, change the nature of schools, create
job-training programs, or initiate flood control programs, and
by so doing re-create and reorganize the way in which people,
networks of relationships, and institutions operate.
Politics
is where our moral dimensions emerge. We are social beings. We
are defined by relationships to other people. These include family
and kin. These also include the less familiar people with whom
we engage in the day-to-day business of living our lives in a
complicated society. When people do not have the opportunity to
connect to meaningful power and participate in public life effectively,
they learn to act irresponsibly—a complaint that is frequently
voiced about the residents of our inner cities.
Focusing
on the least important elements of political action—voting, elections,
and turnout, trivializes our citizens by disconnecting them from
the real debate and real power of public life. We fail to recognize
that voter participation is the wrong measure of the health of
our politics. Voter turnout was high in Pinochet's Chile. Voter
turnout was never a problem in the totalitarian countries. Becoming
mere voters, clients, taxpayers, and plaintiffs, rather than citizens,
renders people incompetent, making them passive viewers of an
electronic display. If there is to be genuine participatory politics
in this country, there must be opportunities for ordinary people
to initiate action about matters that are important to their interests.
Power
Understanding
politics requires understanding the nature of power. Frequently
people shy away from the discussion of power. "Power tends
to corrupt," said Lord Acton, and few people want to appear
power-hungry and corrupted. What we must realize is that powerlessness
also corrupts—perhaps more pervasively than power
It is important
to recognize that there are two kinds of power. Unilateral power
tends to be coercive and domineering. The use of unilateral power
is that in which one party of authority treats the other party
as an object to be instructed and directed. Relational power is
more complicated. It involves a personal relationship, subject
to subject, developing the relational self. The IAF teaches people
to develop the kind of power that is imbedded in relationships,
involving not only the capacity to act, but the reciprocal capacity
to allow oneself to be acted upon. In this context, relational
power involves becoming calculatingly vulnerable—understanding
that a meaningful exchange involves getting into other people's
subject and allowing them to get into yours—in a word, empathy.
There is
no power without relationships: two or more people come together,
express and argue their concerns, develop a plan and the intention
to exercise that plan, and take some sort of action. The challenge
is how to teach them to get enough power to do the things they
think are important. This can happen through two routes, organized
people or organized money—obviously the poor have more of the
former than the latter. Two or even ten people by themselves may
not be able to do much, but if they begin to build coalitions
with other people and learn the rules of politics, including relational
power and reciprocity, then they begin to learn the process through
which they can take advantage of the opportunities presented by
economic, social, and political change.
The IAF believes
in the importance of expanding the sphere of public participation.
In every community throughout the nation there are literally thousands
of people with the potential to participate successfully in public
life. Such participation is the crux of the IAF's strategy for
resolving the crises of poverty. It is not that we view other
strategies as inappropriate policy, but rather that they should
be connected to broad based institutions working to develop this
human potential.
The
Iron Rule
The human
potential of ordinary people emerges when they engage diverse
human beings in the serious business of the polis, particularly
the issues of family, property, and education—which have been
the central work of the IAF for the last fifty years. IAF organizations
have witnessed thousands of ordinary people developing extraordinary
capacities to lead their communities into action and interpret
those actions into the possibility of development and change—both
for themselves and for their communities. The daily work of the
IAF's organizers is searching for, identifying, challenging, testing,
and developing potential leaders within our organizations. Each
of the IAF's victories is the fruit of the personal growth of
thousands of leaders—housewives, clergy, bus drivers, secretaries,
nurses, teachers—who have learned from the IAF how to participate
and negotiate with the business and political leaders and bureaucrats
we normally think of as our society's decision makers. The IAF
lives by the Iron Rule: "Never do for others what they can
do for themselves." The IAF has won its victories not by
speaking for ordinary people but by teaching them how to speak,
to act, and to engage in politics for themselves.
This is the
centerpiece of the IAF's organizing and educational philosophy.
It is the practical consequence of Alfred North Whitehead's warning
about the danger of teaching inert ideas—ideas that are merely
received without being utilized, tested, or thrown into fresh
combinations. Inert ideas make people the passive receptacles
of disconnected information. The Iron Rule recognizes that the
most valuable and important aspect of intellectual development
is self-development, which is critical to the accountable utilization
of power. The Iron Rule recognizes the preciousness of self-discovery.
As John Stuart Mill said, "If a person possesses any tolerable
amount of common sense and experience, his own mode of laying
out his existence is the best, not because it is the best in itself,
but because it is his own mode." [5]
The Iron
Rule is a process that stimulates curiosity, inquiry, judgment,
and mastery of new areas of understanding through action and reflection.
It recognizes as John Stuart Mill did that people can only learn
confidence through competent participation. We learn by doing.
The Iron
Rule goes beyond the rejection of paternalism; it is centered
in a vision of autonomous yet interdependent persons who respect
each other and appreciate the values of reciprocal accountability.
In the IAF vision, healthy relationships in public life are developed
through the back and forth of conversation, in contrast to the
unilateral communication that our modern world directs at people
in much of daily life. Just as conversation demands listening
as well as speaking, public relationships demand reciprocity.
