A Meditation on Dr. King and his Mentor, Dr. Thurman

One of the individuals portrayed in the film Selma, Diane Nash, spoke at the White House Celebration of Music From The Civil Rights Movement in February 2009. One comment she made there helped to put me on the path to Fellowship Church. She said the point of the movement was “reconciliation.” That word, reconciliation, rang a bell and prompted me to realize that for 45 years I had forgotten that principle and had been driven by anger, not love.

In the speech Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. gave at the end of the Selma-to-Montgomery march, which moved me profoundly as I stood in the crowd, he said:

That’s what happened when the Negro and white masses of the South threatened to unite and build a great society: a society of justice where none would prey upon the weakness of others; a society of plenty where greed and poverty would be done away; a society of brotherhood where every man would respect the dignity and worth of human personality…. And so I plead with you this afternoon as we go ahead: remain committed to nonviolence. Our aim must never be to defeat or humiliate the white man, but to win his friendship and understanding. We must come to see that the end we seek is a society at peace with itself, a society that can live with its conscience. And that will be a day not of the white man, not of the black man. That will be the day of man as man.

Unfortunately, it seemed to me, the film Selma did not capture that philosophy, which Dr. Howard Thurman helped shape.

In Dr. Thurman’s Jesus and the Disinherited, a brilliant self-help manual for activists that Dr. King reportedly carried with him when he traveled, Dr. Thurman writes “To love such an enemy requires reconciliation… It involves confession of error…. To love those of the household he must conquer his own pride.” And Dr. Thurman points out that “too much pride on either side [makes it difficult] to make amends…. The underprivileged man must himself be status free. It may be argued that his sense of freedom must come first…. Love is possible only between two freed spirits.” By “status free,” he meant transcending our social roles and relating person-to-person.

Thurman insists we need “an overall technique for loving one’s enemy…, a discipline, a method, a technique, as over against some form of wishful thinking or simple desiring,... a technique of implementation.” The technique he proposes is “the attitude of respect for personality,” which requires us to “put aside the pride of race and status which would have caused [us] to regard [ourselves] as superior….[and declare] ‘I am stripped bare of all pretense and false pride. The man in me appeals to the man in you.”

When “we emerge into an area where love operates,” we say, as did Jesus, “Neither do I condemn you.” We judge our own deeds and confess our trespasses. “[We] must recognize fear, deception, hatred, each for what it is,” Dr. Thurman states. “Once having done this, [we] must learn how to destroy these or to render [ourselves] immune to their domination.”

Yet, as we saw indicated here at Fellowship Church last week in the film about Grace Lee Boggs, most political activists don’t engage in that kind of critical self-examination, which is essential to nurturing the nonjudgmental humility that Dr. Thurman affirms. Most activists are too busy trying to mobilize others to do what they, the activists, want them to do. They focus on the outer world and neglect the inner world.

Not even  faith-based and faith-rooted organizations really talk about the need for critical self-examination. For example, in the call for a strategy conference late last year, Michael Lerner, founder of the Network of Spiritual Progressives, said nothing about the need for self-improvement rooted in acknowledging mistakes and resolving to avoid them. To the contrary, he said, "Nor are we writing you to suggest personal repentance." I found that statement shocking, but par for the course.

I’ve discussed this issue many times with faith-based leaders and activists and organized some workshops to promote that commitment. But so far I mainly see a focus on external issues and neglect of internal issues. Some projects train activists to work on themselves individually. But I know of no political organization that facilitates all of their members to support one another in open-ended self-development as defined by each member.

I envision user-friendly, easily replicated templates that like-minded individuals could use to provide mutual support -- so that we could better transform our social system. The first step, it seems to me, is to establish a new primary purpose for our society:  to “rapidly begin the shift from a 'thing-oriented' society to a 'person-oriented' society,” as Dr. King put it. Once that new mission statement were affirmed, we could better reform all of our institutions, our culture, and ourselves to serve that purpose.

