ORGANIZING COMMUNITIES:
building Anarchist grassroots moverments

by Tom Knoche

With an introduction by
Lorenzo Kom'boa Ervin

Introduction

The author of this pamphiet, Tom Knoche, is an Anarchist and
a veteran community organizer. This pamphiet is excerpted from
an issue of Social Anarchism magazine (issue #18, November
1993) It gves a step-by-step plan for organizing in one's
‘community against the local power structure and provides a way
to empower the poor and powerless in any local area. | believe it
is the way forward to a whole new period of struggle for Anarchists
and other social revolutionaries. | also think that if we are to
accomplish with Anarchist ideals, they must be demonstrated in
real social practice, not simply in ideals.

The fact that the North American Anarchist scene is so white,
middle class, youth-oriented, and has no real revolutionary praxis,
except either idealism or emulating the white Left, says we need
10 think again, and to involve more racial and cuitural diversity in
our movement. It also says that Anarchists must be where the
people are in the communities, and stop thinking of themselves as.
divorced from the communities. That is where the real struggle
will take place, not in punk rock clubs, college campuses, o other
such venues of the “new bohemians.”

We must build a movement to fight the stale and that requires
a mass movement; all of who shouid not look alike or think alike.
We need to be able to convince “ordinary” persons that Anarchism
is a correct path o freedom, not just those we think might agree. |
believe that the community organizing projects will take s out of
the Anarchist ghetto to the mass of people who will work with us,
id we will take the time {0 touch them where they are.

For those Anarchists who have said they believe in
decentralized, community-based organizing projects, this
pamphlet shows the clear path to take, and even tells one what
twists and tumns to avoid. | believe Knoche has done us a great
service here by giving us the benefit of his experience and his
‘passion for this method of social struggle. It is now up o us to
move forward and fight for a new day.

Lorenzo Kom'boa Ervin
January, 1995
South Chicago ABC
: £H1CABD ABC
$ zineDisto TIME DISTRO/PUBLISHER
P.0. Box 721 1321 K NILWAUKEE AvE

PHB 46D

Homewood, IL 80430 thicABo Il 60522
ORGANIZING COMMUNITIES:

building Anarchist grassroots movement
Tom Knoche

Many annrchiata probably cringe at the notion of any person o
group being “organized” and believe that the very idea is manipu-
Intive. They enn point to countlean community organization leaders
whoended up on government payrolla. ‘They can't aee how winning
traffic lights and playgrounda doen any more than holp the system
appear pluralistic and effective.

Such skepticinm makes anso. Community orgnnizing has always
been practiced in many different ways to accomplish many different
thing. In reviewing tho history of neighborhood organizing, Robert
Fisher summed it up this way:

While neighborhood organizing i a political ct, it is
neither inherwntly reactionary, connervative, liboral or
radical, nor is it inherently democratic and inclusive or
authoritarinn and parochial. It is ahove all a political
‘method, an appronch used by various rogmenta of the
population to nchieve apecific gonls, nerve certin inter-
eata, and advance clear or ill-defined political perspec-
tivon. (Fishor, 19A4; p158)

1f o just Jook at some of the progrossive strains of community
organizing thought, we atill face a lot of confusion about what it i
and how it is used. Saul Alinsky, a kcy figure in the development
of community organizing as we know it todny, wrote:

Wo nre concerned about how Lo croata mass organiza-
tionn to seize power and givae it to the paople; to raalize
the democratic dream of equality, justice, poacs, coop-
erntion, equal and full opportunitien for education, full
andusefulemployment, hanlth and thacreation of those
circumatanceain which man can have the chance to live
by the values that give menning to life. We are talking
about a mass power organization that will change the
world. (Alinsky, 1971, p.3)

‘The Midwest Academy, a trmining institute for community orga-
nizers foundedby some ex-civil rights and SDS leaders, asserts that;

More and more people are finding that what in needed
ina permanont, profeasionally staffed community mem.
bership organization which can not only win real im-
provements for it membrs, but which can actually
alter the relations of power at the city and state level,
‘Theno groups [citizen groups] are keaping government
open to the peopls and are keeping our democratic
righta intact. (Max, 1977; p.2)

A sonior member of ACORN (Associution of Communities Orga-
nized for Referm Now), u nationul ussociation of mostly urban
community organizations, describes the goul of arganizing s
strongthening people’s collective capucities Lo bring sbout social
chunge (Staples, 1984; p.1). ACORN urganized local communitics,
then employed ita conatituency at the national level, attempting to
move the Democratic Party to the left.

Finally, a participant in & workshop on community organizing |
conducted a number of years ago charactorized community organiz-
ing as “manipulating people to do Lrivial things.”