They are a process that demands an openness, a willingness to
suspend judgment, to argue and yet be willing to adjust one's
own views. Public relationships demand an openness to others.
One enters into public relationships not with self-righteousness,
but with a commitment to the dignity and respect of others. As
in a conversation, the exchange of a relationship does not have
a foreclosed beginning and ending. It represents rather a moment
in a relationship—a relationship that builds long-term trust
through collaborative action.
Role
of Broad Based Organizations
The development
of such public relationships will be possible only to the extent
that there is an institution, a broad based organization, that
teaches ordinary people how to engage others in conversations
and arguments, to reflect upon their actions, and enable them
to make informed political judgments. These must be mentoring
institutions that cultivate curiosity, imagination, and a vision
of what is possible for citizens and their families. Simply designing
isolated programs and making them available to a community will
not expand the capability, vision, and political acumen of the
community's residents. The development of judgment is critical.
In the modern political campaign, electioneering and voting have
become our most common "political" encounters. This
places an inordinate amount of importance on the measuring of
opinions and preferences, which reinforces the learned helplessness
that comes from being disconnected and isolated. Such a focus
reinforces dependency, rendering citizens incompetent as mere
voters, customers, and clients. Too often our citizens have become
professional plaintiffs who are unwilling to responsibly engage
their fellow citizens and neighbors on any serious collaborative
initiation, instead selecting a course of either costly litigation
or exit strategies.
People in
the United States have been left with litigation and exit as the
most common mechanisms for the expression of dissatisfaction.
As Albert Hirschman outlines in Exit, Voice and Loyalty, the ideology
of exit is very powerful in America. [6] The nation was settled
because of it, expanded westward because of it, and views upward
social mobility as one of the most valuable expressions of it.
"Love it or leave it" is a uniquely American expression,
one that is embraced more and more frequently as citizens retreat
into the walled security and complacency of the suburbs and enclaves.
The theory behind the ideology of exit is that such an expression
of dissatisfaction will force "management" to correct
the problems that are driving people away. However, because the
exit mechanism destroys social capital and weakens the mediating
institutions of the community, it becomes in the self-interest
of the "managers" for the vocal "troublemakers"
also to exit, allowing the further disintegration of community
to occur unimpeded. "Managers" are left with the most
inarticulate, vulnerable, and compliant members of the community—those
least likely to agitate for change.
The alternative
to the exit mechanism is that of voice designed to bring about
change through internal agitation. This is the paradigm that the
IAF is trying to teach, that people are citizens and neighbors
who have to learn the art of making judgments and taking action.
Institutions must be created to allow citizens to develop their
alternative of voice, to learn to exercise their political nature,
and to reclaim their political birthright. The importance of discourse
and debate in the deliberative process exemplifies the need to
make judgments in relationship with other people. Anyone can be
rendered incompetent by not having access to interpretation or
context, or by not having a frame of reference or access to other
people's reactions and interpretations.
Because the
art of making judgments is an interpretive process, one of the
most important aspects of a broad based organization is that it
be action oriented. What we mean by "action" is not
just displacement of energy, not just reaction to a crisis, but
rather praxis. In praxis the most important part of the action
is the reflection and evaluation afterward. Our organizations
plan "actions"—public dramas, where masses of ordinary
people collaboratively and collectively move on a particular issue
with a particular focus—which sometimes produce a reaction that
is unanticipated. This reaction then produces the grist for the
real teaching of politics and interpretation—how to appreciate
the negotiations, the challenge, the argument, and the political
conversation.
An IAF broad
based organization is like a "mini-university." Our
organizations have multiple agendas, traditions, independent dues
based financing structures, and include a wide variety of individuals.
Universities and broad based organizations are two types of institutions
in which persons can engage in constrained conflict, opening the
conflicts of our traditions to the inquiry and reflection of our
citizens. Acknowledging and welcoming these tensions allows for
the tempering of conflict to a manageable level. Repressing these
conflicts can lead to war. Like a good university, a broad based
organization does not just teach people about skills. It does
not treat inquiry as a technique. It also teaches people about
perspective. In the words of William Galston, there are two kinds
of education: there is a philosophic education, which is about
inquiry and the rules thereof, and there is also a civic education,
which is about character formation, enabling persons to effectively
conduct their lives and provide support for building and sustaining
their community. [7] Civic education requires institutions, because
character depends upon culture, values, and perspective. We do
not learn those as isolated individuals. We learn those only in
relationships with others, and in the context of our history and
traditions. Institutions, be they familial, religious, cultural,
or political, provide the framework within which civic education,
character development, and leadership development must be nurtured.
The IAF believes that both types of education are important, and
indeed within a democratic society, each augments and supplements
the other.
The organizations
of the IAF are primarily federations of congregations; they are
connected to institutions of faith and agitated by their traditions
of faith. In this context the term "faith" does not
mean particular religious beliefs, but rather a more general affirmation
that life has meaning. Congregations are the conveyors of tradition,
which connects people and holds them accountable to both their
past and their future. They force us to recognize that we are
encumbered beings who have a responsibility to deal regularly
with the business of transformation, thereby engendering hope.
These institutions, churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples,
are built on networks of family and neighbors. Tragically, they
are virtually the only institutions in society that are fundamentally
concerned with the nature and well-being of families and communities.