With that positive thrust, we who are working on so many different issues could better overcome our fragmentation by occasionally uniting to support one another on timely, top priority issues. By uniting, we could accomplish much more together than we can fragmented, focused on building our own organization. That vision seems clear and convincing to me. But so far I’ve found no organization engaged in that kind of holistic work and have been unable to initiate one.

I trust, however, that some day soon holistic politics will crystallize. It may be just around the corner. As James Baldwin said:

A day will come when you will trust you more than you do now and you will trust me more than you do now. We will trust each other. I do believe, I really do believe in the New Jerusalem. I really do believe that we can all become better than we are. I know we can. But the price is enormous and people are not yet ready to pay.

In the meantime, I plan to stop pushing my vision, ask God to take the weight of the world off my shoulders, try to become more humble, take better care of myself, and learn better how to “love [my] neighbor directly, clearly, permitting no barrier between,” as affirmed by Dr. Thurman.

Then, before I die, perhaps I’ll be a foot soldier in a global movement to transform our global society into a compassionate community dedicated to the common good of the entire Earth Community.

Thank you for listening.

++++++

Presented by Wade Lee Hudson as the Meditation at the Church for the Fellowship of All Peoples, Sunday, January 18, 2015.

http://www.wadeswire.org/?p=1320

Leonard Roy Frank Has Died

Leonard Roy Frank (1932-2015)

Monotheist, Vegan, Gandhian, Social Reformer, Writer,
Opponent of Involuntary Psychiatry, and
Collector of Quotations

He led exactly the life he wanted to lead.

 

Leonard Roy Frank, my best friend, died suddenly sometime the night of January 15. Though he had suffered with a cold for a few days, otherwise he was healthy. He had apparently fallen after having what the medical examiner said was probably an “event.” The cause of death may not be declared for several weeks.

 

A large number of tributes to Leonard have poured in and are being consolidated on the Mad in America Tribute page.

 

The memorial service will be held at the Church for the Fellowship of All Peoples, 2041 Larkin Street (near Broadway), San Francisco, on Saturday, January 31, 10:30 AM. There will be a reception afterwards with a light vegan lunch provided. Please email Wade Hudson <wade@wadehudson.org> if you plan to attend.

 

Following the reception, we plan to invite his friends to visit Leonard’s nearby apartment, where visitors will be able to take books from his large library. (His books on psychiatry may be donated to a nonprofit.)

 

Parking in the area is difficult, with a two-hour time limit. The #19 Polk bus that is due to stop on the north side of Market Street near Civic Center BART at 9:50 AM goes to Polk and Broadway. Nearby parking garages are:  Lombardi Sports Parking Garage, 1600 Jackson Street, $12.00 max; Old First Garage, 1725 Sacramento Street, $10.00 max; Ace Parking, 1776 Sacramento Street, $25.00 max.

 

Contributions in memory of Leonard may be made to: Mind Freedom International and/or the Church for the Fellowship of All Peoples.

 

If you want to buy flowers for the service, you can call Polk Street Florist, 415-441-2868, to order them.


Reform the System with Love and Power: A Call for Action

Power without love is reckless and abusive, 

and love without power is sentimental and anemic. 

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

The system is broken. Our society appears to benefit a few, but those superficial gains are devoid of deep meaning. Moreover, most people are excluded. Worse yet, the whole system may collapse soon as society becomes increasingly top-heavy and destructive to the environment. For those reasons, we urgently need to build a nonviolent movement to reform our society fundamentally and comprehensively into a compassionate community dedicated to the common good.

To be successful, that movement must incorporate the dynamics of both love and power. Love backed by political power holds great potential as a source for social change. And political power rooted in love can promote economic fairness, care for the environment, social justice, and democracy more effectively than can efforts motivated primarily by anger.

