|
A BRIEF HISTORY
OF CO
| The roots of modern community organizing
are as intertwined with the settlement house movement of the nineteenth
century...as they are with the protest movements of the 1960s.
18 |
|
- Gary Delgado,
Applied Research Center
|
To better understand where CO stands today, it is helpful to view its
history. Over the decades, CO has increased its sophistication and networking
for greater impact and wider results. Today's CO field19
encompasses varied philosophies, approaches, organizational
arrangements, actors, priorities, issues and constituencies. CO has taken
root in both urban and rural settings. It enables ordinary people to work
effectively together for change, often with significant impact at the
block, neighborhood, community, city, county, regional, and, at times,
state and national levels. Various racial and ethnic groups, and other
disadvantaged or disenfranchised groups, use CO to fight for fairness
and equity.
Robert Fisher and Peter Romanofsky, the editors of Community Organization
for Social Change, grouped CO activities and perspectives into four
historical periods:20
| |
Labor Organizing
in the 1930s: Seeds for CO's Future
In the 1920s and 1930s, labor militants created unemployed
councils to raise immediate demands for public relief as part of
their effort to build a working class movement. They used a range
of supplementary action tactics, including local and national demonstrations,
hunger marches on employers and government officials, petition drives,
street corner speakers, etc. In addition, to strengthen their movement
efforts among the unemployed, they supported community-based tenant
associations to fight evictions, farmers' unions to fight foreclosures,
veterans' committees to demand bonus payments, cultural associations
among immigrants and artists, share-croppers' unions among Southern
Blacks, and underground in-plant organizing committees.22
...The eventual course of this work contributed heavily
to the enactment of the Wagner Act, the Social Security Act, and
other landmark New Deal programs, and to the establishment of industrial
unionism in mass production. It also set off a wave of organizing
across the working class.23
|
1890 - 1920. The heyday
of neighborhood organizing before 1960. Liberals and progressives sought
to meet the challenge of industrialization - the bigness of cities and
their chaotic social disorganization - by organizing immigrant neighborhoods
into "efficient, democratic, and, of course, enlightened units within
the metropolis." Since the emphasis of the reformers was mostly on building
community through settlement houses and other service mechanisms, the
dominant approach was social work.
1920 - 1940. Community organization
became a professional sub-discipline within the social work field. Little
was written about decentralized neighborhood organizing efforts throughout
the Great Depression. Most organizations had a national orientation because
the economic problems the nation faced did not seem soluble at the neighborhood
level.
1940 - 1960. A new interest in
CO from the social work perspective. This development dovetailed with
the emergence of the distinctive approach of Saul Alinsky. Federal involvement
in reshaping cities and their neighborhoods through the post-World War
II urban renewal programs abetted this unique alignment. (Note: more information
on Alinsky is included over the next few pages.)
1960 - 1980. Neighborhood organizing
became widespread beginning in the 1960s. Literature analyzing events
at the grassroots during this period is extensive. Experience with federal
anti-poverty programs and the upheavals in the cities produced a thoughtful
response among activists and theorists in the early 1970s that has informed
activities, organizations, strategies and movements through the end of
the century, though many major changes in CO have occurred since 1980.21
The Roots of Modern CO. A discussion of CO's history and current
practice must feature Saul Alinsky, the founder of the Industrial Areas
Foundation (IAF). His work from 1938 until his death in 1972 is unique
and had a powerful, multi-dimensional influence on the CO field. It was
Alinsky who drew the roots of CO together in the late 1930s - roots first
planted in the American Revolution and later sprouting in the populist
movement of the 1890s, the political radicalism of the 1920s and 1930s
that focused on organizing tenant unions, unemployed councils and other
organizations to protest the horrible conditions of the period, and industrial
union organizing of the 1930s.24
The Alinsky-inspired approach to CO catalyzed the creation of many organizations
while he was still alive. He learned from his experiences in city after
city, and spearheaded efforts to modify organizing methods and strategies
for maximum effectiveness. Many current CO groups that trace their own
history to Alinsky combine the best of Alinsky with fundamental modifications
they have made to forge the approaches they now employ.
Many books, reports, critiques and films about Alinsky and his efforts
are available. Alinsky himself wrote two books, Rules for Radicals
and Reveille for Radicals, that are immensely popular and
in constant use as tools in training for community organizers and
leaders and in some college-level courses, primarily in schools
of social work. A selected bibliography of resource
materials by and about Alinsky, and information on obtaining
a recent documentary film about Alinsky and the work of IAF,25
is on NFG's Web site, at www.nfg.org.
|
|
BACKGROUNDER
# 1
|
|
Tracing the
Influence of Saul Alinsky on Modern CO
Most contemporary community organizing finds its beginnings in
the work of the late Saul Alinsky. He organized the Back of the
Yards Neighborhood Council (BYNC) in Chicago in the late 1930s.
Allied with the United Packinghouse Workers Union, BYNC was instrumental
in helping tens of thousands of packinghouse workers to dramatically
improve their standard of living and gain the dignity that comes
with union recognition and collective bargaining. BYNC brought together
under one organizational umbrella not only the union but most of
the Roman Catholic parishes in the BYNC neighborhood and a myriad
of other voluntary associations. The organization quickly developed
sufficient power to be able to deal effectively with the Chicago
'machine' and win victories on numerous issues, including child
welfare, public school improvement and neighborhood stabilization.
