[nabs-l] majority

[Bridgit Pollpeter]

But does it matter if the majority is blind, or should it matter that
the majority holds to Federation philosophy?

Yes we are the blind speaking for the blind-- as it should be.  And we
should maintain that a majority of our leadership be blind, but when did
we decide that membership come at a cost?  Are we not trying to change
what it means to be blind?  Does this not include attempting to reach
out to the blind and sighted alike in hopes they are willing to learn
and embrace our philosophy?  Why would this look bad, or change the
focus of the organization?  Shouldn't it be about a collective voice
furthering Federation goals and causes?

We walk a fine line between independence and reverse prejudice.  And as
Miranda described, how was it fair that her chapter take a head count of
the blind and sighted just to say yes or no to a sighted member wanting
to join?  How does this look to someone who presumeably was ready to
join the NFB and do their part?

I have heard the argument that a sighted majority could vote against our
current policies and change the organization, but is not this judging
sighted people just because they can "see?"  What is to stop a blind
majority from doing the same?  Not all blind Federationist are "on
board" with every aspect of the organization.  Isn't it making an
awfully big assumption to claim a sighted majority, who chose to join a
progressive group, would storm in and change our direction, even though
they willingly joined a progressive organization?

I am not suggesting we try to have more sighted people over blind
people, though if this ever did happen, it would be a sad state of
affairs that few blind people cared enough to join.

For a group seeking equality, it seems odd that we would exclude people
based on their eyesight.  Sound familiar?

Bridgit

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 17:09:06 -0400
From: Jorge Paez <jorgeapaez at mac.com>
To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
	<nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Blind Majority
Message-ID: <15D2C523-E8DC-441F-A903-279641EEA4A4 at mac.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII

Miranda:
I understand your points,
but under the constitution, going over majority would mean the sighted
have the major vote, which would defeat the NFB's purpose for existing.


Jorge