Currently, a broad range of activist organizations do good work on a variety of important issues. Those projects are generally based on a similar set of humanistic values. But their impact has been diminished by widespread fragmentation. Those many organizations rarely support one another on timely priorities.

To help nurture the greater collaboration that is needed, it could  help to compose a brief vision statement that responds to the following questions:

1.      How can we best describe and analyze "the system"?

2.      What role do individuals play in maintaining the system?

3.      How do we need to change the system?

4.      What long-term strategies can help build a popular movement to achieve that goal?

5.      What short-term steps can we take toward that end?

By creating a vision statement based on those questions, we could affirm our core beliefs and make clear how they support a commitment that we can sustain over time. The ideas presented here are offered for consideration by anyone who wants to work on a declaration that articulates how we can reform our self-perpetuating, fundamentally flawed social system.

References to “the system” are common, and people have an intuitive sense of what the phrase means. When Elizabeth Warren declared at the 2012 Democratic National Convention, “The system is rigged,” she received a standing ovation. More generally, the percentage of voters who believe the government is run by a few big interests looking out for themselves increased from 29 percent in 1964 to 79 percent in 2013. That same percentage is also convinced that corruption in government is widespread. In fact, most Americans report they’re so upset with the “system” that they “would carry a protest sign for a day,” if the opportunity arose. Strong majorities favor major changes in national policy and believe that grassroots people power is needed to achieve them. Yet, despite all that support for change, there is no consensus among activists about how to reinvent our social system. We need to fill that void and build broad agreement on the underlying issues.

“The System” and How We Can Reform It

No one group controls “the system,” yet it is self-perpetuating. Our major institutions -- including our economy, government, media, entertainment, schools, and religious communities -- our culture, and we ourselves as individuals are all interconnected within it. Each of those elements supports all the others.  

The system’s primary purpose is to preserve the existing social ladder. As those who prosper pass on their advantages to their children, that ladder become more difficult to climb.

The system corrupts our culture and dehumanizes our people. No one escapes its impact, and everyone reinforces it. In particular, our hyper-competitive culture encourages harsh judgments of others and undermines our ability to collaborate with them. Instead, we learn to either dominate or submit.

Because the various elements of the system are intertwined, the only way we can transform it is to steadily change each element in it. We have to change our institutions, our culture, and ourselves.

Before undertaking those specific changes, however, we need to lay out a broad vision of lasting social transformation with a new mission statement that affirms a primary commitment to the common good of the entire Earth Community. We must make clear that we reject the proposition that climbing the ladder of success is our highest calling.

Becoming a Better Person

A primary objective for anyone committed to change for the common good, shared by many people, is to become a better person. To achieve that end, we need to more fully:

• Treat others as we want to be treated.
• Love ourselves as we love others.
• Avoid both selfishness and self-sacrifice.
• Respect ourselves so we can better respect others.
• Be productive and happy, have fun, experience joy, be of service to others, relieve suffering, and advance human evolution.
• Appreciate intangible spiritual realities, ponder or revere the mystery that energizes and structures the universe, and seek harmony with Mother Nature.
• Be honest, courageous, humble, free, generous, disciplined, responsible, firm, and flexible.

To strengthen ourselves and “be the change,” we need to honestly evaluate our mistakes and accomplishments, our strengths and weaknesses, while drawing on mutual support and peer learning. In this process, there can be great value in merely verbalizing the results of our own introspection to supportive allies who understand us. At the same time, of course, we must leave it to individuals seeking self-improvement to define their own goals. They don’t need to be told by others how they should change.

Overall, self-development efforts are most fruitful when they are intentional and consistent, rather than occasional and haphazard. To facilitate personal growth, we need to develop new methods for providing mutual support. One option, for example, is to design formats for soulful conversations that others can readily adopt with little or no special training or expert facilitation. In such groups, members can set aside time to dig deep, acknowledge mistakes, and consider how to avoid making the same mistakes in the future. By developing user-friendly templates that can be easily utilized by small, member-run sharing circles, these tools can spread widely. That would make it possible for large numbers of activists to engage more fully in steady self-improvement, and also increase our own effectiveness by helping us improve our ability to relate meaningfully to others.

