AIDS TREATMENT NEWS Issue #208, October 7, 1994
John S. James

We believe that the key to mobilizing grassroots response is effective integration of political activity with personal and social life. We propose organizing "communication groups" -- small, personal groups of friend who meet regularly for social activities organized around writing and calling public officials (and, for those who are inclined, calling talk shows, and writing letters to the editors of newspapers). Each group can work with many different AIDS organizations, helping them to generate public response on their issues. Because these are also social groups, organizers are responsible for making sure that they work for people -- not just for a cause.

We have developed this proposal into a five-page article, but it is too long to include in this newsletter. For a copy, send a self-addressed stamped envelope to: AIDS Treatment News, attn: Grassroots, P.O. Box 411256, San Francisco, CA 94141.

[Note: The full article is included here, although it did not fit in the printed newsletter.]

"Communication Groups" for Mass-Movement Grassroots Organizing by John S. James, 415/861-2432, 10/2/94

SUMMARY

Why do people go to church? Usually not for the theology, but for the people. A successful church provides institutional structure and support to help make a group work well. Churches are popular in the U.S. because the dominant business-professional structure, through which we make our living, does not provide a complete framework for human life. Churches help to fill the void.

Successful MASS MOVEMENT grassroots organizing must address the same need. It requires an institutional structure which will take responsibility for making human groups work -- responsibility, for example, for maintaining a warm and inviting atmosphere, and for successfully matching people to groups which are suitable for them.

But AIDS, gay, and progressive organizations have failed to do this. Until they do, their grassroots organizing will appeal mainly to specialists; it will never be a mass movement. And without a mass movement, we cannot protect our basic rights in the modern world.

We have proposed one possible way of structuring such a movement. This particular model is based on small, autonomous groups, so that it can be tested and improved quickly, without waiting for national organizations to move. The Problem

Right-wing and hate groups have been very effective in organizing their members to call and write to public officials, call talk shows, etc. Sometimes they can generate ten to a hundred times the calls of anybody else, even on issues where public opinion is against them. This imbalance has caused a painful loss of public civility and quality of life, a national distraction from the most important issues (AIDS, economic insecurity, others), and a potential threat to our future.

How can liberal, libertarian, left, or other views, which should be providing a balance, become more effective in being heard? We believe that the key is to integrate political action with social life -- geared toward meeting compatible people, and/or toward building an ongoing extended family and support network, like many churches do.

Almost all political organizations outside the right have done very poorly in getting their members to call and write public officials. And no wonder -- since their model, basically, is getting each person to go home alone and write or call, with little or no social support. A few people work well this way, but most do not. As a result, the many "action alerts" mailed or otherwise transmitted -- almost all based on this do-it-all-alone model -- usually lay unused on desks until thrown away.

A Model: Communication Groups

To illustrate a different model, we will picture one small group. If this approach can work well for people, there could be many.

The core will usually be a small invited membership of persons who are comfortable with each other -- perhaps five to 15 people, who may plan to stay together for years. They might meet once a week at a member's home, a coffeehouse or restaurant, etc. Any member can bring visitors. (The core group itself would grow like an affinity group -- starting with two or three people, then inviting new members who are compatible with those already there.)

At any time, one member will be the convener, who does the groundwork so that the meetings happen: making sure that the next meeting is scheduled and everyone knows the time, place, and agenda; making sure that supplies (including writing materials, envelopes, stamps) will be there; and making sure that several issues will be brought to the meeting for action.

Any member can bring an issue to a meeting; no permission is required. Whoever brings the issue is responsible for bringing an adequate description (either oral and/or written), important points to be made when communicating with public officials, etc., and the names, phone numbers, and addresses of officials to communicate with. (Often the issue will be prepared the easy way -- by copying an action alert from a friendly organization which is trying to mobilize public support. Or sometimes an outside organizer or expert will speak.)

Another way to develop issues is directly from the news. Every day there are many outrages which are prominent enough to get media coverage. For a single individual, it is seldom feasible to do the research required to find out what the real story is, and what response, if any, is appropriate; as a result, almost always there is no response, and our values as human beings have no effect on public life. A group, however, can share the research work; also, its response can be more powerful than an individual's. This makes it much more feasible for the group to act on a story in the news.

Not everyone will agree with every issue, or be comfortable writing or calling about it. That is one reason why several issues should be available at each meeting; persons not comfortable with one can work on others.

The meeting proceeds largely as a "discussion group with stationery." Letters to officials can be written right there, since short, handwritten letters are usually best. Phone calls, and more involved letters such as to newspapers, might be outlined at the meeting, with the benefit of feedback and social support, and sent later. (Note: the "stationery" is plain paper; the group does not need any letterhead, since people write as individuals.)