In addition, religious institutions have a commitment, albeit
somewhat attenuated, to the vitality of the city. They are accountable
to the vision of the prophet Jeremiah, who stated clearly, "Seek
ye therefore the shalom [welfare] of the city. For there you shall
find your own shalom."
Through these
institutions we learn to accept the tension between what we are—our
nature and our limits—and what we can be. We have to be able
to embrace the dialectic of that tension and not yield either
to cynicism or romantic sentimentality. We learn that there are
always intended and unintended consequences to actions, and that
to practice politics, citizens must be prepared to deal with both.
Most importantly, and this is perhaps the crux of the tension,
we must accept that the best often gets in the way of the good,
and that there will never be total justice. This is a precept
that is difficult to deal with unless one is situated in a political
context. Political beings understand the limits and boundaries
of power and action, and do not try to make inordinate claims
on life. That is why there has to be in the teaching, the mentoring,
and the evaluating the constant attempt to grapple with the human
condition: what is the self, what is the relationship of the self
to its situation and context, and how do we begin to understand
the potential for the development of personhood. Our politics
have to be connected to that search for meaning, for authenticity,
and for identity.
Religious
faith, history, and tradition are important because they embody
the records of the struggles of those who have gone before—their
struggles both to understand and to act. Others have made efforts,
sometimes succeeding and sometimes not. In this context, one learns
not to take one's self too seriously, and to recognize that there
are limits to what one can accomplish in a lifetime or in a generation.
Traditions, to the extent that they are meaningful and useful,
enable us to deal with the realities of ambiguity, irony, and
tragedy. They convey to us, through symbols, those dimensions
of the human experience.
The root
of the word "religion," re-ligare, means to bind together
that which is disconnected. There is always an effort to connect.
The best of religious traditions try to be inclusive. They respect
diversity. To the extent that they are good traditions, they convey
a plurality of symbols that incorporate the experiences of diverse
peoples. The whole concept of the mixed multitudes in Sinai and
Pentecost is central to the Judeo-Christian tradition; there is
a constant incorporation of different traditions in the reweaving
of the social and political fabric.
Social
Capital
The IAF is
concerned with the social capital embodied in relationships among
adults in a democratic public life. Broadly defined, "social
capital" is a term identifying the value of a community's
relationships. In contrast to human capital, which is locked up
in the skills of an individual, social capital is a measure of
how much collaborative time and energy people have for each other:
how much time parents have for their children, how much attention
neighbors will give to each other's families, what kind of relationships
people in congregations have with each other, the relationships
in organizations like PTAs and scout troops, and the quality of
many other potential webs of relationships in a community. The
social capital of a democratic public life comprises relationships
among adults who are equal in essential aspects and yet unequal
in their virtues. The IAF is concerned with the relationships
of people who aspire to learn and to grow—to acquire the virtues
of leadership and satisfactions of becoming, in the phrase of
Thomas Jefferson, "participators in the affairs of government."
Social capital
is not a familiar term in the current debate, but it is as crucial
to the resolution of crises and the alleviation of poverty as
are the other forms of capital we already understand. In order
for community development (both economic and social) to be successful,
there have to be investments in human capital, physical capital,
and social capital so that financial capital or entrepreneurial
activity can be productive. The 1980s were absorbed by concern
with financial capital, and now the United States is paying the
price for that narrow focus. Differing types of capital must be
mixed with each other to be productive. The items of "physical
capital" such as machinery alone are not enough, but require
workers with the "human capital" of skills to operate
them. Teams of workers need not only tools and skills, but the
trusting relationships of "social capital" to work together.
They all need "financial capital" to facilitate the
exchanges and investments central to economic life. Men and women
of vision must be able to coordinate these different kinds of
capital.
To think
of our relationships as "capital" suggests a different
way of thinking about other people. To create capital we must
invest labor, energy, and effort in the here-and-now to create
something for later use. We must expend energy now in creating
a tool, or learning a skill, or saving money, or building a relationship
in order to put it to use in the future. Investment requires the
ability and discipline to defer gratification, to invest energy
not only in the needs or pleasures of the present, but also in
the potential demands of the future.
Capital also requires maintenance and renewal. Workers find that
their tools wear out with use and rust with disuse. Knowledge
and skills must be updated and refined. Similarly, the partners
in a venture must renew the means of trusting one another. Neighbors
in a community or members of a family must maintain their relationships
to renew the social capital they represent.
University of Chicago sociologist James Coleman has examined a
particular example of the importance of social capital in the
context of education.[8] He identifies the social capital of a
school as "attention from responsible adults" that students
receive in the various institutions of their daily lives—their
schools, families, churches, and neighborhoods.
Coleman studied public, Catholic, and non-Catholic private schools
in Chicago, and found that Catholic schools had been more successful
at educating students than either public or non-Catholic private
schools. Even when he took into account the advantages and disadvantages
of varying family backgrounds and incomes (i.e., different levels
of "human" and ''financial" capital), students
at Catholic schools had slightly higher achievement rates on math
and verbal skills and dramatically lower dropout rates. In fact,
the dropout rates were one-quarter the level of public schools
and one-third the level of other private schools.