Expanding the Activist Network to a Global Scale

If we can reach agreement on a long-term vision statement, small groups of endorsers could gather regularly to break bread and enjoy one another’s company. They could share a cultural experience that engages the heart, such as listening to a song, and report on both their self-development efforts and their political actions. Such circles could in turn attract new members through contagious happiness, and also occasionally gather in regional, national, and international gatherings.

If we tap our inner strength and courage, we can join with others to leave the world a better place for future generations -- in part by impacting national policies in our own country and also by supporting the efforts of people in other countries to do the same in their nation. Changing America’s policies must be our first concern, however, as they are often a principal cause of the injustices suffered by our fellow humans in other nations. We can help end injustice and prevent future ones by supporting efforts to eradicate their root causes.

By continuously expanding an interconnected activist network, and reaching out to the entire world, we can more completely ensure that:

• Everyone has healthy food, clean air, drinkable water, peace and quiet, economic security, a safe environment, rewarding social interactions, good friends, a healthy family, ongoing learning experiences, and a fair chance to realize his or her best potentialities.
• Working-age adults who are able and willing to work can find a good job at a living wage.
• Private businesses serve the public interest, treat their workers fairly, and refrain from damaging the environment.
• Workers are fully able to organize.
• Everyone is treated equally in the eyes of the law, while law and order are upheld.
• Legitimate authority is respected, but officials who abuse their power are held accountable.
• Individuals have a right to privacy as long as they don’t violate the rights of others.
• The principles of nonviolence, reconciliation, empowerment, partnership, cooperation, and collaboration are promoted throughout society.

With an equal emphasis on both short-term objectives and long-term goals, and a balanced focus on simultaneous personal, social, cultural, and political change, we can win victories that will build momentum for social change on a global scale, while recognizing that no victory or defeat is final. Such an approach, moreover, will enable us to inspire concerned individuals who want to do more than “tinker,” as well as those who want to see results.

It’s important to keep in mind that many people are passive in pursuing change not because they don’t want to act, but because others are passive. We must break that downward spiral with an upward spiral. As we steadily mobilize like-minded people, other concerned individuals will also be encouraged to participate. Then, by pushing for realistic positive change to advance the common good of the Earth Community, we can promote evolutionary revolution, meet neglected needs, build our collective power, and restructure our deteriorating society into a compassionate and truly democratic community.

Reader's Comments

Following are responses to recent posts. Except when the authors posted on public platform (Facebook, Wade's Wire, or the Wades' Weekly website) or asked me to identify them, the comments are anonymous.

Re: Escaping Xmas

"Santa Claus does not belong in Bethlehem." Wade, Wade, Wade. What does that mean? This note my daughter sent me today, as to how I explained Santa Claus to her and my son, also explains why I would take the stress of Christmas with my loved ones vs. spending it in a gambling joint, uh, hotel.

---------------

"Mom and Dad,

The attached letter reminds me of how you responded to the "Santa" question all those years ago. Not exactly the same, but similar sentiment.

Love you both,..."

---------------

But to each his own Wade. Life is about choices I guess.

Merry Christmas,

NOTE: The attached letter referred to above beautifully explained who actually put the gifts under their tree and affirmed certain nonmaterial values. In my reply, I commented on how I have no children, grandchildren, or any real community -- and how Xmas has taken Christ out of Christmas.