In this articls, I will focus on how community orgunizing ean be
useful in advancing an anarchist vision of social change. Commu-
nity organizations that build on an anarchist vision of social change
are different from other community organizations because of the
‘purposes thay have, the criteria they have for success, the issues
they work on, the way they operate and the tactics they use.

My experience with community organizing spansa 16-year poriod
including four yeurs in Baltimore, Maryland and twalvein Camden,
New Jerusy. I'have primurily worked with very low income peopls
on & wide range of issues. | will draw heavily on my persunal
experionce in this article. 1 use the term “community organizing”
to refer to social change elforts which are based in local geographi-
cally defined arvas where peopls Live. This is the key distinction
betwesn community orgunizing and other forma of organizing for
social change which may be based in workplaces or universitiss,
involving people whore they work or study instead of wherw they
live. Some issue-oriented orgunizations are considered community
orgunizations if their constituency is local

Goals of Anarchist Organizing

Anarchist commuaity organizing must be dedicated to changing
what we can today and undoing the socialization process that has
dopoliticized so many of us. Wo can usa it to build the infrastructurs
thatean respond and make groutor advances when our political and
economic systema are in crisis and are vulnerable to chunge.

The following purposes illustrato this concept.

1. Helping people experinent with decentralized, collective and
cooperative forms of orgunization.

‘We have to build our American model of social change out of our
©own experionce; we can't burrow revolutionary theory in total from
that developed in another historical and/or cultural context. Com-
munity orgunizations cun help peoplo log that experience and

analyzait. Bocause of our culture’s grounding in defonse of personal
liborty and domocracy, social change engineered by a vanguard or
administered by a strong central atate will not work here.

David Bouchier is on the right track when he says, “For citizen
radicalnovlution inbattar than revolution bacausaevolution works”
(Bouchier, 1987; p. 139). We must learn new values and practice
cooperation rather than compeition. Community organizations
can provido vehicle for thin “rotooling.” “Thia means that a
cultural ravolution, a revolution of idans and values and under-
standing, ia the susential prelude to any radical change in the power
arrangomant of modorn aocity. The purposn of radical citizenehip
into take the initiative in this procass” (Rouchior, p. 148).

Any kind of alternative institution (sea Ehrlich, efal, Reinventing
Anarchy, p. 346), including cooparntivan, worker managed busi-
nesses, tc., that offers a chanco to learn and practice community
control and worker elf-manngomont, in important. We muat
experionce togather how institutions can be different and better.
‘Themn altarnative inatitutions ahould be nonprofit, controlled and
stafled by residenta of the community they sarve, and supported by
the people who banefit from their axintonce. Most charities and
social service agencies do not qualify aa alternative inatitutions
because they are stafTed and controlled by people who umually are

not part of the community thay serve; they therefors foster dapen-
dence.

The recent proliferation of community Innd trusts in this country
in an exciting example of community-baned, cooperative and dacen-
tralized organizationn. Through thesa organizations, people are
taking land and housing off the privata market and putting them in
their collective control.

1 have been a bonrd member of North Camden Land Trust in
Camden, New Jersey nince its inception in 1984. The land trust now
controla about thirty propertien. A group of thirty low income
homeowners who previously warn tananta without much hope of

home ownership now collactively make decisions concerning this
property. The development of the Iand trust embodies ‘many of the
elementa that describe community organizing grounded in a socinl
anarchint vinion for nociety.

2. Increasing the control that peaple have over actions that affect
them, and increasing local self-reliancs.
. This involves taking some mensure of control away from Inrge
inetitutions like governmant, corporations and social servics con.
glomeratea and giving it to the poopla most afTected by theis actiops.
David Bouchier describies thia function s attaining “positive free:
doma." Positive freedoma are rights of self-government that are not.
dependent on or limited by higher powers (Bouchier, p. 9).

Intho neighborhood whare [ liva and work, residenta are atarting

to dumand control over lund uss decisions. ‘They stopped the state
and local governments’ plan to build a sacond state prison on the
waterfront in their neighborhood. Instand of atopping there, the
residents, through u serios of block meotings and a neighborhood
coalition, huve developed u "Peoplus’ Plan” for that waterfrant site.
Control of Land use hus traditionally restod with local government
(and stats and foderal government to a much miors limited extent),
guided by professional plunners and cousultants. Neighborhood
rosidents beliove they should control land wse in their neighbor-
hood, sinca they are the unes most directly affcted by it.