Coleman argues that the strong, informal adult-student relationships
of the Catholic school and community were responsible for the
significantly lower dropout rates. Even when children had relatively
diminished attention from adults at home—as in the case of single
parent families—the Catholic schools were able to keep them in
school. He suggests that adults in the Catholic community were
attentive to the children's growth and willing to intervene early
when they saw trouble. They provided role models and mentored
children. By their example and their actions, they taught children
how to relate collaboratively with others. They were available
to ask for help or guidance.
The concept of social capital places credence as much in the quality
of relationships among people as simply their number or availability.
Social capital implies a richness and robustness of relationships
among people, that the members of a community are willing and
eager to invest in one another. Our broad based organizations
are trying to build, expand, and agitate the social capital that
is imbedded in the networks of human relationships.
The
Development of Leadership
IAF leaders
begin their development in one-on-one conversations with a skilled
organizer. Individual meetings are not interviews. Rather than
a communication of information, convictions, or instruction, they
represent an exchange of views, judgments, and commitments. The
organizers see themselves as teachers, mentors, and agitators
who cultivate leadership. Their job is to teach people how to
form relationships with other leaders and develop a network, a
collective of relationships able to build the power to enable
them to act. They begin with small, winnable issues—fixing a
streetlight, putting up a stop sign. Then they move into larger
concerns—making a school a safe and civil place for children
to learn. Then they move to still larger issues—setting an agenda
for a municipal capital improvement budget; strategizing with
corporate leaders and members of the city council on economic
growth policies; developing new initiatives in job training, health
care, and public education. When ordinary people become engaged
and begin to play large, public roles, they develop confidence
in their own competence.
IAF leaders are women like Virginia Ramirez of San Antonio's Communities
Organized for Public Service (COPS), who was afraid to speak out
because she felt she wasn't educated. But she was angry at the
injustice done to her neighborhood—at watching a neighbor die
because she did not have heat in the winter. COPS taught Mrs.
Ramirez to tap that anger and forge it into a tool for the renewal
of hope in herself and her community. She learned to speak publicly,
to lead actions, to take risks with herself, and to guide others.
The IAF process taught her to develop relationships within which
she could challenge the indifference and apathy of corporate and
government officials. She learned how to negotiate with the holders
of power: how to compromise, how to confront when necessary, and
how to rebuild collaboration. She gained the confidence to negotiate
with the City Council and mayor. She went back to school at age
forty-four, earned her general equivalency diploma, and entered
college.
Virginia Ramirez is now president of her parish council. She is
also a co-chair of COPS and represents her community at the negotiating
table with the head of the Chamber of Commerce, the mayor, and
the bankers of San Antonio. She leads a team of community leaders
and clergy engaged in transforming the public hospital system
to truly serve the inner city. She guides and mentors young leaders,
some of whom are the sons and daughters of founders of COPS from
twenty years ago.
Mrs. Ramirez, as a result of being part of COPS, has learned how
to exercise power—relational power. She has learned not only
how to act, but how to be acted upon. She has learned how to collaborate.
She has learned how to develop a political institution inside
the COPS organization. She has learned how to leverage that institution
in a relationship with the city government and the corporate community.
As a result, San Antonio has one of the most creative community
development block grant (CDBG) programs in the country. In addition,
a new, innovative housing strategy has been created, including
a $10 million Housing Trust Fund. COPS has used public dollars
to leverage many more private dollars for construction and purchase
of single-family homes. As a result, the organization has literally
physically and spiritually revitalized neighborhoods so their
residents have the opportunity to generate stability and growth.
Virginia Ramirez and her personal and political growth are extraordinary
but not unique. The IAF has developed more than twenty institutions
that have transformed the lives of thousands of persons like her,
who felt a deep anger at the injustices done to their lives but
believed they had no ability nor right to speak out to make their
communities more just and more fully human. The IAF organizations
have been schools for the development of politics and community.
What
Politics Has Brought
One of the
twelve Texas IAF organizations is Allied Communities of Tarrant
(ACT) in Fort Worth, composed of 14,000 families from twenty-two
congregations of diverse faiths and ethnic backgrounds. ACT is
a very broad based institution, involving African-American, Anglo,
and Hispanic leaders from both Protestant and Catholic congregations.
Formed in 1982, ACT has organized its families in a number of
efforts to direct public investment to the inner city. Among other
accomplishments, it guaranteed the passage of a bond referendum
to finance $57 million of new streets, sewers, and other improvements
in 1985.
In 1986 ACT leaders began to work closely with the principal of
Morningside Middle School, a predominantly African-American school
that had all but ceased to function as anything other than a holding
place for children and adults. Its students ranked dead last on
measures of performance among the district's twenty middle schools.
Half of the children were failing at least one subject. Half failed
the state's writing skills test. The police were called to the
school two to three times a day. The school's parent-teacher organization
had one or two persons attending meetings.
In collaboration with the principal, ACT leaders developed a plan
to rebuild the relationships among the parents, teachers, and
students of the school to revitalize the school. The principal
took the lead in building a leadership team within the school's
staff. ACT built leadership among the parents through a two-pronged
strategy.