+++++

hey Wade - that all sounds great. You sound renewed, revitalized, yes?
As for Santa, I never really cared so much for Christmas or Santa, but I'm feeling it a little different at the moment. Went to a talk at the Fellowship last week (your friend will be presenting there in January on MLK) and a great symbologist/mythologist talked about how the themes of Christmas are so Universal. there is something about this time of year... That there may be a universal human experience makes it more compelling to me. She had many relevant pieces of art including one that was very provocative -- Santa Claus holding the baby Jesus - something about pagan Santa coming together with more traditional religious stuff -- who knows...I always liked Jerry as Santa...Thinking about the difference between archetypes, deities, and saints.

http://www.stnicholascenter.org/pages/origin-of-santa/

interesting political times - so many people thought the mid terms were another catastrophe but instead Obama seems freed (in some ways - not all), i.e., Cuba is cool. The demonstrations across the country seem significant - very grass roots - I heard that when Jackson and Sharpton went to St Louis the people turned their backs on them..

+++++

Liked your post Wade!
--Sara Colm

+++++

The more I know about "living in the Now" the more I understand its practical application. There are profound spiritual implications that I get fleetingly and yet settling in to be satisfied with what is is a recently new one for me. As fast as we've grabbed life and lived consciously, I had the illusion that it would always be so. Guess I actually never made any serious plans for getting older and although I've had health challenges off and on all my life, I've lived through them and adapted each time to whatever needed adapting. None of us anticipated the economic downtown 2008, so I was feeling pretty proud of myself with my savings, good health, and eagerness to continue to work. Didn't happen. Won't happen now in any of the forms I had imagined... so now, I'm taking it a day at a time and pondering about the REALITY of truly "letting go" and TRUSTING that Spirit/God/the Divine is active in my life to the degree that I am not overwhelmed. Glad you wrote about how
you are
dealing with one of those "quick turns" that you've now encountered. And, yes, you ARE a writer... Blessings of Grace and Comfort this season, Wade.

+++++

We stayed at the Nugget this past summer and have done so before, too. We also enjoyed the big, round hot tub. In Reno, we enjoy walking along the river.

In terms of eating, our fav place there is the small, funky, veg Pneumatic Diner, though we also really enjoyed the hip, mixed Laughing Planet.

+++++

Sounds like a nice plan. Have a Merry Happy Holiday!

+++++

I‘m glad you’ve figured out a way to survive in the face of the Uber horror, Wade. I was worried about you.

And I’m glad you’re thriving despite the holidays, an annual challenge.

For good things in the New Year,

++++++++++

Re: Evolutionary Revolution

I wholeheartedly agree with this, Wade. A lot of talk about "revolution" is usually just empty rhetoric. Plus, from an organizing point of view, if people don't see concrete results, the activists will just drift away.

Didn't Saul Alinsky say something similar to what you wrote here? That in order to build a movement, people have to see some successes?

Evolutionary Revolution

For thirty years, I affirmed a “radical” activism and rejected “liberal” piecemeal reform. Then, one day, while listening to some recordings of speeches by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., one comment struck me like a lightning bolt. Dr. King’s point was simple: movements need to focus on winnable demands. I concluded that we radicals had been wrong when we attacked Dr. King for compromising.

Mahatma Gandhi, who influenced Dr. King profoundly, adopted a similar approach. He called it  “evolutionary revolution.” This visionary pragmatism acknowledges the value of short-term reforms that improve the quality of life for people who have been oppressed -- as part of an ongoing, never-ending process that can eventually lead to the fundamental restructuring of our entire society. This evolution involves change in our way of thinking: a change of paradigm.

This perspective is not “either/or.” It integrates both liberal reform and radical transformation. It balances the short-term and the long-term, giving equal importance to each. Gandhi and King were neither radical nor liberal. They were both.

In biology, species are defined by their ability to reproduce themselves through interbreeding. Over time, biological evolution produces new species that become so different they can no longer breed with their predecessor species.

In a similar way, human societies evolve in ways that constitute a “revolution,” or transformation -- a sudden, fundamental change in how we live, work, or govern ourselves. These transformations produce societies that are so different they feel “new.” They change the composition, structure, outward form, and appearance of a society.