‘The concoptof sulf-rulint communities described by David Morcis
(1987) also helps us understand the shift in power we ure talking
sbout. Self-roliant communities orgunize to ussert authority over
capital inveatmont, hiring, bunk lending, otc.all urcus where
decinion muking traditionally hus Luen in the hands of government
or private enterprise. N

3. Buildingacounterculture that uses all forms of communication
‘o llegitimate authority, racism, sexism, and copitalism. In
low-income neighborhoods,it is also impartant that this countercul-
ture become an alternative to the dominant culture which has
resulted from welfare and drugs.

The Populist movement can Louch us u lot about building &
counterculture. That movement used the press, person-Lo-person
contact via roving rallies and educational lectures, an extensive
network of farm cooperutives and un altornative vision of sgricul-
tural economics t o this (Goodwyn, 1976; 1981).

Every movement organization has to use the media to advance its
ideas and values. Educational evonts, film, community-bused
newspapors, otc., ar ull important. ‘The local community udvocacy
organization in North Camden has dona a good job of combining
fundraising with the developmont of counterculiure. Thoy huve
sponeored ultornative thoater which hus explored the isauca of
battered women, homelossness, und sexiam. After each play, the
theator group conductod an upun discussion wi wudicuca
about these issucs. These were powerful experiences for those who
attonded.

the dominant culturo in very low-
of the greatest challenges fucing
community argunizations. Many fumilics have now experienced
welfure dependence for four generations, u phenomenon which hna
rudically alterod muny peoples’ value systems in a negalive w
People must worry about survival conatantly, and believe that
anything they can get to survive they are entitled to, regardless of
the effect on others. It has not fostered caoperative gpirit. The
responso of low-income peoplo to long-orm welfare dependency is

notirrational, but it is a sarious obstacla to functioning in a aystem
of decentralizad, cooperntiva work and sarvicos. 7

One exporiance in this regard in rolevant. A soup kitchen called
Lanvonhiouss has operatad in Camdon for 10 years, during nine of
which it wan open to anyone who came. A yaar ago, the soup kitchen
changed into a feeding coapartive on weokdnys. Guests now ha
torither work a fow hourain the kitchen ar purchane a ticket for five
dollarn which in gaod for the entira month. Daily average atten-
dnnc han dropped from 200 o about 20. The iden of cooparating to
provide some of the ranources necesnary to austain the sarvice s
outide the value system of many peopln who previously used the
Kitchen. Lenvenhouee renlizes now that it munt address the reasona
why people have not reaponded to the co-op, and in planning
community outreach campaifn designad to build some understand.
ing, trust and acceptanca of the iden of caoperative freding.

The 20 people who have joinad tha co.op have respondod favor-
ably. They apprecinte the more tranquil eating environment and
foel good about. thair rolo in it. The co-op members now make
decinions about the operation of their co-op. Friendships and
information aharing (primarily about joba) have been facilitated.

Fawer peopla are boing sarved, It menningful political objectives
1o now being realized.

4. Strengthening the “social fabric” of neighborhood unite--that
network of informal associations, support services, and contacts
that enables people to survive and hold on to their sanity in spite of
rather than because ofthe influence of gover nment and nocial service
bureaucracies in their lives.

John McKnight (1987) han done a good job of exposing the failure

of traditional social service agencies and government in meeting
People’s needa for a support structure. Thay opernta to control
peopla. Informal anocintions (“community ‘of ssociations™), on the
other hand, oparate on the basia of consent. ‘They allow for creative
solutions, quick responae, interpersonnl cnring, and foater a broad
base of participation.

Agood example of fulfilling this purpose in the bartering network
thatsome community organizations have developed. The organiza-
tion simply printa a listing of people and services they need along.
with a parallel list of people and nervices they are willing to offer.
Thisatrangthens intranoighborhood communication. In poor neigh.
Borhoods, this ia especially offoctive bacause it allows peopla to gat
things done without money, and to gt a raturn on their ‘work which
Is not taxabls.

‘Concerned Citizans of North Camden (CCNC) has ‘supported the
development of a Camden “Canter for Indepandant Living™--an

organization that brings hundicupped and disabled people in the
city togethur to collectively solve the probloms they fuce. Twelve-
stop groups ure unother oxample of informal, nonprofessional
ausociations that work for peopl.

Criteria For Success g

Many comaunity orgunizations mensurs success by “winning*
The tangible result ia all that mattars. In fact, many orgaizations
evaluate the issues they tuke on by whether or not they ars
“winnable." The real significance of what is won and how it is wen
are of less concarn.

