Streetwise for Book Smarts: Grassroots Organizing and Education Reform in the Bronx

Chapter Five. Off the Charts

Chapter Five Off the Charts Tackling Issues of Race in SCOs In this chapter I examine social change organizations’ untold stories, contradictions, and other factors not easily labeled as activities, organizerleader relationships, or other key practices. In other words, I analyze patterns in the conspicuous, awkward silences that unfolded in my fieldwork. It so happens that, more often than not, what was not being openly talked about (even though participants later admitted that they all were all thinking about it) dealt with issues of race. Whether and how the social change organizations (SCOs) discussed these issues helped to shape the campaign issues they ultimately chose to tackle. SCOs adopting the Freirean tool kit were more likely to face issues of race head on. Their socializing activities, combined with critical reflection, sometimes became vital, safe spaces for relatively judgment-free discussions on race. Because of their emphasis on individual development, leaders and organizers at Mothers on the Move (MOM) and Sistas and Brothas United (SBU) created a culture in which leaders did not have to be exactly the same in order to form a collective. They were able to broach race as one of the many important forces shaping any individual’s life. (Gender, neighborhood of residence, age, class, sexual orientation, political affiliation, and even taste in music were other obvious forces.) In these SCOs, even when two leaders did not share the same racial background, they were likely to Off the Charts: Tackling Issues of Race in SCOs 107 nevertheless recognize that they had overlapping interests. Partly because the Freirean tool kit involved a much wider array of activities, MOM and SBU leaders had the safe space to have a lot more informal conversations in which they could be race conscious without seeming racist. By contrast, a focus on organizational development at the Bronx chapter of theAssociation of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) and the Northwest Bronx Clergy and Community Coalition (NWBCCC) helped leaders and organizers to quickly unite on broad-based, usually class-centered, campaign issues, but they did not always possess the cultural tools with which to talk about issues of race without seeming divisive. As a result, ACORN Bronx adopted “color-blind” terms in their conversations , even when the leaders and organizers were talking about issues that affected different racial or ethnic communities in different ways. Unfortunately , these color-blind practices perpetuate existing racial inequalities in mainstream American society.1 For example, none of the SCOs would argue against public safety officers in schools, but adding more officers will not change the unfair treatment experienced by some students unless patrolling protocols are changed as well. Likewise, calling for more funding for public schools is a laudable goal, but unless funding is centralized so that criteria are based more on need or academics rather than dependent on local tax bases and private property values, most of this money will continue to go to wealthier schools in predominantly white districts. We can see how the two tool kits end up treating issues of race so differently by examining the respective case study SCOs’ practices in three key areas.2 First, demographic breakdowns of the SCOs’ staff and base constituencies show that paid staff and organizers at all four SCOs represented constituent “racialized minorities [and majorities]” (Agocs 2004, 2) fairly well, but nevertheless, some leaders questioned the predominance of white directors in the top ranks of three of the SCOs. What differentiates the different groups here was how staff members then responded to touchy questions of race and rank. Second, patterns in “communication [and] informal social relations” (Agocs 2004, 2) salient to race varied greatly at the four SCOs. These included unwritten dress codes at the organizations, patterns of segregation among leaders and organizers, and the extent to which conversations about race took place.At the Alinskyite SCOs, campaign issues had to automatically gather the support of most members in order to be broad-based. Other issues were often sidelined as divisive. Finally, the two tool kits were associated with different decision-making rules and practices so that the SCOs could either affirm or contest color 108 Chapter Five blindness in their campaigns. The SCOs had dramatically different “policy and decision making process[es]” that affect everyone in the organization. Social change organizations in multiracial contexts need to create “organizational space”that allows members to discuss issues in their own language, or...