If there are five issues at a meeting, and each has an average of four relevant officials to write or call -- a reasonable scenario -- then each person can send up to 20 communications from that single meeting. If there are five or ten participants, and they meet weekly, then clearly a single group can have an effect; on some local issues, one group might register more public opinion than all the rest of the public combined. And if this form of organization can fit well into different peoples' lifestyles and aspirations, then there could be thousands of such groups operating all the time on behalf of humane causes.

Advantages

Coalition. Since each group will require a continuing supply of issues to address, it will need to reach out to related causes, to different ethnic communities, etc. And it will have something valuable to offer them. This will build working relationships between people who should be talking more often to each other.

Independence. Each group can independent if necessary, not an arm of a national organization; therefore it can work simultaneously with many "cause" organizations, not just one. (And it must work with many groups, or it would run out of action alerts to respond to.)

Competition. These communication groups will create healthy competition among national organizations. Those that stay in touch with the public will get support on their action alerts; those which become distant from people will see how and why others are succeeding, and how they might improve.

Attention. Usually organizations have to push their action alerts out onto a seemingly uncaring world. For a group to come to them and ask for alerts to work on is unusual. This change should get their attention -- and therefore help this kind of grassroots organizing catch on.

Report-back. Each meeting should include time for persons to tell what calls, letters, etc. they have sent since the group was last together; this provides recognition for them, and communication models for others. There might also be awards; for example, the one who sends the most communications each month might be taken out to dinner by the others.

Evaluation. It is important to keep good records of the communications sent -- in order to evaluate group performance, and also to inform outside organizations, which will want to know what letters and calls have been made on their issues.

When organizations ask separate individuals to write to Congress, etc., it is difficult to find out how many actually did so. But when a group works on the project together, information and evaluation can be a standard part of the process.

Social benefits. So widespread is the need to find ways of meeting people that small industries have grown up to provide occasions. But many people are not comfortable going to bars or other venues to meet strangers; they would rather start with others with whom they have something in common -- for example, a readiness to defend their community, or a sense of history and willingness to act on it.

Existing political organizations can serve for meeting new people and developing circles of friends. But usually they operate in a business mode, often cold and competitive; they are seldom designed or intended for social purposes, and using them that way may be resented. Also, newcomers usually must start by sitting through many boring meetings, which drive most people away. Communication groups, on the other hand, are set up for socializing; but at the same time, new people start doing useful work immediately.

This is especially important for reaching those who are busy in their careers or otherwise. Many would like to find a compatible social group which is also defending their community. AIDS, gay, and progressive organizations have failed to offer this option.

* Talk shows. These present special opportunities for those who are into calling them. For example, the reason there are so few liberal talk shows (leading to the right-wing imbalance) is not because of a conspiracy, but because liberal hosts don't get enough callers to survive. This means that you can be almost sure of getting on the air with sympathetic hosts, even on some of the biggest radio stations, and reaching many thousands of people. Hostile hosts are easier to find, but obviously harder to work with; they are very experienced, often deliberately unfair to callers, and they control the switch. Groups may want to get professional advice and run training sessions to teach members how to accomplish their purpose (reaching the audience, not beating the host) in this difficult setting.

* Newspapers. Letters to the editors can reach thousands of people; and it is easier to get published than generally realized. The group can provide support, brainstorming, ideas, etc. -- allowing everyone, whether or not they have writing skills, to participate in developing the message; the writers can finish and mail their letters later. Since they will be writing as individuals, there is no need to come back to the group for approval; this allows rapid response to public issues, and also avoids intra-group "process."

* No external funding needed. The expenses -- postage, phone calls (mostly local), and occasional photocopying -- are less than people ordinarily spend on social activities. Funding, therefore, is not an issue. Anyone can move ahead to develop this model without waiting for others to get on board.

Next Steps

We see the following next steps in developing this project:

1. Suggestions and discussion to improve this outline.

2. Several "prototype" communication groups to test the idea, refine it, and produce a kit to help people who want to start new groups. (As an early test, I would like to start a group to support existing AIDS organizations by responding to their action alerts on local, regional, and national issues.)

3. Outreach. Since these groups are set up for communicating, they can handle outreach (for this grassroots organizing model) by doing what they do anyway: helping existing organizations, writing to community newspapers, and otherwise encouraging the formation of new communication groups.

The permanent goal is to develop ways to live that build the kind world we want to live in.

941007
ATN20807

AEGiS presents published material, reprinted with permission and neither endorses nor opposes any material. All information contained on this website, including information relating to health conditions, products, and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is often presented in summary or aggregate form. It is not meant to be a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals. Always discuss treatment options with a doctor who specializes in treating HIV.

Copyright ©1980, 1994. AEGiS. All materials appearing on AEGiS are protected by copyright as a collective work or compilation under U.S. copyright and other laws and are the property of AEGiS, or the party credited as the provider of the content. .