[nabs-l] Appreciating our roots. And, examining the tree and the forest
Carrie Gilmer
carrie.gilmer at gmail.com
Sat May 8 15:29:33 UTC 2010
Hello,
I agree with many of your points very generally Heather. I also think Harry
and Joe's voices/experiences/points are valid, sincere, and not felt by only
a fringe minority. I do say though Heather that this is not a simple thing
and the three things you mention can not in reality be separated from
leadership, fundraising or veteran members as a causal relationship. I agree
above all the local health is where the most crucial effect happens, but it
is still a microcosm of what happens nationally. I agree all groups have a
similarity because all groups are made of humans, but I think in some ways a
better comparison would be with other organized civil right grassroots
campaigns.
Looking at that, as well as your church comparison, I believe leadership is
fundamental, crucially. Take Dr. King and the non-violent methods and
movement for change. It had both a bottom up and top down approach. But in
every case in history the bottom-up needs defined and vibrant and visionary
leadership. Dr. King inspired the very "bottom" and as well every level. He
went out in person and was deeply involved with communicating and
encouraging local groups. They worked with other groups such as the NAACP,
even though often times the groups were in very heated disagreement. Dr.
King worked hard with his staff to work together for common missions. He
also went out and marched with everyday people. The incidents before his
death are a perfect example. His staff and advisors did not think he should
take the time to go help the sanitation workers in person. Dr. King
disagreed. He saw the sanitation workers marching with signs that read "I am
a Man". This was bottom up~these were not members necessarily but they were
saying at the core, and peacefully, what the whole thing was about. Dr. King
realized this and that he must go support them and that it would also help
the overall national efforts to bring them in. His first attempt there was a
disaster, violence broke out. He and his staff then met with locals who were
prone to that, they came down strongly and got them turned around. Then Dr.
King came back and they did it again, without the violence.
People/Individuals could talk with Dr. King one on one. They all felt "he
cares about me/us". When Dr. King was murdered, the whole movement really
struggled...yes people went on but the effect was enormous. Leadership
counts huge!
Also as time went on, some of the "fights" became less obvious. Ironically
because of the victories it became harder to rally groups around more subtle
and hidden racism. And in a way that is the path, a civil rights
organization mission should be in the end to truly put itself out of a
mission. The very hard part is to keep active in that middle place, where
maybe the battles are less obvious or less "glamorous".
It (Dr. King's organization) also was very narrow in its philosophy (i.e. if
you thought violence had a place, the Southern Leadership group was not the
group for you and those voices were drummed out~obviously because at the
heart of Dr. King's movement was non-violence. This is proper and any group
with out a core philosophy which all agree to and embrace can not go in a
straight line direction to its goal. They had staff trained with exact
methods that worked~they paid local staff. Then they trained volunteers.
They kept to a message and methods that worked. But they were also open to
new ideas and gave locals the chance to make personal difference~to lay
their own lives on the line...for a very specific thing. This really helped
the movement.
On the other hand, generalized group think can fill stadiums with loyal
followers, but in the end those groups are less vibrant, less able to change
with changing needs, and in the end I believe they die out with only in
great part affecting those who fill the stadium. It can be a thing needing
great finesse and understanding of the members and even more, leadership, to
tell the line between group think and unified philosophy. The difference is
monumental.
Money is needed. Of course. But the methods of getting it are key. People
turn away when they feel they are only useful for that. Or they raise money
and then it is not spent appropriately. Or they raise money with basically a
"spin" on the reason. People eventually realize this and feel it...it may
work short term but not long term. Take a church which constantly asks for
money but never spends any on missions, just the building fund. Well a lot
of good people leave that kind if thing~and well there could be long
discussions on that.
Also some churches seem so desperate~you join and you can tell they look at
new people as looking to you to fix what is broken, or maybe to do the jobs
no one has wanted to. Some want to keep people working in the nursery for
example, and only the same old same old get to lead a Bible study or speak
from the podium. New ideas are feared or shunned. There are cliques of the
"popular". This is human behavior that sneaks into all groups and the
leadership has to be proactive in repealing it.