First, ACT congregations near the school organized periodic "Recognition
Days" in which the congregation as a whole would applaud
children for progress at school. Each congregation took care to
recognize every child for some form of progress, no matter how
small. These ceremonies generally formed part of the worship service.
Often the homilies were directed toward recognizing and supporting
families in their efforts. Nearly twenty local congregations held
"Recognition Days" for the children of the school.
Second, ACT leaders organized a series of individual meetings
in which they met or attempted to meet with the parents or guardians
of every child, regardless of whether or not they belonged to
an ACT congregation or to any congregation at all. The building
of relationships in individual meetings is slow, hard work, but
there is no shortcut or substitute. It is the means by which people
begin to recognize and understand their own interests. It is how
they articulate their vision of themselves and their hopes for
their families. It is how they build reciprocal relationships
with others.
Over 600 meetings were conducted in a period of a year and a half.
While leaders learned about parents' concerns, the more important
result was that they began to build relationships to draw them
into involvement with the school. Parents attended training sessions
on how to support their children's study habits. They began to
meet more often with their children's teachers individually.
The most visible sign of change was the school's transformation
into a successful institution. The children's performance on standardized
tests rose from twentieth of the district's twenty middle schools
to third. The percentage of students passing the state writing
skills test increased from 50 to 89 percent. The percentage of
children failing at least one subject decreased from 50 to 6 percent.
Police calls fell off to virtually none. Now it is not unusual
for 200 or more to attend parent assemblies at the school to learn
about drug awareness, study habits, or other education related
themes. Parents also staff an after-school enrichment program
that ACT and the principal of the school jointly conceived and
implemented. Leaders from other churches and schools have begun
to duplicate this effort in another middle school and three feeder
elementary schools
Beyond making the school a more successful institution; parents
became successful in ACT, a mediating institution, and developed
the capacity to negotiate with other institutions to pursue their
interests and the interests of their children. In the second middle
school, parents identified the need for substantial physical renovation
of the building. They drew up a $1.8 million plan and negotiated
it with the school board. The board approved the plan and doubled
the capital spending originally allocated to the school
Such accomplishments are only the outward signs of the organization's
real achievement—the development of mediating institutions that
shape and support their families in both their private and public
lives. Whereas before, the children had been failing, the new
relationships built among parents strengthened their family lives
and enabled them to succeed in school. One ACT leader has commented
that the project calls parents to be parents, changing the culture
within families. Through their experiences in ACT, parents learned
how to organize and how to act. They no longer merely celebrate
their values and their hopes as fantasies in the privacy of home
or pew, but have acquired the power to make them a real part of
the public life of Fort Worth.
Communities Organized for Public Service in San Antonio is the
oldest and most established of the IAF organizations. For twenty
years, one of COPS' focal points has been pioneering a strategy
to rebuild the infrastructure of its inner city community. With
its sister organization, the Metro Alliance, COPS has brought
over $750 million of sewers, streets, sidewalks, parks, libraries,
clinics, streetlights, and other infrastructure to the poor west,
east, and south sides of the inner city. The IAF organizations
in San Antonio have helped working families build over 1,000 units
of new housing, rehabilitate 2,600 existing units, and purchase
1,300 more. Beyond these new homes and infrastructure, however,
the most important accomplishment of the IAF organizations is
the leadership development of people like Virginia Ramirez.
In the early years of the San Antonio housing efforts, professional
organizers worked intensively to identify and mentor individuals
who would form a core of leadership, equipping them to reshape
city policy. This core group, and the thousands of others whom
they led and collaborated with, organized hundreds of house meetings,
neighborhood actions, and research visits, which built both the
COPS housing agenda and the power to move it forward.
COPS first major housing initiative came to be known as the "Select
Housing Target Areas" program. Unlike many other cities,
in which substandard housing was razed or refurbished without
regard to the original low-income residents, COPS was able to
develop a strategy in which community improvements did not dislocate
residents. Their aim was not to redevelop real estate, but to
rejuvenate communities. Formulated in cooperation with city officials
and the San Antonio Development Agency (SADA), the program has
built over 900 new homes and rehabilitated 2,600 more since its
inception in 1974. Ninety-five percent of homeowners have chosen
to rebuild their homes in the redeveloped neighborhoods, rather
than seek housing in the suburbs.
COPS leaders, when encountering obstacles or gaps in the community
redevelopment
strategy, have been able to initiate new programs to complement
existing ones. One gap identified from the experience of the Target
Areas program was the need to help young families purchase their
own homes. Working families in San Antonio, like others in the
United States, have seen their wages and incomes fall in real
terms over the last decade, while the price of housing has risen.
In the words of one COPS leader, they saw young families "losing
the American dream of owning their own home." Many were able
to afford monthly payments, but were unable to raise the lump
sum of down payment, closing costs, and prepaid insurance and
taxes.
To address this barrier, COPS and Metro Alliance leaders worked
with SADA to create the Home ownership Incentive Program (HIP)
to help young families finance the lump-sum payments. HIP enables
moderate-income families who qualify for FHA insured loans to
receive a thirty-year, zero-interest second mortgage to use as
a down payment. Since 1988 the city has made loans to leverage
private mortgage funds to over 1,300 families. These families
have an average annual income of $17,500, and 18 percent are headed
by single mothers.