For organizations that embrace an anarchist vision, the process
and the intangible reeults are at loast as important as any tangible
results. Increasing any one orgunization's size and influence la not
aconcern; stimulating many decentralized, politically active groups
iaaconcern. The succeas of community organizing can be measured
by the extent to which the following mandates are realized,

1. Peaple learn skills needed to analyze issues and
confront those who exert control over their lives;

2. People learn to interact, make decisions and get
things done collectively-rotating tasks, sharing skills,
confronting racism, sesism and hisrarchy;

3. Community residents realize some direct benefit
or some resolution of problems they personally face
through the organizing work;

4. Existing institutions change their priorities or
way of doing things 5o that the autharity of govern-
ment, corporations and large institutions ia replaced
by extensions of decentralized, grassroots authority;
and

6. Community residents fecl stronger and better
about themselves because of their participation in the
collective effort.

Picking Issues

Much of the literature about community organizing suggests that
issues should be selectod which are: 1) winnable; 2) involve adve-
cacy, not service; and 3) build the organization's constituency,
power and resources. “Giood issua campaigns should have the twin
goula of winning a victary nd producing organizational milaage
while doing so” (Staples, 1984; p.63).

These guidelines have always bothered me, and my experience
suggests that they are off the mark. Iusues should be picked
primarily because the organization's membors believe they are
important and because they are consistent with ane or more of the
purposas listed ubove. Lot me offer a few guidolines which are a bit

differont.

1. Service and advocacy work must go hand in hand, especially
in very needy communities.

Peoploget involved with groupabocnuna they present an opportu-
nity for them to gain momething they want. It mny be tangible or
intangible, but the motivation to got involved comes with an
expectation of relatively short-torm gratification. The job of com-
munity organizations is to facilitate a process where groups of
People with similar needs or probloma work togather for the benefit
ofalL Through this process, people loarn to work cooperatively and
learn that their informal association can umually solve problama
more effoctively and quickly than established organizations.

1 will offer an example to illustrata this point. When Concerned
Citizans of North Camdan (CCNC) organized n equatter campaign
in 1981, the folka who squatted and took all of the risks did so
because they wanted a houss, and becmuno thay bolieved aquatting
was the beat way 1o got ane. Ench one of the original 13 aquatter
families benefited becauso thay got title to their house. The
advocacy purpose was served because a program resulted that
allowed 160 other families to got a house and some funda to fix it up
over the mubsequent five yoars. Becauso CCNC has stayed involved
-ith-ghrma,-udfuinmbd-m"mulwwlmmm(uvu
the present), 142 of the houses are still occupied by low-incoms
famiies.

‘The government bureaucracy tried to undermine this program on
umeTous cocasions, but without success. Participants willingly
rollied in ench crisia because they benefited in a way they valsod
deeply. The aquatter movement allowed them to win something
that they knew they would never realistically bo abla to win through
any traditional homs ownership programs. The squatters wers
poor, mont had no credit historien and most ware Hispanic. Official
discrodit, for whataver reasons, was menningloas because people
knew the effort had worked for them.

In my experience, I have never boen part of a more exciting and
politically memningful affort than the CCNC squatting ffort in
1081. ‘The initial squatting with 13 families was followed by five
yours of taking over abandoned houses which the City roluctantly
sanctioned becausa of the strangth and peristenc of the move-
ment.

2. Issues that,
for example, issues which favor homeowners over renters, blacky
over Puerto Ricans, etc.--should be avoided.

Mot issues can be addreased in waya that unify neighborhood
residents rather than divide them.

it one segment of the community against another--

formal involvement in broad political issues should be
maintained on a consistent basi 1z

While ! believe the kind of decantralized associations which form
the basin for any anarchist vision of aocial change are moat easily
formed and nurtured at the local lovel (neighborhood or citywide),
pooplo munt alno connect in some way with bronder socinl change
issues. Socinlchange cannot just happen in inolated plcen; we munt
build n lnrge and diversa movement.

We need to intagrate actions agninet militariam, imperinliam,
nuclear power, apartheid, etc., with ction on local issues. They
ofton can and should be tied together. Thia requires getting poople
to regional and national political events from time to time, and
supporting local ctivities which help peopla to connect with thess
broader isnues.

4. Avoid the pitfalls of electoral politics.

This is n very controvernial area of concorn for community
organizations. The organizations 1 have worked with in Camden
have vacillnted in their atance vis-a-vin electoral politics.

‘The dangor of cooptation through involvement in this arena is
savors. Whonaver a group of popla atart gatting thingn done and
build n credible reputation in the community, politicinna will try to
usn the organization or ita members to thair dvantag.

I hnve yot to witnoss any candidate for public offica wh main-
tained any kind of ineue integrity. Once in the limelight, peopls
bend toward the local intereats that have the resourcon necessary to
finance political campaigns. They want towin mors than they want
to advance any particular platform on the ismuas. We deluds
oursclves if wa believe any politicinna will support the progreasive
apendn of a minority conatituency when their politi
Aependn on them abandoning it.