Transformation, however, can also be taken to mean “to change (something) completely.” The butterfly emerging from the caterpillar is commonly used as a metaphor for this type of change. This definition of transformation is dangerous.

New species remain similar to other species within the same genus, including their predecessors. They are distinct, but they are not totally different.

Sustainable revolutions do not create new societies (or individuals) that differ from their predecessor as much as butterflies differ from caterpillars. That metaphor suggests change that is total, complete, not lacking anything, having all necessary parts, not limited in any way, not requiring more work, entirely done or completed, fully carried out, absolute, perfect.

This attitude is prone to totalitarianism, black-and-white thinking that demonizes opponents and attempts to use physical force to impose its will.

When we speak of transformation, we need to avoid language that implies “total” change. Individually, when we are “reborn,” we may feel like a new person, but we are not completely new. When we transform a community, it may look new, but it is not totally new. Transformation does not destroy. It builds on what preceded.

Gandhi and King were more than willing to compromise. Reconciliation and community were their ultimate goals. They saw revolution as a never-ending process. For them, “shut it down” was not a goal in and of itself -- a reactive outrage against an injustice that would somehow spontaneously lead to revolution. Rather, such actions were part of a calculated, proactive strategy for specific improvements in living conditions.

Their long-term vision was the beloved community. Their short-terms objectives were, respectively, independence and desegregation.

We need to update their vision by articulating it in contemporary language, and unite behind concrete, winnable demands concerning public policy that help us steadily transform our global society. To be winnable, demands must be measurable. It needs to be clear when we have achieved our objective. Movements build momentum with victories.

As I see it, the primary shift our society needs today is to move away from a selfish commitment to climbing the social ladder to a commitment to the common good of the entire Earth Community -- the entire human family and all life. And we need to achieve that vision by democratizing our entire society with new public policies that establish new structures.

This transformation would discourage both selfishness and self-sacrifice. It would affirm that we can both love ourselves and love others. It would not reject ambition, the desire for economic security, and getting promoted to further one’s career. Rather, it affirms a balance between both self-interest and the common good, solidarity rather than isolation.

What specific reforms can best help us achieve that vision is another question. The list of demands forwarded by Ferguson Action  in response to the death of Michael Brown is suggestive. For instance, with regard to the use of deadly force by police, they call for “the development of best practices…, [including] the development of specific use of force standards … [and] a Department of Justice review trigger when continued excessive use of force occurs.”

When an officer feels threatened by someone who is 8-10 feet away, can the use of deadly force be justified? Aren’t there other options?

Thus far, most of the Black Lives Matter demonstrations are primarily a cultural phenomenon that enhances awareness of important realities, as did Occupy. Hopefully consensus behind specific demands will soon help that movement develop into an effective political force.

Briefly blocking traffic and shutting down business gains publicity. But if that tactic becomes used more widely without a focus on winnable goals, it will backfire as resentment builds. Potential supporters want to know: what do the protestors want and how do they plan to get it?

Rejecting the need for incremental reforms is divisive and undermines unity. One correspondent, for example, recently told me:

The policy making process .. has rarely done anything good for [the marginalized]. ...It has been curtailed, crippled, and suppressed into ineffectiveness. I do not think that we make sustainable progress with piecemeal policy change. What ever policy changes that are done to make liberal amendments to the current system are not sustainable because the whole structure and foundation is riddled. The whole house is burning; integration with that won't get it.

Alas, however, in the foreseeable future, integration is inevitable. We cannot escape so long as our society does not completely collapse. That catastrophe may happen eventually, and we need to prepare for it as best we can. But to wish for it or try to help precipitate it would be morally irresponsible, due to the greatly increased suffering that would result.

In the late 1960s, we demanded “no more business as usual” and tried to achieve our goals by inflicting widespread inconvenience. Our primary accomplishment was the Reagan Revolution.

I would prefer to learn from those mistakes and push for specific reforms that steadily lead to the transformation of our global society into a compassionate Earth Community dedicated to preserving and enriching all life.

