Larison on community organizers

I laughed - but it was guilty laughter.

Really.

"When America's Communities Need Organizing, America's Community Organizers Will Be There to Organize Them"

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2008/09/when-americas-c.html

It's the Democratic party that's in a tailspin, at least when it comes to the Presidential election.

Only 59 days left of this sideshow, thank goodness.

Pass the popcorn.

Daniel Larison is letting the sometimes self-regarding quixoticism of his paleoconservatism stance get the better of him -- that and his youth and inexperience. Grad school can be a good thing, but one reaches diminishing returns.

The notion that liberals are more involved in their communities than conservatives are is perhaps the single biggest "big lie" in circulation today.

Most all sociological studies ever done on this question have shown that a very, very strong correlation exists between conservative values broadly defined and community service of all different sorts.

This correlation is strongest among those who hold the dreaded socially conservative or "Christianist" views that we have all been bombarded with dog whistles about in the past few days.

In that sense, Sarah Palin and those inclined to come to her defense in the current dispute have every reason to heap righteous scorn on the largely ridiculous claim made again and again and again by Barack Obama, his campaign, and its supporters in the media and elsewhere that his time as a shakedown-artist and leftist apparatchik with ACORN represents some marvelous and unprecedented display on his part of a communitarian spirit on the left that is lacking on the right.

In fact, just the opposite is true.

ACORN is a government-subsidized cog in the Chicago and other big-city political machines, designed to encourage dependancy on the welfare programs which profit those electorally from whom ACORN itself likewise profits financially.

For example, as I've mentioned on the Fannie and Freddie thread, ACORN is never one to miss its turn at either one of the all-you-can-eat pork-barrel bars that F-and-F represent for the wide range of liberal and leftist institutions that receive F-and-F's "support" -- i.e. their share of F-and-F's share of the political spoils that accrue to both the Democratic Party.

As for evidence of (most) conservatives' and especially Christians' overwhelmingly greater contributions to voluntarism, charity, and community service than what is displayed by (most) liberals and secularists, I point my skeptics toward the work of Arthur Brooks (among others), who has compiled the relevant data from a wealth of social science source in several excellent books on the subject.

My qualifications above are due to the fact -- which should be noted -- that it is religiosity, both Christian and otherwise, more than political perspective per se that makes the difference here.

The religious left is comparably as community-minded as is the religious right.

Right-wing secularists by contrast are just as individualistic as most left-wing secularists are.

That said, it must still be acknowledged that the religious -- and especially Christians -- are more likely to lean right than to left, politically speaking.

And those who lean right tend to be more community-minded than those who lean left, even when one factors in the libertarian right, which tends not to be very community-minded at all.

The key thing to bear in mind -- though liberals and leftists tend not to do so -- is that there is such a thing as private life as opposed to public politics.

Skepticism toward the notion that community organization should be nationalized by the federal government and taken over by career bureaucrats is frequently a sign of the presence of community spirit in a person, not a sign of the absence thereof.

And now for our closing hymn, please turn to page 232 in your hymnal and join me in singing that old Charles Wesley standard .....

sorry DavidTC but I've got to disagree with this statement 'I've been pointing out the inanity of GOP speakers attacking 'community organizers', who not only solve many problems without government support,"

see the following which I posted in response elsewhere on this blog.

Closer to home here is what the Dallas Area Interfaith (DAI) organization touts as their community organizing accomplishments

'Dallas Area Interfaith was a key organizer of the April 9, 2006 500,000 person MegaMarch Immigration Rally, where we signed people on to our agenda, and registered voters. As a result, the press conference and our work at the rally has been repeatedly highlighted and praised in the media and by local politicians and community leaders.'

"Following DAI's 2007 call for expanded access to matrículas for our congregation members, the Mexican Consul General agreed to set aside three Saturdays for DAI congregation members to apply for their matrículas. As a result, DAI worked with the Mexican Consulate and Dallas police to provide 1600 matriculas in three sessions. One session provided ID cards to 650 individuals in one day, the largest ever in North Texas."

http://www.dallasareainterfaith.org/

If you dig through their website you'll see that much of their organizing has to do with getting the government (and indirectly the taxpayers) to pony up more money.

I would look more favorably on community organizers if what they did was to teach folks real skills such as speaking English, or would work towards helping immigrants assimilate into our society. to me community organizers are nothing more than social agitators who see the government as the solution for all problems.