And finally being totally open about how the staff are paid verses
accounting with trails and attempts of veils of routes for the salaries to
give an appearance or with a intended purpose to make an organization able
to say something or give some image with "accuracy"...that kind of lowered
integrity or IMO, scam, seeps in like a stain. Likewise shifting statistics
and slanting in favor...this has a short term great soundbite and short term
positive effect but does not stand the test of time. Often sadly the real
statistics are bad enough and sources valid so it was not really
needed...These points are very valid and how they are answered does indeed
determine the long term health of an organization.
And finally as Barbara Pierce always likes to say, "The world is run by the
people who show up" If you don't show up you can have no effect at all.
Carrie Gilmer
-----Original Message-----
From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
Of H. Field
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 7:38 PM
To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
Subject: [nabs-l] Appreciating our roots. And,examining the tree and the
forest
Hi all,
It is very easy to blame generalised groups. "The older generation",
"leadership", "fund-raising" and so on. However, the real truth about
the growth and education of this organisation, the NFB, is the same as
it is for all similar groups. To demonstrate what I'm referring to,
let me take a moment to share what we can learn from other similar
groups. One such similar group is the Christian church. I have read of
how some other religious groups, and some sporting groups and clubs
which function the same. But, for the purposes of this post, I want
to use a group that most of us have had some experience with at some
time or other.
Many studies have been done over the years about how various Christian
churches, grow and maintain, their membership and perform their work.
Without fail, the results of the studies show that churches gain and
keep new members wehn people are personally invited by a personal
friend or relative. People continue to stay at a particular church and
get involved in the work of their church because they are mentored,
discipled personally by other members of the church.
This is the simple truth. People join a Christian church of choice,
get involved in church work, and promote that particular philosophical
interpretation of the Bible which their church adheres to because of
the personal factor. All the studies show that personal invitation by
friend/family member, personal mentoring, and opportunity to serve are
the tree factors in the growth and maintenance of a church. Training
classes, media advertising, door knocking and "sales pitches" by
strangers, and other publicity events such as having a booth at a
local fair, will bring in a very small percentage of people of whom a
smaller percentage actually stay. so, if you want to know what works
there it is.
I have been a chapter president and I know what it is like to try to
get the work of the organisation done. It is not as simple as saying
that the leadership or the older generation are letting young people
down. The nfb exists within a society and any meaningful assessment of
the organisation must be made in the social context in which it
operates. Some current social trends in first world countries are
worth considering.
1. Generations since the Baby-boomers are much less inclined to do
volunteer work.
2. Post Baby-boomer generations are much less inclined to join, and
commit to groups such as service clubs, The Red Cross etc.
3. The pressure for women to work outside of the home leaves less
leisure time for social group involvement.
4. The number of disability groups vying for public attention is much
larger in this century than the last. Factors causing this include the
incredible advances in medical competence, the development of
technology to sustain life longer, and the success of the civil rights
movement which has put the disability community out of institutions
and into the public arena. This means more people to consume finite
resources such as jobs, government assistance programmes and volunteer
transportation assistance.
5. A blindness specific social factor is the decentralisation of
education for blind students. Many more blind children are growing up
with minimal and marginal contact with formal groups of and/or for the
blind. This means that networking on a personal basis is more
difficult and, ironically, that attitudes against accepting the
respectability of blindness are harder to influence.
6. The largest and fastest growing group of blind people in the
western world are adults over 65 years of age.