Escaping Xmas

Santa Claus does not belong in Bethlehem. So, dodging the stress and madness of Xmas in the Naked City, I find myself on the 23rd floor of the Nugget Hotel in Sparks, Nevada, just outside Reno, for $38 per night.

I like the solitude. It’s convenient. My room has free Wi-Fi and a desk. The fifth floor has a gym and a large glass-enclosed, tree-lined pool with birds flying around and the best Jacuzzi I’ve experienced (it has several different kinds of strong jets). And the food in the lobby is adequate and affordable.

Being away gives me distance and perspective, which leads to new insights. Better yet, being forced out of my routine helps me break bad habits and develop new ones that I hope to carry over when I return, such as: more exercise; stretching; writing at least 1-2 hours in the morning; avoiding late-night snacks; doing my late-night meditations; and, six days a week, staying sober while avoiding both caffeine and sugar.

In addition to forming those habits, I plan to use my time here on special projects, like reading real books, emptying my Inbox, posting my autobiography, and working on the budget for the rest of my life. In addition, of course, now that I’ve adjusted to the altitude and largely rid myself of a chest cold, on days the Warriors don’t play basketball I expect to win some money at blackjack (I did win $75 in ten minutes in an experiment on my way in, but haven’t yet been in shape to play seriously).

I had planned a road trip, including Canyon de Chelly, Joshua Tree National Monument, and New Year’s Eve on Fremont Street in downtown Las Vegas. But I like it here so much I may stay until I return home early next year. The less time I spend driving and getting settled in new locations, the more time I’ll have to be productive.

This approach may help me deal with my post-Uber life. Previously, my monthly check included at least several hundred dollars from my share of our co-op’s net profits. Now those profits are virtually zero. Moreover, when I drive, I earn 20-30% less per hour.

According to my latest calculations, when I move up the first-come, first-served list and get a Section 8 rent subsidy in about five years (hopefully), I can sell my medallion, invest the proceeds, and have enough money to manage until I’m 94, while slowly consuming my capital.

With this plan, until I sell my medallion, I’ll have to drive taxi 40 hours a week eleven months per year for the first time in my life, which means I’ll have to stop trying to save the world. I can take the weight of the world off my shoulders.

Going back and forth to the airport in my taxi can be a bit boring, but it’s not all that hard. I can still work on my devices while I’m parked at the airport waiting for a fare (more than an hour on average) and take home enough money to make ends meet.

I should be grateful I’m as well off as I am and have been able to do as much as I have with my life. So unless someone offers me a part-time job doing social-change work, my goals will have to be much more modest.

My inclination is to focus on writing, with a priority on Wade’s Weekly. The 120 or so subscribers to that blog is not a huge number. But writers like to have readers, and I very much appreciate the feedback I receive, and hope to put more time into engaging in dialog with my readers.

Who knows? Maybe I plant an occasional seed that blooms somewhere. Or maybe we just bolster one another in our resolve to contribute to human evolution as best we can.

Regardless, I have numerous ideas for essays on my mind that I really want to write. They say if you have to write, you are a writer. Maybe I am.

So, unless some miracle happens with the Residents’ Council while I’m away, or “Changing the System: A Proposal for a National Conference” develops in a way that involves me, I’ll once again try to drop my self-identity as a “community organizer” and fade away into the sunset, alone, pen in hand.

“They Treat Us Like Children”

When I reluctantly agreed to serve as President of the Western Park Residents’ Council, I sensed the Council would have to be assertive to develop a real voice with management. The deeply ingrained, widespread paternalistic assumptions of superiority that I discussed in “Comments on ‘It’s All for Your Own Good’” are manifest here. I often heard residents complain, “They treat us like children,” or variations on that theme.