I agree with AML there is a vast difference between community organizers like ACORN or DAI and volunteer organizations such as the Lions, Kiwanis or Rotary. the former sees the government as the solution and agitates to force the government (state, local or federal) to pony up more money. The latter groups identify a problem and work to solve that problem without the support of the government.

Would ACORN be able to stand on its own if it didn't have federal monies coming to it?

I should also point you to what was posted on the Wellstone Action website
http://wellstone.org/blog/responsibilities-a-community-organizer#comment-196

Rural Americans have no idea what Community Organizers do--that is why the concept is so easy to ridicule. We are familiar with Rotary Clubs and the like. The Obama Campaign has failed to educate the American public on this issue--perhaps because no explanation would help.

I had an "aha" moment on Friday when I finally identified an infamous "Community Organizer" in the Dallas area---John Wiley Price. However, I don't think Senator Obama would welcome the comparison.

Denton is right. Palin wasn't ridiculing community organizers; she was ridiculing Obama, and rightfully so. "Mr. Infanticide 'Present' 130 Times Community Organizer" has set himself up for all the slings and arrows he's had to dodge.

There's a difference between someone who sets out with a goal—feeding the poor, sheltering the homeless, getting school supplies for kids, fixing a playground, starting a neighborhood watch—and a person who sets out to be a "community organizer". The idea that Republicans are mocking volunteerism is ridiculous, they are mocking politics masquerading as volunteerism.

The word "organizer" can have unpleasant connnotations when organizing people and their behavior is meant as it means in "community organizer", at least as far as I understand the term. I can organize things in my house and I may be justified in getting the kids organized to get to school on time in the morning but organizing adults who make up any community suggests to me manipulating them, managing, directing, even controlling them to do what I think they should do.

Who invented this term? Is it a spin-off of Union Organizer? Getting workers to join the union?

What happens to community members who don't want to be organized the way the community organizer wants to organize them?

The older term "social activist" was more honest although it may not have generated much grant money to salary the activists or now "organizers."

People who are helping the disadvantaged through food banks and literacy programs and even navigating the paper work to get available help---those people are community helpers and they are respected for what they do.

It all boils down to how one understands the term "community organizer". Here's my take...

Community organizer= one who works to lead the transition from charity to justice

I count those who mock community organizers, defined in this way, as allies of Pharaoh and perpetrators of injustice. I count them as enemies of the God revealed in the Bible.

Yahweh through Moses opposed the Pharaoh, pyramid, wealth to the few, poverty to the masses system. In the wilderness, for 40 years, he trained the people in the Manna Lifestyle- daily bread for all.

Duh-sciple

Well, Bugg ... and how many of these pinko commie white guilt FDR New Deal programs have benefited YOU? http://home.earthlink.net/~gfeldmeth/chart.newdeal.html

Thanks, Erin, for sharing your definition and perspectives on "community organizing".

What do you think of my translation, below, of your 4 organizer points?

1. They have unsolvable problems;

Me: There is injustice, manifested in specific problems such as asbestos in public housing.

2. They need public funding to solve those problems;

Me: Simple charity cannot overcome the injustice, although it can be helpful.

3. To get that funding, they need to "grow" their political clout;

Me: Hearts, minds, wills, wallets, passion and God-acting-through-people is needed to overcome injustice.

4. They need the organizer to help them figure out how to do this, though he will remain in the background once they begin taking action.

Me: Despair, self-destructive behaviors, violence, family breakdown, community collapse and more result from injustice. Moses... Sojourner Truth... Martin Luther King, Jr... Ghandi... inspired and organized people to address injustice. Tragically, some leaders become deluded into thinking it is "all about them," undermining and calling into question both the leadership and the goals.

Erin: nobody really cares whether all the apartments in question end up asbestos-free.

Me: The Almighty cares. And I would hope that the people of God would care. When God's people don't care, he sends in-your-face-prophets to call the Powers and the people to task. The words and actions sound angry... for good reason, if it's true that people don't care.

Treasured people, treasure people,

Duh-sciple

Picking up on Bugg's post, it might be instructive to compare U.S. casualty rates in Chicago with those in Iraq since Obama became the Democratic nominee.

I don't know about you, but to me having all of life defined as a struggle for power for which the solutions will always be political is extremely left-wing philosophically; moreover, I rather resent the notion of some outside group coming into my community's religious, homeowner, parent, or other volunteer group and annexing that group to "build a political base."