The central component of the San Antonio IAF organizations' work
to redevelop the city's neighborhoods has been the annual community
development block grant program, $4 million of which remains the
principal funding for the Target Areas and the HIP effort. Designed
to replace numerous federal categorical programs with a single,
flexible grant to cities, the CDBG program since 1974 has been
a steady, though small and diminishing, source of funds for the
redevelopment of inner cities across the country. COPS and the
Metro Alliance have ensured that the funds are used carefully
and effectively, maximizing expenditures for durable capital improvements
and minimizing the demands on CDBG for ongoing operating expenditures
of city and private agencies. In fact, San Antonio's program has
been recognized nationwide as a model CDBG project.
COPS leaders drive the annual CDBG process, in which residents
of eligible neighborhoods meet in their homes, schools, and churches
to draw up their lists of potential projects, the costs of which
are always three or four times their neighborhood's CDBG allocation.
People begin their bargaining, trimming some projects and delaying
others in exchange for mutual support. They proceed from house
meetings concerned with one street or drainage issue, to neighborhood
meetings proposing a package of projects, to meetings in each
City Council district to shape a proposal with the council member,
and then, in collaboration with the City Council member, community
leaders finalize the selection of the year's project. COPS leaders
have incorporated into the organization's collective culture the
expertise to plan projects and the skills of negotiating and facilitating
the bargaining among neighborhoods.
The principal constraint on COPS' efforts has been the lack of
resources. San Antonio had received roughly $40 million a year
in federal aid in the early 1970s in various categorical urban
programs. Now that amount has fallen to $14 million through the
CDBG program.
COPS and Metro Alliance leaders have sought new sources of funds
to complement the limited resources from CDBG. In 1988 leaders
from the two organizations developed a plan for the creation of
a City Housing Trust Fund. They researched the operation of local
trust funds across the country, designed their own proposal and
negotiated with the City Council to establish it. The City Council
was more willing to create the fund than to actually fund it,
but a windfall of $22 million from the sale of San Antonio's cable
television franchise gave the IAF organizations an opportunity.
IAF leaders negotiated with the council and representatives advocating
other capital spending priorities to set aside $IO million of
the $22 million sale to endow the City Housing Trust Fund, ensuring
an annual stream of $500,000 to $1 million in new funding for
housing.
San Antonio's City Housing Trust Fund provides an important source
of flexible financing to fill gaps left by other sources too restricted
or too highly taxed to be accessible to low-income families. So
far the City Housing Trust Fund has financed the planning of several
housing projects for the elderly and one affordable single family
development—the Brighton Park subdivision.
The Brighton Park story is one that begins not with a government
housing program, but with the frustrations of neighbors with a
trashy vacant lot. House meetings were convened to discuss possible
uses for the lot. Each house meeting, where ten or fifteen neighbors
would gather for an hour or so of conversation, reported back
to the leadership with the same issue: housing for young families.
Neighbors became excited when they imagined the prospect of new,
modern, single-family homes as good as the ones in the new subdivisions
outside San Antonio's Outer Loop.
The story proceeds through the development of a core of dedicated
and competent neighborhood leaders who for five years worked doggedly
to secure the participation of the city government, commercial
banks, the San Antonio Development Agency, the City Housing Trust
Fund, and private builders. In essence, the COPS leaders became
developers. The story concludes with young families moving into
a new neighborhood of sixteen custom designed homes-the first
new subdivision in the south side of San Antonio in over twenty
years.
Time and again, COPS and the Metro Alliance have initiated new
ideas for the creative use of local, federal, and state public
dollars to help working families rebuild their neighborhoods,
both physically and socially. They formulate their goals and strategies
from the experiences and dreams of working families. These IAF
organizations have institutionalized a culture of politics in
which citizens have both the real power to act on their hopes
for their communities, as well as the responsibility to put forward
not just complaints but constructive plans. They have created
a culture of reasoned debate, accountability, negotiations, respect,
and compromise within which the powers of a city can collaborate
to guide its destiny.
Other situations in which disenfranchised citizens have developed
the power to initiate action to improve their communities include
the following.
The Nehemiah Homes Project in Brooklyn
and Bronx, New York. East Brooklyn Congregations has
built over 3,000 new single-family homes for working families,
renewing completely devastated neighborhoods. This was possible
because the broad based church organization, under the auspices
of the Industrial Areas Foundation, leveraged land and tax abatements
from the city of New York and no-interest construction financing
from religious institutions. In addition, each home carries an
interest-free second mortgage loan from the city government of
$15,000 as a lien repayable whenever the house is sold. A similar
Nehemiah program was established in Baltimore by BUILD, also an
IAF organization.
Job Training in San Antonio.
COPS and the Metro Alliance, the business community, the city
of San Antonio, the local Private Industry Council (PIC), the
governor of Texas, and several other state and local agencies
have collaborated to create a $7 million high-skill job-training
effort. Employers have committed several hundred high-skill positions—primarily
in health care. The governor committed $2.3 million in state funds
for development. The city government committed $2 million for
income maintenance. The PIC committed $2.6 million for job training.