The world in which the current NFB is functioning is vastly different
from the one that existed when it began, and even from the nineteen
nineties. Yes, many of the things Doctor Jernigan told us to strive
for in his speeches have not yet been achieved, but the reasons why
are much more complex than simply saying the organisation has focused
on fund-raising or centralising programmes. A far better approach is
to begin with one's self and look at what one has personally done to
increase the influence and effectiveness of the organisation. Whatever
the national leadership decide to spend or build, what happens in my
town is up to me and my blind and sighted friends who believe the NFB
philosophy and live it as best we can. Local chapters are the mouth
and arms and legs of the organisation. It is in local chapters that
new people receive words of welcome and empowerment, hugs of
encouragement and affirmation, friends and mentors to walk alongside
them and visit them at home and teach them skills and hope for a
better life. I ask myself how many new people I have brought to
meetings after reaching out and getting to know them. Do I attend all
my chapter meetings and events and make a difference by my physical
presence? What have I done to reach out to other blind people? It can
be a sobering experience if you are willing to sit down and ask
yourself the hard questions.
I began with the observation that reliable studies show that it is
person to person outreach and mentoring/discipling that brings new
members to social organisations. I will close by sharing another two,
scientifically varified facts about the successful functioning of
groups like the NFB.
1. Between 9 and 12 percent of the membership are willing and able to
take on leadership positions.
2. Roughly ten percent of the people do roughly 90 percent of the
work. Generally, the remaining membership attend sporadically, work
occasionally and talk. and, I would assume in these days of
techological communication, e-mail, text and twitter.
What people are prepared to actually, do. in their community will
determine what the NFB looks like and what it is doing in fifty years.
Regards,
Heather Field
----- Original Message -----
From: "Briley Pollard" <brileyp at gmail.com>
To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
<nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Appreciating our roots
I think it is perhaps a stretch to say we won't exist in just 50
years, but I do think the purpose and philosophy will be very diluted
at that point if something isn't done. I did bring it up to say that
we have a responsibility to sea out information, but I do think the
leadership needs to be more efficient at educating new comers. This is
just speculation on my part, but I think part of the reason why the
specifics and history of the philosophy stopped being pushed so hard
is because the federation didn't want to scare off new members. While
I think it is a poor approach to immediately yank away a cane that may
be too short, or talk constantly of the "glory days" as soon as
someone walks in the door, I think a better effort needs to be made at
empowering and educating the membership as a whole.
Thanks for your thoughts,
Briley
On May 2, 2010, at 6:54 PM, Joe Orozco wrote:
> Briley,
>
> I don't know how many people actually read my series of action plan
> posts.
> I'm wrapping it up anyway just to finish my ramblings, and it's
> funny that
> you mention roots because it's basically the foreground of what I
> have to
> contribute. Yet, I am not convinced the blame rests squarely on our
> generation. Actually, it is my theory that the older generation is
> almost
> completely responsible for our sense of complacency. I believe the
> National
> Center has saturated the work of the organization so much with
> fundraising
> and technological design that everyday philosophy has been
> forgotten. It is
> my personal belief that our philosophy has become more the banner
> than the
> engine, and at this rate I do not believe the NFB will exist in 50
> years,
> maybe sooner. Outrageous? Of course it is, but considering the
> source, are
> you surprised? More later, but I'm glad the subject came up.
>
> Best,
>
> Joe
>
> "Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their
> sleeves,
> some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all."--Sam Ewing
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org
> [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Briley Pollard
> Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 7:31 PM
> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Appreciating our roots
>
> I do think our generation in many ways has a sense of
> entitlement. I think a better understanding of our history and
> our purpose as an organization will better define that line
> between entitlement and creating a level playing field. To whom
> much is given, much is required, and I think people all too
> often forget that.
>
> Briley
> On May 2, 2010, at 5:23 PM, David Andrews wrote:
>
>> As an old-timer, thank you! It is important to remember that
> our ceiling is your floor. What you can take for granted is
> what we had to fight for!
>>
>> And ... we came from a time that was in some ways simpler,
> but where we asked for as little as possible. We will not ever
> be as comfortable as your generation with asking for some
> stuff. We also feel somewhat like there is an entitlement
> attitude, and people are not as self sufficient as they need to
> be in the real world.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> At 03:35 PM 5/2/2010, you wrote:
>>> Good afternoon all,
>>>
>>> I am writing to open up a topic of conversation which I feel
> is to often overlooked in our organization; our history as a
> movement. I've grown up in this organization, and admittedly
> didn't fully understand our history until about a month ago
> when I began digging a little deeper.