Precisely, Erin. The term "community organizer" is rightly understood by most people as a synonymn for left wing political activist. It isn't a synonymn for volunteerism. It's hilarious that Larrison would take it that way.

Apparently my own community growing up needed organizing for better public education. My post above should read "five words" and not "four words". ;)

"Despair, self-destructive behaviors, violence, family breakdown, community collapse and more result from injustice."

Not all the time. Sometimes, in fact, more often, it's individual choices. Yes, people fail, but people get back on the horse the nxt day and go on. If you expect or demand government to do it for you, you will not ever get there.

As to what New Deal programs I've benefited from, as someone who is 44 years old, I do not expect to see an SSI check, and have see the SEC waste millions propping up bad business decisions on Wall Street. Yes, wonderful things those government programs and departments are. Like the Department of Education that operates no schools. Or the Department of Energy that has avoided establishing any coherent energy policy whatsoever under adminsitrations of both parties for the whole of it's existence)if anyoen knows waht they actaully DO, let us all know).Or the FBI(Famous But Incompetent) who can out diversity workshop anyone, and would rather chase around John Gotti wannabees than look at Zaccarias Mossui's hard drive before 9/11. Need I go on? And now with some spackle and pixie dust, Obama will suddenly part the waters,which will power our cars. He could just as plausibly promise no calorie Budweiser, and many would be believe that too.

Dorothy Day was a community organizer of sorts.

The picture of Barack Obama the community organizer that some (Erin?) are painting here is a disinterested, calculating sort of fellow who's only goal was to establish a power base for himself, not actually try to help people.

I'd call that a rather cynical interpretation unless someone can present actual *evidence* that Obama was disinterested in anything having to do with actually improving the community.

For all the blather about putting "America First", sorry if I'm having a hard time seeing Obama not winning any comparisons with John "marry an heiress and run for Congress" McCain or Sarah "I'm a hockey mom who just happened to run a PAC for a corrupt senator!" Palin.

"The picture of Barack Obama the community organizer that some (Erin?) are painting here is a disinterested, calculating sort of fellow who's only goal was to establish a power base for himself, not actually try to help people."

I think that description would be the antonym of "disinterested".

Duh: "I count those who mock community organizers, defined in this way, as allies of Pharaoh and perpetrators of injustice. I count them as enemies of the God revealed in the Bible."

So, Sarah Palin is a Pharaoh? An enemy of God? Wow. Ever heard of "hyperbole"?

"Yahweh through Moses opposed the Pharaoh, pyramid, wealth to the few, poverty to the masses system. In the wilderness, for 40 years, he trained the people in the Manna Lifestyle- daily bread for all."

And, God is a socialist? It's amazing what you can make up, isn't it?

Pentamom is right; I meant that when the "community organizer" has moved on to bigger and better things, the community has failed to become an effective voice in their own advocacy, which is supposed to be the point of community organizing in the first place--yet no one who approves of or participates in community organizing acknowledges that this problem exists or has any helpful ideas as to addressing it.

I think some people here might want to look at this basic discussion of what community organizing is; this is definitely a "pro-community organizing" site, and yet there are a lot of things here that I think a conservative might find troubling:

nfg.org/cotb/07whatisco.htm (add the usual, as always.)

I want to add this link, too, from the site I already mentioned; this is the table of contents for those who want to explore community organizing further:

nfg.org/cotb/index.htm#toc

Anne,

Few things offer more incentive for people *not* to "band together" and "organize themselves" to "get things done" than the government getting involved -- as is clearly indicated by the inverse correlation between degree of government in a community and the degree of social solidarity in that community as measured by voluntarism, charitable service, etc, etc.

The notion that the government "ought to do something" about this problem or that has done more than anything else in the past forty years or so to see that this or that problem does not get solved.

It has prevented people who accept that notion from seeing that *they* ought to do something and that they *can.*

Liberal bumper stickers, *The Daily Show,* and Barack Obama do not a community make -- let alone a Great Society.

I for one would never say that community organizers never have a sense of responsibility for their communities.

Having a sense of responsibility, and actually being responsible for what happens are, however, distinct concepts.

Interesting string of comments here, though a little lopsided, I would say.

First, a disclosure: I dated a community organizer on Chicago's South Side for three years. I will try to keep my statements as unclouded by that bias as possible, but I cannot deny that much of my analysis will come from the exposure to the world of community organizing that that relationship afforded me.

I am politically independent, and believe that charity and justice, as applied to the real world, require a combination of what are now considered conservative and liberal values.

