Participative Methods 4: Citizens' Organising

This approach was first developed by Saul Alinski during the 1970s.  He worked amongst the poorest communities in urban United States and developed forthright methods of increasing the confidence of people trodden down by poverty.  He wrote two books Rules for Radicals and Reveille for Radicals.

After his death in the late seventies, his work was taken up by the Industrial Areas Foundation.  During the nineties IAF attempted to introduce organising to this country.  Although their may still be a few organisations around I believe the attempt has run into the sand.

I took their leaders training in 1992.  Whilst I had difficulty with the whole package they were promoting, much of what I learned has been helpful in my community development practice.  It is not a method that is written down anywhere.  This is a deliberate policy as it is supposed to be passed from practitioner to practitioner.  A good introduction to the principles is Robert Linthicum's Building a People of Power.

Here are a few of the basics:

1. Organising starts with the churches (and perhaps today any place of worship).  Why?  Because churches are there for the long haul.  In disadvantaged communities they can be the only institutions which maintain a presence. 
2. Organising is based upon an analysis of power.  The Statutory and Private Sectors (and to a lesser extent the professional voluntary sector) access power through organised money.  Communities cannot do this, as they have no money.  They access power through organised people.
3. Citizens' organisations are funded solely through the giving of their member organisations.  The reason for this is that accepting grant aid means they become beholden to the donor organisations.  They must unambiguously represent the interests of their members.
4. This is power tempered by love.  Power collectively exercised is used in a disciplined way so that no-one is marginalised.
5. The people involved are motivated by anger and self-interest.  Anger energises the leaders; ensures that things get done.  Self-interest is the deeper motivation that arises out of realising that I benefit when I work for the benefit of others.
6. Leaders are trained and developed but never occupy any position in the organisation for more than one year.
7. They work by ensuring that people with power, eg local politicians, business people, church leaders, etc are accountable to their own aims.  Citizens' Organisations have no permanent friends or enemies, the aim is always to develop relationships.

I think the problem in Britain was that it is culturally very different from the States.  We have a lot to learn but have not yet developed an approach to organising that suits our own culture.  The churches led with organising in the States and could in Britain lead in developing our own brand.  It is in fact an effective way of encouraging real sharing between churches and ecumenists could do worse than study this method.  I will explore the weaknesses of community development in England further in future posts.

Comments

[John Hayes]

Interesting. Will you be reviewing the development of the theory and practice of Social Capital and its relationship to faith communities during your commentary? John

[Chris Sissons]

Thanks John, you win the prize for first ever comment on this blog.

I hadn't thought of covering Social Capital but it may be possible. Over the next few days I am planning to cover community development and the churches' role in it and so I should be able to cover it to some degree.

For more information Anne Morisy is the best author I know of - her book 'Journeying Out' is worth a read - she also contributed to the follow up to 'Faith in the City' which calls the same thing spiritual capital. I'll try to track them both down and provide details later.

[John Hayes]

My particular area of interest is the challenge for christians (and other faiths)who engage in projects supported under initiatives that look to develop social cohesion. On the one hand it really is going where the work needs to be done - on the other it can become all consuming activity just to meet outcomes and maintain funding. This can mean that you lose sight of other important activity.

[Chris Sissons]

I'm planning to consider some of this over the next few days - keep reading and let me know if I could helpfully expand any post further.

Starting today, my plans are:
1. Immortality (this is relevant!)
2. Volunteering and self-help
3. Development workers and activists
4. Divisive nature of grant aid
6. Community buildings