[Nfb-editors] Seeking diversity

[Bridgit Pollpeter]

Mike,

Again, I am not asking us to collaborate with other organizations.  I am
saying seek membership the way we do now, but be willing to include
non-blind members.

And I fail to see how gaining members threatens the focus of the NFB.

I am also not saying we take in new members just to have a large number.
We continue to do our work, and we seek those who find a common thread
in our efforts.  Why does my assertion that we should seek individual
membership from blind and sighted together translate into accepting
anyone no matter what, and taking on issues not related to Federation
goals?

And if we are about changing what it means to be blind, doesn't this
mean we are attempting to change mindsets of the blind and sighted
alike?  So doesn't this mean we would welcome new members, even if
sighted, that felt empowered by our mission, and believed in what we are
working towards?  We already have sighted members who believe in what we
do, and they are working alongside us.  This is what I am talking about.
The sighted make up the majority of the world.  If we find those who are
willing to learn and embrace our philosophy, they will help spread that
message.  Why is this bad?

Believe it or not, I am not an idealistic.  I actually tend to see the
bad in humanity, but this is more a matter of practicality.  We want to
change perceptions so we need to extend our membership, not just our
outreach, to anyone who feels the NFB resonates with them.

I am not saying tons of sighted people will feel this way, but this can
be said of the blind too.  We focus on working with these blind people
who do not "see the light," so why not the sighted people too?

If we concentrate on changing perceptions, and we teach people-- blind
and sighted-- about our philosophy and demenstrate it, and these people
embrace the philosophy, I fail to see how these new members-- converts,
if you will-- would suddenly want to change the current direction of the
NFB, or bring in outside issues.

Bridgit

Message: 8
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 17:12:37 -0700
From: "Mike Freeman" <k7uij at panix.com>
To: "'Correspondence Committee Mailing List'" <nfb-editors at nfbnet.org>
Subject: Re: [Nfb-editors] Seeking diversity
Message-ID: <005d01cbe5ca$5b3e86d0$11bb9470$@panix.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

Bridgit:

For starters, it seems to me that we already *are* reaching out as best
we can to gain a wider appreciation of our cause and to gain members.
That more people aren't involved is, to some extent, a sign of the
times.  Almost every organization from the YMCA and YWCA to the NAACP to
church groups to political parties is reaching out for members and
decries the fragmentation of current society wherein people are doing
their own thing on the Internet or via Facebook and Twitter and find
less and less time to join with others in common endeavors.  WE are not
unique.

Having said this, I consider it inevitable that trying actively to gain
members from other groups within society will inevitably mean a dilution
of our message, our goals and our principles.  Why should others join us
unless they expect to influence us?

In this connection, you ask what other groups of the disabled have heard
of us?  Have you not participated in councils dealing with specialized
transportation or dealt with other disability groups in conferences
designed to get everyone together or to ascertain what "people with
disabilities want" -- as if we have a common set of wants and needs.
For instance, I have encountered envy and even hatred among groups of
mobility-impaired persons and groups of developmentally-disabled persons
when we of NFB refused to make it our policies to work toward the goals
these other groups espoused.  They just could not understand why we
stuck to blindness issues. Frankly, they wanted our expertise and
advocacy skills to work for them. When we offered to help them advocate
for themselves, it wasn't good enough; they wanted us to actively work
on their issues.

I maintain that Dr. martin Luther King JR. began to lose effectiveness
just after the Selma March when he began to speak out against the
Vietnam War and against economic privation.  Both of these were worthy
causes but they diluted the punch of his civil rights movement.

Same thing with the national Organization for Women (NOW).  It was
within two states of adoption of the Equal Rights Amendment when it
began to take on causes such as women's reproductive rights and in so
doing, they lost ground so that I doubt the ERA will be adopted in this
century.

We of NFB cannot afford such mistakes.  You say you're not advocating
changes in our goals or philosophy.  But if we are to remain democratic,
these cannot help but change when we bring in anybody and everybody.

I'm not advocating exclusivity; I merely say that diversity for
diversity's sake makes no sense.

Mike