There seem to be a few matters at the center of this debate:

1) Did Palin's remarks constitute an insult directed at community organizing at large, or at Obama's success as a community organizer in particular?

In this case, while I agree that Palin did not intend to mock all those who dedicate their lives to organizing communities (we'll get to the thorniness of defining that enterprise in a second), her delivery was inelegant. By her phrasing, the entire practice of community organizing was impugned, and like it or not, it is Palin's responsibility to convey her feelings precisely, which she did not. (Imagine me saying, "My job is a lot like being a solider, but with real responsibilities," and then, over your protests, saying, "No, I just meant THAT soldier." Same thing.) But this is a convention, so nuance is not really the currency of choice.

2) What is community organizing?

It's clear from some comments here ("it's nonsense," "They don't care," " left wing political activist," "politics masquerading as volunteerism") that many believe the practice to be self-serving rather than service-oriented. I would argue that, in practice, like any other profession or service, be it military, volunteer, law enforcement or government, there are different and competing philosophies/motivations.
At its purest, modern community organizing seeks to offset power imbalances within communities and between communities and the greater power structures they inhabit. The methods by which this is accomplished, as well as the motivations and effectiveness of community organizers, are certainly fair game for scrutiny and criticism; however, if you disagree with the fundamental premise of community organizing, debating the details doesn't make much sense.

3) Is community organizing a bad thing?

In its purest form (see above), I would argue No. Seeking to build power within communities so that they might a) understand how power operates and b) exercise power in the interest of the community is, in my opinion, not a bad thing. Most effective organizers dedicate their lives to a single community--in Chicago, for example, many of the directors of comm. organizing organizations that I met had 30+ years (with 60K or less salaries) working for the same community. The programs created, the ordinances and legislation passed, and the "injustice righted" are probably--as any honest organizer would admit--up there with the programs stillborn, the ordinances and legislation failed, and the "injustices perpetuated."
Where it was successful, however, the organizer connected to the success had about as much right to claim it as a high school teacher has to a former student's admission to a great college--that is, some claim, probably, but it'd be difficult to prove.

4) Why do organizers organize?

You talked to any recently? No, I didn't think so. And I don't want to speak for all of them. From the organizers I've worked with and spoken with, service to community and the centrality of personal involvement in civic life plays a big role. Most also talked about treating community ills systemically, rather than superficially. Maybe I've just met wonderful organizers. On the other hand, I couldn't possible state with any credibility that no organizers do what they do for selfish reasons. I can't say that about ANY profession. Again, as far as motivations go, each organizer's record will speak for itself, and often to a variety of motivations. Yes, Obama went on to become a state and then US senator, and yes, the bonds he created as an organizer probably did not hurt him in his pursuit of these accomplishments. But if you want to be a state senator in Illinois, there are better--and far easier--ways to do it than by being a community organizer. Growing up rich or growing up connected are two ways, neither of which Obama was afforded. And if the people Obama worked with as a community organizer ended up voting for him, then he probably did OK by them.

Being a Community Organizer is no qualification for an executive position like President of the United States.

Obama admitted that the executive experience he has is running his presidential Campaign. So far he has done a very good job at that, but it is part of his career of self promotion and getting the presidency.

I admire some community organizers like Martin Luther King, but not others like Al Sharpton. They have role to play in democratic America, but being Chief Executive in not one of them.

Obama is stuck with this cross that he has chosen for his profession, but in the end, it will ruin his chances of becoming president. Sarah Palin put is succinctly "Community Organizer is like Mayor of a small town, but without responsibility.

""Barack Obama's community organizing was done in association with ACORN.

Actually, it wasn't. The community organizer job that Obama had before law school and that Palin was presumably making fun of, was with the Developing Communites Project, which was not affiliated with ACORN. The ACORN connection which is being used as the basis for right wing attack (originating with a classic hit piece by Stanley Kurtz in NRO last May) dates to the late 1990s, when Obama apparently provided legal representation for certain ACORN Chicago projects.

Several ACORN chapters have gotten in legal trouble for their activities, however, this was a number of years after Obama's involvement with the Chicago unit, which in any event is not one of the chapters to get into difficulty.

The comment above at 11:17 was mine, btw. I wish Movable Type would prefill those boxes, don't you?