COPS and Metro committed the sweat equity of neighborhood leaders
to holding job trainees accountable to the community for a commitment
to long-term training.
Commonwealth in Baltimore.
The corporate community in Baltimore contributed $20 million in
scholarship funds, to be matched by funds from local universities,
for high school graduates achieving good grades and attendance.
The BUILD organization helps to raise additional resources from
government sources, and mobilizes the participation of families
and local schools. COPS and the Metro Alliance created a similar
program called the San Antonio Education Partnership.
Colonias in South Texas. The
state of Texas has pledged $250 million in grants and low-interest
loans (which is helping to leverage federal and local funds) to
build water and sewer systems in the 400-plus unincorporated rural
communities along the Texas-Mexico border. Colonia is a Spanish
word for neighborhood, and along the border in Texas it is a word
for communities of people who were deceived by unscrupulous land
developers—hard-working people who were promised complete utility
services but were left with open sewage ditches, unpaved streets,
no running water, and an unfathomable number of public health
problems. Valley Interfaith, the Border Organization, and the
El Paso Interreligious Sponsoring Organization (EPISO), with support
from the entire network of Texas IAF organizations, initiated
and promoted the legislation in collaboration with the elected
leadership of the state government, the Texas Water Development
Board, and local providers.
Moral Minimum Wage. In 1987,
after nine months of hard dialogue and negotiation with Southern
California IAF, the California Industrial Welfare Commission raised
the state's minimum wage to $4.25 an hour, then the highest in
the nation. This case is one in which the work of the Southern
California IAF made a positive difference in the real income of
families, and contrary to the prophecies of the opposition, subsequent
studies have demonstrated no adverse effect on levels of employment.
Community Policing in Hudson County, New
Jersey. The Interfaith Community Organization (ICO)
in Jersey City and Hoboken has for three years worked with police
departments to create a new culture of "community policing"—an
approach to public safety that involves the commitment of a city's
resources to the day-to-day work of building ongoing relationships
between police and neighborhood residents. Although the struggle
ran the gamut from replacing the police chief to developing a
true public consensus on community policing as a priority, ICO's
work has led to a firm commitment of resources and personnel for
eight neighborhoods in Hudson County.
Texas Alliance Schools. The
Texas Education Agency has pledged additional resources to thirty-two
schools that are collaborating with local community organizations
to seriously reorganize neighborhood schools. Modeled on the experience
of Fort Worth's Morningside Middle School, in which leaders of
Allied Communities of Tarrant rewove the fabric of community linking
families, teachers, administrators, and community leaders, the
Alliance Schools project works to build a constituency and commitment
among stakeholders in education to make dramatic improvements
in the performances of the schools and develop an effective constituency
for education reform.
The
Role of the Government
Reinvigorating
urban life requires a new vision of civil society appropriate
to the challenges of this age. The IAF believes, with Arthur Okun,
that the two primary institutions of modern times, the market
and the state, have their places in social life, but must be kept
in their places. [9] Without strong countervailing institutions,
the imperialism of the market will dominate and penetrate all
relationships, in both public and private spheres, as it did in
the 1980s. The healthy functioning of an enterprise-market system
depends on balanced relationships among society's major institutions—family,
community, and church—and market mechanisms. These institutions
teach the values of social intercourse, reciprocity, trust, exchange,
and accountability, which are requisite for the effective functioning
of the market system.
Americans have already seen contemporary politics—both electioneering
and governing—reduced to marketing strategies. Politics no longer
mediates the market but is part and parcel of it The advertising
executives and media consultants now shape campaigns centered
not around debates of public philosophy or the governance of what
Daniel Bell called the "public household," but around
negative thirty-second television ads. Even worse, the media advisors
now attempt to govern, fashioning the rationale of war and peace
by opinion polls. The result is an incoherent, inarticulate, and
trivial political leadership, and a growing, cancerous cynicism
and alienation from the community. The failure to center public
life around genuine discourse is poisoning the reservoirs of good
will in social relationships. Trust is unraveling not just in
the political sphere, but in other public spheres—between doctors
and patients, pastors and parishioners, teachers and students.
The tools of a market mechanism—money and prices—are effective
signals for what is to be produced, how much, and for whom. The
market is also an effective mechanism for the creation of wealth;
the coordination of economic activity, and the buffering of citizens
from the state. Yet the market has fundamental limits. It accepts
grossly unequal distributions of income and power, which distort
the very workings of the market process. The market cannot deal
with external factors, nor can it calculate intergenerational
costs. Market mechanisms often seem oblivious to the many examples
of market failures that lead to air and water pollution, environmental
degradation, and social imbalance-what John Kenneth Galbraith
called private affluence in the midst of public squalor.
Government provision of consumer goods, services, transfer payments,
or tax credits will provide some relief from the conditions of
poverty. To the extent that they allow some people more choices,
such policies are useful. Yet these consumables, however benignly
bestowed, will not provide a long-term solution to the culture
of poverty and despair that exists in communities today. The alleviation
of poverty requires not just an increase in income, but the development
of the capacity to act—to make choices. This means that any strategy
to alleviate poverty must also address the question of inequities
of power. The role of those who have power in shaping political
and economic decisions is critically important. If poor people
are to have any real dignity, they must play a meaningful role
in making these decisions. Market oriented strategies are not
sufficient. There must also be strategies for developing political
entrepreneurship.