1 have participated in organizing campnignn whore politiciana
wero exploited hecaune of vulnerability and whers one politician
was mucceanfully played off againet another. It inmuch ensier for
community organization to use politiciana to advance a cause if
neither the organization nor ita membara are loyal to any offico-
holder. My experience snys that any organized and militant
community-baned organization can succeanfully confront electnd
officinla-.regardless whether they are friends or enemien.

Operation
For organizntions committad to the long-term process of sndical
sacinl change, the way they operate in mors important than any
short-torm victorien that might be rwlized. The discipline, habita
and values that are developed and nurtured through an
orRanization's dny-to-dny life are an important part of the rovolu-

l future

Lionary procens. Souo guidelines for oporation folow.

i3

1. Have a political analysis and provide political education
Lower-cluss and working-cluss neighborhood organiz
ing vt dovelop long-runge gouls which addreas imbul-
ances in a clusa suciety, an allernative viaion of what
people are fighting for, and a context for all activity,
‘whather pressuring for u stop sign or an eviction bluck-
age. Otherwise, un hus repeatedly happened, victories
that win ssrvices or rewards will undermine Ui organi-
zution by “proving” that the existing eystem is respon-
sive to poor snd working people and therefors, in no
need of fundumental change. (Fisher, 1984; p.162)

Any organization which is verious about social change and com
mitted to democrutic control of neighborhoods und workpluces must
devote considerable onergy to self-development--building individual
skills and self-confidence and providing busic political education.
Tho rolo of the stute in muintaining inequality and destroying self-
worth must be exposed

“Phis is particularly necossary in low income und minority noigh-
borhoods where people luve beon mast consistently seciulized to
believe that they ure inferior, that the problems they fuce ¢re
individunl ones rather than systemic ones, and where poor educu-
tion hus lefl people without the basic wkills necessary to understand
what goes on around them. Self-esteem is low, yet social change
work requires people who are salf-confidont and asserts

This dilemma is another of the major challengea in community
organizing. The socialization process that stripe people of their self-
estoom is not easily or quickly reversed. This problom mandates
that all taskabe performed in groups (for support and skill-sharing),
and that training and proparation for all uctivities be thorough.

2. Be collectively and flexibly organized; decentrulize as much us
possible.

Radical organizations must always try to set an example of how
organizations can be better than the institutions we criticize. All
meetings and financial records should be open und leadership
responeibilities rotated. Active men and women muat work in all
aspecta of the organization-office work, fundraising, decision mak-
ing, financial management, outreach, housckeoping, otc.

Toams of peoplo should work on different projocts, with coordina-
tion provided by an elected council. Pyramidal hiorarchy with
committees subordinate to and constrained by a strong central
Loard should bo avoided. The organization must remain floxible so
that it can respond quickly Lo neods au thoy urise.

3. Maintain independence.

Thin in extromely important and oxtremely difficult. No organi-
zation committnd to radieal nocial changn can allow itaslf to bocome
financially dependant on the government o corporations. Thiadoo
not mean that we can't use funda from government or private
inatitutionn for neaded projecta, but we can't get oursnlves in a
Pposition whern we own any allegiance to the funders. 14

In 1983, tha Farm Labor Organizing Committes wan involved in
# march from Toledo, Ohio to the Campbell's Soup headquarterain
Cnmden, New.Jernoy. They were demanding three-party collactive
bargnining betwaen Campbell's, the farmer it buya from, and the
farm Inborers who pick for the farmern. A conlition of groups in
Camden worked to coordinate the final leg of the march through
Camden. Many community-based organizations in Camden, how-
ever, refused to participate because they wero dependont on dona-
tions of food or money from Campbell's Soup.

The bankruptcy of such behavior was driven home Inat year when
Campbell'a closnd their Camden plant and lnid off 1,000 workers,
They made no apecil effort to soften the impact on the workers or
the community.

All rerourcen come at a price--even donations. We simply cannot
acorpt fundn from individuala or groups who conditicr. their use in
‘ways that conatrain our ‘work, or we must ignore the conditiona and
romain prepared to deal with the consequences Intar

Alternative funding nources are providing a badly neded service
in thin regard. In Philadelphin, the Broad and Roses Community.
Fund raisea money for distribution to social change organizations,
In 1983, it apun off the Delaware Valley Community Reinvostment
Fund, an alternative lending inatitution which provides crodit for

community-hasnd houning and community development projacts.
Socinl change organizations in the Philadelphin/Camden aron are
oxtromely indobled to these two support organizations. They play
nvitalrolain helping organizations to maintain their indepandence,

4. Reach out to avoid isolation, but keep the focus local.

Community-basad organizations munt maintain loose ties with
other grasaroota, groupa. Progreasive groupa should be able toensily
conlesce when that makes sense. We can always benefit from ideas
and conatructive criticism from supportive people who are not
wrapped up in the day to day activity of our own organization.