But I never guessed that our managers would refuse to engage in any dialog with the Council. I was shell-shocked when at our monthly Council meeting with more than forty residents in attendance, three managers walked out after merely giving a pro forma report and refusing to respond to questions, including questions that had been submitted to them in writing.

The whole experience has been painful and mystifying, leading to many sleepless nights, countless hours trying to figure out what to do, and neglecting other priorities.

Now I feel I’ve finally settled on how to proceed. Rather than resorting to the old notion of leadership and trying to rally “followers” to do what I want, which was my first impulse, I will try to facilitate the Council finding its mind on the matter. I need to practice what I preach and trust the “wisdom of crowds.”

Some residents accept our current situation. Perhaps most do, more or less. We have a beautiful, newly rehabbed building, with affordable rents and a good location. The nonprofit owner, Northern California Presbyterian Homes and Services, has good intentions. Our managers are kind, competent, and hard-working. Residents can offer input into management decisions as individuals. If an objective study were done of all of the complaints and suggestions made by residents, it may well be that management has generally responded in a reasonable manner.

So why rock the boat? Why ask for collective input from the Council as a whole? Why not just accept that management will come to Council meetings and engage in dialog if and when they choose to do so? Why create more tension by trying to persuade management to promise to briefly engage in dialog when requested? Why alienate the building managers by going over their head to their supervisors and/or the Board? Why should residents risk receiving a less favorable response to their individual requests, or maybe suffer retribution, because they supported efforts to restructure the Management-Council relationship? Why not be submissive and accept that we are dependent on management? Why not accept that we have a good thing going? Why risk ruining it?

Given those considerations, yesterday I circulated to the 200 residents who live here (except for one who has requested not to be informed about Council activities) a proposal that the Executive Committee place on the agenda of the December 9 Council meeting the following item:

Do you believe WPA management, when invited, should engage in dialog with the Council on issues identified by the Council?

1. No. Not at all important.
2. Yes. It would be nice but is not very important.
3. Yes. It is a very important goal that we should aim to achieve.

It will be interesting to see how folks respond.

Reflecting on all this, it struck me that this struggle hit a nerve with me because it is part of a lifelong pattern: the refusal on the part of people with power over me to dialog, starting with early childhood experiences with my mother and high school teachers who punished me because I was a “freethinker.” No wonder Martin Buber’s I and Thou blew me away with its affirmation of mutual encounter. And no wonder that for fifty years I’ve endorsed the critique of disabling liberal paternalism.

After the Council had been dormant for more than a year, some residents called a meeting to revive it. I went to that meeting and presented some proposals for how to conduct the election in a more democratic manner than had been the case before. Those proposals were accepted and implemented. Old-timers predicted about ten residents would come to our membership meetings, but more than forty have participated each time.

When no one else would serve as President, I agreed to do so. More than 60 percent of the residents cast their ballot in support of the slate of candidates. Great enthusiasm filled the air. Many residents expressed to me passionate appreciation for my efforts. I became hopeful that a great, warm sense of community would emerge here, leading to this place being a great place for me to spend the rest of my life. Since I believe that residents having a meaningful, collective voice in decisions that shape their environment helps foster that sense of community, I’ve worked hard to establish structures to help make the Council democratic, and have sought a commitment from management to engage in dialog with the Council. We were on the verge of a productive partnership. I felt it was just around the corner.

Then the staff threw cold water on all this good spirit by walking out of our meeting. Their action threatens to undercut the Council and diminish participation. If they had simply engaged in a brief dialog with us, we could have been off and running with a marvelous collaboration. Why they walked out is a mystery to me. I can’t read their minds. But it hurts, and it leaves the future uncertain. Only time will tell if we bounce back.

In the meantime, I hope to return to posting to my blogs, posting My Search for Deep Community: An Autobiography chapter by chapter, working on “Changing the System: A Proposal for a National Conference (10/17/14 Draft) ,” and perhaps writing a memoir that would focus more narrowly on my efforts to nurture community and fundamental social change.