>>>
>>> The federation has always been an important force in my
> life, and has shaped my views about my blindness, even during
> the periods where I wasn't actively involved. I always heard
> about what great leaders we've had, and was exposed to tidbits
> of information at state conventions or national events. But
> most of the focus has always been on the here and now, which is
> understandable to a point. It is vital that we understand the
> obstacles that the blind community as a whole faces on a daily
> basis, and how the federation is responding to them. However,
> life events have spurred me on to discover more about our
> roots. I'll keep the story short for brevity's sake, but it has
> a point which I think is important, so stay with me.
>>>
>>> I am dating someone who has never been actively involved
> with any of the blindness consumer organizations. He recently
> realized his need for further training, and that lead him to
> ask me my reasons for being a federationist. He began asking me
> questions about how the federation began, how the philosophy
> developed, and how the rehabilitation views of the NFB evolved.
> I found myself unable to answer a lot of his questions, and was
> disappointed in myself. I knew vague details about Dr.
> Jernigan's involvement with the Iowa Commission for the Blind,
> and something about airplane issues in the 70's and 80's, but
> beyond that, my historical knowledge of the NFB was supremely
> limited. After discussing this with some of my friends in the
> organization, I found that the problem wasn't just with me. I'm
> on the board of our local chapter, and it became apparent to me
> after out last meeting that this is a widespread problem. We
> have lost touch with our past, and that is never good. Roots
> are vital to the life of any tree, and without them, we wouldn't
> exist.
>>>
>>> I began to dig, which isn't hard to do. Nationals has done
> an amazing job of making our history available to us.
> www.nfb.org is a gold mine of information, even some of the
> parts that are hard to see. Issues of the Braille Monitor are
> available online going back 25 years, and important speeches
> are available in both text and recorded form going back before
> that. I have found myself appalled by the discrimination that
> blind people faced even just twenty years ago. The fortitude it
> took to get out there every day and command respect from a
> sighted public is not just commendable, but amazing to me.
>>>
>>> I think that sometimes, the youth of this organization
> accuse the older generation of the federation of being too
> "militant," or "confrontational." While I do not always agree
> with how the older generation has approached some issues, when
> you really dig and read about what they had to indoor just to
> be able to do things we take for granted today, you develop a
> greater respect for their views and approach. We still have a
> long way to go in some respects, but we have come far, and I
> think we've lost respect for our past.
>>>
>>> I encourage everyone to sea out and understand the
> beginnings and progress our movement has made over the past 70
> years. You will be amazed, and it will make you really
> understand, respect, and love this organization. I have had my
> share of frustrations with the organization over the years. But
> I must admit that I am so proud to be a part of the NFB, not
> just for what it has meant to me, but what it has done even
> before I was born to insure that I can live and work in a world
> where I am seen as an equal with my sighted peers. No
> organization is perfect because no person is perfect. But we
> must all remember to appreciate this community we have, built
> upon a solid foundation provided by many generations of blind
> people before us, tirelessly working to show that blindness
> should not limit our life choices.
>>>
>>> Let's all make a greater effort to know and appreciate our
> history. We will all be better for it.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Briley
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nabs-l mailing list
>> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
> info for nabs-l:
>>
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/brileyp%
> 40gmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
> info for nabs-l:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/jsorozco
> %40gmail.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
> virus signature database 5080 (20100502) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature
> database 5080 (20100502) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
> for nabs-l:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/brileyp%40gmail.com
_______________________________________________
nabs-l mailing list
nabs-l at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nabs-l:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/missheather%40comcas
t.net
_______________________________________________
nabs-l mailing list
nabs-l at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nabs-l:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/carrie.gilmer%40gmai
l.com
More information about the NABS-L
mailing list