“Thin in another way in which 1o wing fundraising/grantmaking
groupn like the Braad and Roses Community Fund in the Philadel.
phin aron play an important role. They identify and bring togother
those groups in the region with a similar politieal ngenda. Through
Bread and Rones, the community advocacy organization in North

Cumden (CCNC) hus muintained s vory looss but productive rela-
tionship with the Kensington Joint Action Council (KJAC) in
Philadelphia. KJAC squatted first, und helped CCNC plan ita
v campuign. CCNC spun off a land trust first and assisted
KJAC in the development of their own lund trust, Manos Unidas.
Soma ideus they developed for their Lund trust in terms of building
comradery among members are now boing considered by North
Cumden Land Trust. s

Stutewide and national vrganizations try very hard to pull in
active locul orgunizations und got leaders involved in issues at the
state level. Be wary of the drain this can place on the local work.
Clowurd and Piven, in their Poor Peoples' Movements, do s wonder-
fuljobof illustrating this danger in their discussion of welfare rights
organizing. Successes are won via direct action, not via formal
organization.

6. Do not foster crovs class ties.

This upplies sspucially to comuaunity organizing in low income
areas where the local rusources ars uxtremely scarce. Many well-
to-do “do-gooder” orgunizations like to bave u ghetto project. It
‘makes thom foel good. Community ongunizations o not exist to
alleviate ruling clas guilt. Dependency on upper-class skills and
tmoney ia a problem. Poor and working puople must wage their own
struggle.

‘An illustration of this is provided by the soup kitchen in North
Camden. Suburban church folks, once they heard about
Leavenhouse, were more than willing Lo send in velunteers each duy
to propare and serve o meal. Leavenhouss told them not Lo bother,
‘oxcapt parhapa occasionally with two or thres peopleat a Lime. This
allowa the soup kitchn to develop local ownarship, and for neigh-
borhood residents Lo fisel good about taking care of sach other. It
avoids the traditionul sacial service model where one group comes
into the city and delivars a sarvice to anothier group of people who
livea thero and takos it.

Leuvenhouse doas uccopt money and food donations from outside
tho noighborhood, ut itu busic operating costs ure covered with the
ront of the community membora who uctually live at Leavenhouse.
The outside income ia extra; without it Leavenhouse will nat shut
down.

6. Have a cultural und social dimension.

Cultural and socisl events not only help to build a counterculturs,
but they help peoplo foul good about who Uiy are and where thoy
coma from. Thisis an iinportant dynamic in overcoming powerless-
nes. Political music and film are especially offective in building
cluss unity and strongth, and in providing busic politicul education.

7. Staffthe organization, to the greatest extent pos
workers and volunteers, 1z

Thin seema obvioun, bit many community organizations dengy on
outaidors to perform the bulk of their work.

In Camdan, nonprofit community organizations which provide
nfMordable housing do it in throe differont ways. One organization
mntchon suburban church groups with vacant housen. The church
Kroups then purchae materinla and provide voluntoer Inbor o do
tho rehnbilitation work. - Another group rolies on contractors to

perform the work, fw of which ars basad in Camden. A third group
han hired and trained neighborhaod residenta to do all rehabilita-
tion work. The workers are paid a decent wage for what they do.
The Intter appronch developn ekilla in the neighborhood, allows
neighborhood residonts to foel good about improving their commu.
nity, and fosters cooperative work habits which the construction
crow membors will carry into other organizations inthe comntunity.

Since the crew amployed by the third |organization is paid a decent
nge, the first organization mentioned above rohabilitates more
hounea for leas monay. Again, when the commitment is to socin!
change, the short-term tangible renulta are not the mot important
meanures of auccess.

tontrol, or o force a rollocation of resourcos (public o private) iy

y
{Pposite. Wo must be diaruptive. No guidaline is mora important
in the considoration of tactica, We can't move the system by

Loetifying at hearings, negotinting at meetings and lobbying elected

W must dofy the rulen of the system that fails to mest our noeds.
‘W must use guerrilla tactics that harass, confront, srabarrase and
©xpose that system and its functionaries.