Tomhermanage, why should I do any of what you've suggested? I don't want to sound rude, but I don't take kindly to your sort of post. It's a game that some posters play, where if I go off and scour the internet for sources for all of my opinions about community organizing/CCHD/IAF and Alinsky-influenced organizations/Catholic Church involvement in same etc., the next move in your game would be to seize on one or more of those sources, declare that those sources are suspect because they come from a site, newspaper, etc. that is conservative politically, religiously, or both, and demand that I go back and find neutral or left-wing sources to back up all of my opinions--at which point, if I do all of that, you'll attack some other minuscule point and ask for sourcing on *it*, etc. ad infinitum (remember, Sig?).

So let's cut to the chase, here: my opinions about CCHD/IAF-Alinsky/community organizing/Catholic involvement in these and the detrimental effects of that are my opinions. They come from, among other things, years of readership of a conservative Catholic weekly that has published information about all of the above; various books and other sources about the left-wing roots of community organizing; a great deal of personal experience with left-wing Catholic school teachers (one example would be a project where our teachers made us participate in a "community voices" sort of initiative whereby we had to compose anti-nuclear art, poetry, or bumper stickers, with the best slated to be published in a little book, or another experience where a pro-Sandinista woman spent the afternoon indoctrinating us kids into liberation theology); and hearing these things discussed by members of my mother's family who lived in and around Chicago and had little respect for the Marxist agitation behind a lot of the "community" initiatives that would crop up in the parishes.

These latter were generally viewed by my relatives as part of a neverending scam directed at convincing the poor who lived in places like the old Cabrini-Green that if they helped the latest ambitious community organizer or project leader "lean" on some guy or other at City Hall, their lives would be better. My mother's pet phrase for projects like these is "Mittens for the Starving," a pithy indictment of the misdirected efforts and unsuccessful nature of such endeavors.

So, what's your experience with community organizing? Why do you question my opinions, and on what basis? If you have a different experience of community organizing that causes you to take an opinion which contradicts mine, by all means share it! I won't even insult you by asking you to define all your words and source the whole post in triplicate with a conservative, liberal, and neutral writer to back you up--I promise.

Erin;

My questions were genuine, and came from a place of real curiosity. In general, I refrain from getting too nit-picky about sources when people make soft claims, i.e. "I think that..." or "I've observed that..."
The quotes of yours that I posted were examples of unsubstantiated "hard claims." If requests for substantiation are a "game posters play," then by all means, don't cite them. Seriously, though, why the great fear? You've posted other links on this site. How are my requests suddenly different?

It's great that you've read numerous books and articles and heard stories from your Mom about what community organizing has done to communities in Chicago and elsewhere. I just think that before your opinion settles into stone, you should hear the stories and read the books from the other side. Try Ed Chambers "Roots for Radicals" and check out http://www.swopchicago.org/home.aspx, a community organizing organization on Chicago's south side that has done tremendous work in the area. Better yet, talk to a community organizer from a smaller organization (ONE, SWOP and LSNA in Chicago are all great places to start). Really. Try it.

For a fascinating, balanced (and Church-related) perspective on the subject, see the writing of Anthony Mansueto.

But back to my original beef. For example, you state that "CCHD, which has been exposed before for "organizing" Catholic parishes into political entities which then lobby for the left-wing cause du jour at City Hall and elsewhere," is belittling and reductionist. Stating that CCHD funds community organizations that hire community organizers is valid. The rest of your claim is tendentious. Using the word "exposed" indicates some sort of cover-up. Putting "organizing" in quotation marks suggests the practice is somehow illegitimate or underhanded. Failing to specify what you mean by "left-wing causes du jour" is unhelpful and misleading (can the reader pick a left-wing cause du jour and assume it's being pushed by the parish?). The entire phrase "'organizing' Catholic parishes into political entities" leads the reader to believe some sort of hostile takeover has occurred, leaving a lobbying machine in the shell of what was once a sacred space.

Your overarching opinion of community organizing is clear--your just a little short on the details. And the links to Marxism are a tad dated.

My background with community organizing is that I've worked with organizers through my work as a teacher at an employment training program in Brooklyn, a volunteer in a shantytown in Santiago, Chile, and a citizenship exam teacher and accredited immigration representative in Chicago, and my experience has been almost uniformly positive. The organizers I've met have shown a passion for and dedication to the communities they serve unlike any I've seen before. I'm sorry your experience with organizers has been less than positive, but I wonder if it has been a more mediated exposure than mine. This would likely explain a lot of our divergent opinions about organizers.