Just as the government cannot create entrepreneurial economic
activity, neither can it create political entrepreneurship. The
government cannot "empower" people, because power is
not something that can be bestowed. Government can facilitate,
encourage, recognize, and reward grassroots organizing, but it
cannot create it. Government cannot create local initiatives,
but it can understand the importance of these initiatives having
an institutional base rooted in people's imagination, curiosity,
values, and search for meaning.
The IAF has developed an innovative proposal that is rooted in
our organizational community base. We propose that the federal
government structure a matching grant strategy to leverage the
commitments of states, local municipalities, and communities.
The strategy would be based on the concept of an augmented community
development block grant program and a more flexible Job Training
Partnership Act. Communities would receive a certain minimum entitlement
based on need, as in the current program. The federal government
could then increase the amount of the grant to the extent that
a results oriented strategy had been developed that would reward
the achievement of certain outcomes. These outcomes could include
some combination of the following: increases in meaningful employment,
reduction of a percentage of poverty, increased access to health
care, improvements in infrastructure and security, facilitation
of first-time housing purchases, and so forth. Essentially, the
federal government would provide matching grants for local investments
of money, resources, and "sweat equity." Ideally these
efforts should be developed as part of a larger strategy for state
and local governments, corporations, and private sector institutions
to make available resources to match the social capital of authentic
indigenous local community based organizations.
Theoretically, the granting of additional moneys to cities in
which such strategic organizing is taking place should generate
interest in other locales, thus facilitating the replication and
dissemination of a new institution-building process. At the same
time this strategy recognizes the necessity for macroeconomics
initiatives to ensure a growing economy and full employment. In
addition, it also recognizes potential labor demand and supply
problems. Thus there is the need to develop job-training initiatives
strategically, with consideration for the future as well as the
current situation in which the local economic structure is embedded.
Conclusion
The task
of rebuilding our civic and political institutions is an urgent
one. People in modern industrial societies, particularly those
living in the cities, are atomized and disconnected from each
other. Particularly in the suburbs, far too much of the American
search for "fulfillment" is centered on the individual,
making his or her relationships utilitarian and narcissistic in
nature. This fragmentation leaves people increasingly less capable
of forming a common purpose and carrying it out. Vaclav Havel
pointed out in his address to the World Economic Forum in February
1992 that global civilization is in danger of destroying itself
through inattention to any number of massive threats—the population
explosion, the greenhouse effect, AIDS, and so on.
The large
paradox at the moment is that [the hu]man—a great collector
of information—is well aware of all this, yet is absolutely
incapable of dealing with the danger. Traditional science, with
its usual coolness, can describe the different ways we might
destroy ourselves, but it cannot offer us truly effective and
practicable instructions on how to avert them.... What is needed
is something different, something larger.... The way forward
is not in the mere construction of universal systemic solutions,
to be applied to reality from the outside; it is also in seeking
to get to the heart of reality through personal experiences.
Such an approach promotes an atmosphere of tolerant solidarity
and unity in diversity based on mutual respect, genuine pluralism
and parallelism. In a word, human uniqueness, human action,
and the human spirit must be rehabilitated. [10]
As Havel
indicates, this rehabilitation can only be done through a different
kind of politics, that is, a politics that creates authentic democratic
political institutions that teach, mentor, and build a constituency
of leaders and a network of stakeholders to initiate and support
appropriate public policies that can rebuild our cities and reinforce
the development of viable communities and mediating institutions.
The work of the IAF is in fact designed to create a different
kind of politics. Developing a strategy that deals with the structural
inequalities built into our dynamic economy requires an organized
constituency with the power and imagination to initiate and support
policies for change. If we are to create such a constituency and
restore health and integrity to our political process, mitigating
the distorting role and influence of organized concentrations
of wealth, then we must be vigilant in the development of real
democratic institutions. The work of the IAF is to create organized
constituencies that are effective in teaching real politics.
Notes
1 Mishel
and Frankel (1991).
2 Levy (1990)
3 Miles (1992), pp. 41-68.
4 Wolin (1989).
5 Thompson (1976).
6 Hirschman (1990).
7 Galston (1989), pp. 89 101.
8 Coleman (1989).
9 Okun (1975), p. 119.
10 Havel (1992), pp. 8-14.
Ernesto Cortes,
Jr. is the Southwest regional director of the Industrial Areas
Foundation (IAF), founded by the late Saul Alinsky in 1940. Cortes
has played a key role over the past twenty years in developing
the IAF's successful approach to institution based community organizing.
A native of San Antonio, Cortes returned to the city in 1974 and
established the organization known as COPS (Communities Organized
for Public Service), which has become a model for organizing efforts
around the country. He went on to establish similar organizations
in Los Angeles, Houston, and other cities in the Southwest. Cortes
has received widespread recognition or his many accomplishments,
including recognition as a MacArthur Foundation Fellow in 1984.
His work has been highlighted in numerous publications on social
change and in Bill Moyers's PBS series A World of Ideas.
Return
to Community Index
|