2. Clear, preciss and measurable demands are the cornarstona of
any oryanizing campaign.
‘A group must know exactly what they wunt efore ey bein to
confront the opposition. 7

3. Gradually escalate the militancy of your tactics.

‘Ihe tactics in 8 campaign should gradually escalate in militancy,
80 thut poople now Lo political struggle are not intimidated. Let the
‘militancy of the tactica incroase at about the same puce s the
intensity of their anger.

4. Address different targets simultaneously.

‘Mo tactics should be simultansously dirvcted at difforent purts of
the systom that are responaible for the injustics or griovance that
needs to be resolved.

In the campaign to stop construction of second State prison in

their neighborhood, North Camden residents directed tactica at the
Commissioner of Corrections, the private landowner who was
willing to sell the waterfront land to the state for the prison, local
politiciune, the governor and the two gubornatorial candidates.

5 Avoid legal tactics.

Legal challonges ar difficult. They take u lot of enery und
monay, people who arcn't truined in the luw have a very difficult
time understanding the process, and they ure usy to lose. I huve
nover experienced succoss with a legal challenge.

When North Camden residents opposed construction of the first
Stute prison in their neighborhood, they eued the atate on environ-
montal and land use grounds bocause the etate planned to use
valuable waterfront land for the prison. After year of propars-
Lione, the cass was beard before an Administrative Law judge. Tie
throw tho case out on technicality. Understand that he was
appointed by a governor who had made a public commitment o
conatruct 4,000 more prison beds during his term in office.

Our legul system is sot up to protect the interests of private
proporty. Using it Lo dismantls the institutions that thrive on
private property is obviously problematic.

6. Use direct action.

Direct actions are thoss that take the shortest route toward
roalization of the ends desired, without dupending on intermediar-
ies. A simple example might help to clarify. If a group of tenanta is
huving a problom with a landlord refusing to make needed ropairy,

i ‘They could take the landlord to
court. They could get the housing and health inspectors Lo issue
violutions and prossurs the landlord to make repairs. Or they could
withhold rent from the landlord themselves, and use the money
withheld to pay for the repairs. Along the same vein, they might
picket the landlords nice suburban home und leaflet all of his
neighbora with infortaution about how be treats peala. The first

two options put respenaibility for getting something dons in the
handa of a govarnment agancy or law enforcement official. The
Intter courno of actionn keeps the tananta in control of what happens.
Atamajor state-funded conatruction projoct in Camden, residents
wanted to make sure thatcity residenta and minorities got conatruc-
tion joba. Following the lead of soma militant contruction workers
in New York City, they organized people who ware ready to work,
and blocked the gate to the job site at starting time. Their position
nn simple; they would move when local people were hired. The
Rroup got talked into negotinting and supporting an affirmative
netion program that would force the contractor to hire local paople
whenaver the union hall couldn't provide s minority or city resident
to fill an opening. The enforcement of that program was so mired
inred tape that only a handful of local workers got hired. The group
would have fared much better if thay had stuck with their original
tactic--the mont direct one.

7. Have fun. A1

The tactica used should be fun for the participanta. This isn't
#lwaya possible, but oftan ia. Street theator can often be used to
change a routine action into a fun one. Let me provide a few
oxamples.

When Concerned Citizens of North Camden (CCNC) ran ita
homeowner program (the program which rasultad from the squat-
Ling in 1981), the City tried various mechaniame to discreditit. On
one occanion when they threataned to cut some of the public fund
involved in it, CCNC conducted funeral march with sbout 100
people and carried a coffin from North Camden to City Hall where
A haaring was being held on the Community Development Block
Grant funds. Right in the middle. of the hearing, a squatter came out
from inaide the coffin and told the crowd how the people'smovement
could not be silenced and made n mockery of the whole hearing. The
effect was spoctacular, as was the prees covernge the next day.

When trying to stop the second prison, residents circulated &
specinl ismue of the community newspaper that made fun of the land
owner, the mayor and the Commissioner of Corractions. The front.
Page of the paper included photos of the three, captioned with the
nmes of the Three Stoogen (the rsemblance was striking). The
text on the front page mnde fun of ench pernon's role in the project.
Wo circulnted the paper at a big public menting which ll throe of
thosa individunls attended. 1t helped give people courage and set
the atmosphere for poopla to freely speak their minda. When people
talk about the prinon campnign, they laugh and remember “the
three stooges.”

Finally, whon the homelosa problem atarted to escalatein Camden
(1983), we loarned that people were being turned away from
nvailnbla sheltarn bocause thare was not anough pnce. 1 envenhouse,

a locul woup kitchin, Uron sturtod Lo sorve its woals un the stops of
City Hall one duy each week. This croated a party atmosphere; s
couple hundred peupls would gather o eat and bung out every
Wedneaday at noun. As the weather got coldor it bocame lous fun,
but the peruistonce was important. Three months after we started,
in Decomber, the City agreed to muke a public building availablo us
asholtor and sgroed W adupt s policy that no bomelsss peron would
bedenied shelter in Cumden. The good uspect of this action was that
homelesa peoplo waro uble to participate and help muke it happen.