For Alinsky, the BYNC experience also led to recognition by the
powerful Archdiocese of Chicago, John L. Lewis of the CIO (Congress
of Industrial Organizations) and wealthy department store owner
Marshall Field. Backing from them helped Alinsky to form the Industrial
Areas Foundation (IAF), which was Alinsky's base of operations for
the remainder of his life.
After World War II, Alinsky brought Fred Ross, Sr. onto his staff.
Ross's work in California led to the formation of the Community
Service Organization (CSO), largely Mexican American, and the identification
and training as an organizer of Cesar Chavez, then a community leader.
Unlike BYNC, which was an 'organization of organizations,' CSO took
a 'direct membership' form, a precursor to the ACORN model initiated
by Wade Rathke. Chavez, of course, founded the National Farmworkers
Association and later was the principal leader of the United Farmworkers
Union. Chavez involved Ross in his organizing, calling him 'my secret
weapon.' It was Ross who trained many farmworkers and students -
and trainers who could extend the training to others - for work
on boycotts across the country. In the labor movement today, almost
every union that is actively involved in organizing has staff who
went through the farmworkers union experience. The same holds for
numerous community organizing groups.
By the late 1950s, Alinsky broadened his base of institutional
support from the Chicago Archdiocese to Catholic dioceses all over
the country, and to many mainline Protestant denominations. The
impact Alinsky's (and IAF's) work had on how a fair number of American
churches increasingly supported urban reform efforts and fought
racism and poverty beginning in that period is still in evidence
in such grantmaking agencies as the Catholic Campaign for Human
Development.
In 1959, the impact of the emerging civil rights movement in the
South was beginning to be felt in northern ghettoes. With support
from both Catholic and Protestant funding sources, Alinsky began
work in the largely African American Woodlawn neighborhood in Chicago.
The next year the student-led sit-ins began in the South. As the
civil rights movement spread and gained momentum, it generated considerable
interest in economic and racial justice issues in colleges, and
in religious seminaries and denominations across the country, and
created new sources of organizers and funding for community organizing.
Alinsky capitalized on this to spread his brand of organizing to
still more communities. Paralleling this development, urban unrest
grew; poverty and racism became increasingly unacceptable in northern
communities of color, Black and Hispanic, and this too obviously
spurred community organizing's growth.26
- Mike Miller, Organize Training Center
|
CO Today. Since the mid-seventies, and particularly in the 1990s,
CO strategy has prioritized the development of powerful, multi-issue organizational
vehicles with the track records, intent and potential to become significant
long-term players for change. And this is exactly what has happened. The
CO field is studded with powerful organizations achieving important results,
and more such groups - nurtured by national organizing networks - are
emerging. These groups, and CO practitioners as a whole, have demonstrated
increased sophistication in attracting allies, developing community cohesion,
and marshalling power not only locally, but on regional, state and national
levels. The Toolbox focuses primarily on this modern period.
|
18 Gary Delgado, From
the Ground Up: Problems and Prospects for Community Organizing, prepared
for the Ford Foundation, Oakland, CA: Applied Research Center, February
1993, p. 5.
19 The term "CO field" is not one that all or many
involved in CO utilize. In fact, no single term that captures CO in all
its varieties is in common use among CO practitioners. Some prefer the term
"craft," while others use "profession." Both of these
terms refer mostly to the roles of community organizers.
20 Robert Fisher and Peter Romanofsky, "Introduction,"
Community Organization for Social Change, ed. Robert Fisher and Peter
Romanofsky, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1981, pp. xi-xviii. Fisher and
Romanofsky's historical overview was summarized in Michael R. Williams,
Neighborhood Organizations: Seeds of a New Urban Life, from which
this section is taken.
21 During these four periods of social reform CO history, counter-productive
local organizing also flared periodically with equal intensity. For example,
fierce anti-black "Neighborhood Improvement Associations" formed
in Detroit after 1915, as blacks poured into the city from the South to
work in the auto plants. These neighborhood organizations had only one purpose:
to maintain their all-white areas against black encroachment. And, in another
of dozens of examples that might be cited, the Citizens Council in New Orleans
during the late 1950s opposed school integration orders, organizing citywide
and targeting specific neighborhood schools. See B.J. Widick, Detroit:
City of Race and Class Violence, Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1972, pp.
3 -22, and, Neil McMillen, "The Citizens Council in New Orleans: Organized
Resistance to Social Change in a Deep South City," in Fisher and Romanofsky,
pp. 157 - 185.
22 Drawn from: Ann Bastian, Why Do We Need Strategic Practice?,
New World Foundation, undated.
23 Ibid.
24 Mike Miller, internal memorandum discussing forthcoming book,
Organize! Training Center, May 2000.
25 The Democratic Promise: Saul Alinsky & His Legacy,
produced by Bob Hercules and Bruce Orenstein for the Media Process Group,
Chicago, IL, 1998.
26 Mike Miller, memorandum prepared for NFG to assist in development
of the CO Toolbox, May 2000. |