Above all, I would stress keeping an open mind about organizing. It is a broad subject, and an evolving practice. Like I stated in a previous post, I think organizing in its purest form can be a wonderful agent for community-initiated and community-centered change. For my part, I'll keep an open mind about the intersection of organizing and its impact on the Catholic Church. Maybe you can give me a few places to inform myself as you have.

In the light of morning, I realize my post may have come off snide. Apologies. I think that, for better or worse, US society compartmentalizes itself along ideological, cultural and political lines, both in geography and in forums for real-life interaction. Community organizing is an issue of emerging interest to the greater public, and I think that reasonable people of different opinions can bring much-needed perspective to the either/or depictions of organizing. I'm probably more eager that people understand organizing from my perspective than understanding it from theirs. I'll try harder.

Erin;

My questions were genuine, and came from a place of real curiosity. In general, I refrain from getting too nit-picky about sources when people make soft claims, i.e. "I think that..." or "I've observed that..."
The quotes of yours that I posted were examples of unsubstantiated "hard claims." If requests for substantiation are a "game posters play," then by all means, don't cite them. Seriously, though, why the great fear? You've posted other links on this site. How are my requests suddenly different?

It's great that you've read numerous books and articles and heard stories from your Mom about what community organizing has done to communities in Chicago and elsewhere. I just think that before your opinion settles into stone, you should hear the stories and read the books from the other side. Try Ed Chambers "Roots for Radicals" and check out http://www.swopchicago.org/home.aspx, a community organizing organization on Chicago's south side that has done tremendous work in the area. Better yet, talk to a community organizer from a smaller organization (ONE, SWOP and LSNA in Chicago are all great places to start). Really. Try it.

For a fascinating, balanced (and Church-related) perspective on the subject, see the writing of Anthony Mansueto.

But back to my original beef. For example, you state that "CCHD, which has been exposed before for "organizing" Catholic parishes into political entities which then lobby for the left-wing cause du jour at City Hall and elsewhere," is belittling and reductionist. Stating that CCHD funds community organizations that hire community organizers is valid. The rest of your claim is tendentious. Using the word "exposed" indicates some sort of cover-up. Putting "organizing" in quotation marks suggests the practice is somehow illegitimate or underhanded. Failing to specify what you mean by "left-wing causes du jour" is unhelpful and misleading (can the reader pick a left-wing cause du jour and assume it's being pushed by the parish?). The entire phrase "'organizing' Catholic parishes into political entities" leads the reader to believe some sort of hostile takeover has occurred, leaving a lobbying machine in the shell of what was once a sacred space.

Your overarching opinion of community organizing is clear--your just a little short on the details. And the links to Marxism are a tad dated.

My background with community organizing is that I've worked with organizers through my work as a teacher at an employment training program in Brooklyn, a volunteer in a shantytown in Santiago, Chile, and a citizenship exam teacher and accredited immigration representative in Chicago, and my experience has been almost uniformly positive. The organizers I've met have shown a passion for and dedication to the communities they serve unlike any I've seen before. I'm sorry your experience with organizers has been less than positive, but I wonder if it has been a more mediated exposure than mine. This would likely explain a lot of our divergent opinions about organizers.

Above all, I would stress keeping an open mind about organizing. It is a broad subject, and an evolving practice. Like I stated in a previous post, I think organizing in its purest form can be a wonderful agent for community-initiated and community-centered change. For my part, I'll keep an open mind about the intersection of organizing and its impact on the Catholic Church. Maybe you can give me a few places to inform myself as you have.

In the light of morning, I realize my post may have come off snide. Apologies. I think that, for better or worse, US society compartmentalizes itself along ideological, cultural and political lines, both in geography and in forums for real-life interaction. Community organizing is an issue of emerging interest to the greater public, and I think that reasonable people of different opinions can bring much-needed perspective to the either/or depictions of organizing. I'm probably more eager that people understand organizing from my perspective than understanding it from theirs. I'll try harder.

Bill,

I think you are describing something distinct from Sen. Obama's activities. (With the caveat that the details of the situation are unknown to me). In the first case, the activities of mining companies create 'externalities' with a negative impact on the material well-being of those of the surrounding community. You are actually helping a productive population to assert its interests in a circumstance where a market failure is occuring.

In the second instance, you appear to be organizing producers to press for an administered restraint of trade.

The Senator was not organizing a producing population in the capacity of its members as producers (and, in fact, I suspect you would find that an abnormal share of the South Side's population had checked-out of the labor market). Neither was he organizing producers to press for public policies that might be injurious to consumers.