It was a concrete way that they could have fun and feol good about
helping to improve their own situation.

Concluding Comments

The kind of community organizing described here w not eusy or
straightforward. It can be extromely frustffting, with many pit-
falls, tomptations und diversions pushing it off the track and
allowing it to assunie « more liberal posture. This article described
‘some of the main chullenges: overcoming the welfare/drugs culture;
waintaining indepondence; and working with people with fow skills
and low self-estwom. One other dessrves mention--mobility.

In our society, molility is expected. Peopls are supposed v move
10 take a better job, Lo ind a beter house, etc. It is accoptuble to
displace people Lo build new expressways and universities. The
uverage Amoricun woves once every five years. This mobility
affecta the atability of community organizations. Leaders and
workers may get Lrained, got involved und then lsuve before they
huve been able Lo give much back Lo the orgunization. The drug
trafficin many low-income neighborhoods exacarbates the stability
problom; familiss faca crisu on & regular busis which tuke priority
over community involvement.

The revelutionury work of comainity organizations would be
enhanced with more pupulation stability. Why aren’t jobs crouted
for people where thoy are? Why aren't a mix of housing typos and
sizew available within all communitios? Why isn't displucomont
avoided ut all cost? We need o address these questions if our
communilios ure going to be mere fertile ureas for community
organizing.

Community organizing from an anarchist porspoctive acknowl-
odges that no revalution will be meaningful unless muny Americuns
duvelop new valucs and behavior. This will require u history of wurk
in cooperative, decontralized, revolutionary organizations in com-
‘munities, workplacas and schools. The task bafore usis to build und
nurture those organizations wherever we cun. Thers ure no

shortcuta. .
Works Cited
Minsky, Suul D. Ruls for Hadicals. New York: Random Housa. en

Baldall, Glovanni. Soclal Anarchism. New York: Alding Atharton, 1971

Bouchlor, Davd Radical Chizanship. New York: Schozken Books, 1087.
Boyto, Harry. Communhty is Possible. New York: Harper & Fow, 1984

Cawloy, Kays, Mayo and Thompson (eds.). Communty or Class Struggle?
London' Stage 1, 1977,

Ehrich, Ehrlich, Dol.aon and Morria (eda.). Rekventing Anarchy. Boston
Floutladgo & Kegan Paul, 1979

Fishar, Roberl. Let the Peopls Decide: Nelghborhood Orpanizing i
America. Boston: Twayne Publishars, 1984

Flshor, Robert and Romanoleky, Peter (eds.). Communy Organization for
Urban'Soclal Change. Wastport Groenwood Pross, 1981

Fonar, Philp S (o). The LHe and Wittings of Fradarick Douglass. New
York intornational Publiahars, 1975.

Goodwyn, Lawrence. The Populist Moment. New Yor: Oxlord Univarshy.
Pross, 1981

Goodwyn, Lawrence. Democratc Promise: The Popultst Moment b
Amarica. Now York: Oxtord Unlvershy Prass, 1976

Pivon, Frances Fox and Cloward, Richard A. Poor Paoph's Movemants,
Now York: Vintage Books, 1979,
Kahn, S1. Organtzing. New York: McGraw-HN, 1962.

Lamb, Curt. Polical Power in Poor Nelghborhoods. New York: John Wilay.
and Sons, 1975,

Max, Stove, “Why Organize?" Chicago: Steve Max and the Midwast
Acadomy, 1977.

McKnight, John, “Fegenemting Communty,”in Socka Pollcy, Wintar 1867,
PP 5456

Morrts, David, “A Globo of Vilages: Sell-Raflart Communtty Davelopment
I Building Economic Afternatives, Wintor, 1987, pp. 7-14.

Flobinson, Chrls. Plotting Oirections; An Activists® Gulde. Phlladelphin
Fecon Publeations, 1962

Floussopoulos, Dimfiros (ed ). The Chy and Radical Social Changa.
Montroal. Biack Roso Books, 1962,

Schoctar, Stephan. The Poliics of Urban Libaration. Montreal. Biack flose
Fooks, 1078

Spoater, Grog. Powar: A Flepassession Manual Amhorst. Univarsty of
Massachusetis, CRizans Involvement Training Project, 1978

Staplos. Loe. Roots to Powar. New York: Praeger, 1084,

Vi Gl Aty Acon Now Yok Harer i 1673 €3)