Making a Sustainable Movement - is it Possible?

     Today's readings were a little bit too real for me right now.  We looked at Power in a Movement by Judith Stadtman Tucker, the same author I talked about in Market Logic Motherhood and founder of The Mother's Movement Online, and The Mother's Movement:  The Challenges of Coalition Building in the Twenty-First Century by Patrice Diquinzio, Associate Provost at Washington College and former professor of feminist philosophy.  These two articles detailed the way that social movements ought to be structured in order to be sustainable and effective.

     As a co-organizer in the recent "Enough! - The New Face of St. Olaf" movement on campus, the suggestions and shortcomings of these two articles were extremely relevant to my own life at this very moment.  As I stated in an article released in the Manitou Messenger yesterday, "Rather than simply talk about the issues, we culminated our event with a call to action, beginning the student-led organization that has evolved" into what it is today.  Unlike John Mayer, we are not "waiting on the world to change," but making the change happen.  As Tucker stated in her article, "I'm no longer satisfied with writing and talking ... I want to get the job done."  And that is exactly what we are trying to do.

     As I read the articles on activism, I couldn't help but compare our movement with the ideals outlined in the texts.  One of the first requirements that Tucker lays out is that we must think beyond ourselves.  As a group comprised of a wide variety of different people organizing around an even wider array of issues (racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, ableism, religious intolerance, sizeism, etc.), I think we pretty adequately fit that description.  The second requirement is balancing talk and action.  In our initial forum on March 11th and our open letter published online on Tumblr and Facebook and circulated around campus in print, we "talked" a lot.  Now we are trying to take the information we have presented and move toward "action" on our propositions for change.  Next Wednesday, May 1st, 2013 we are organizing a Solidarity Rally in the Quad to bring these issues up in public and show just how many people are affected, personally or indirectly, by discrimination and hatred at St. Olaf College.

     Tucker then talks about "building on-ramps to activism" as a means of sustaining a movement, stating that "multiple entry and exit points for first-time and seasoned activists" are essential to success.  This is one area of our movement that I think is struggling somewhat.  Although we would love to have more people engaged in the daily tasks of organizing, we haven't found an effective way of reaching out to new students and keeping them involved.  After our original meeting with 150 attendees, 102 of whom signed up to be a part of the movement.  But by the time we had finalized our open letter, only 20-some of us were regularly attending meetings.  Many other students continued to check in with those of us who were regular attendees, explaining that school, work, meetings, and other commitments kept them from being actively involved - all of which are totally valid reasons.  However, this analysis leaves me wondering how we can build as much flexibility (identified as essential by both Tucker and Diquinzio) as possible into our movement from here on out.

     Similarly, I find myself wondering about how well we have executed the coalition-building discussed by Diquinzio.  Though at the start we invited every single student organization and academic department to our presentation (I literally emailed every alias or contact person), we have proceeded largely on our own.  This has not been out of any separatist motive, but simply a function of how we proceeded.  As we wanted to keep the movement student-led, we did not pursue official recognition or faculty leadership.  In so doing, we kept our autonomy, but limited our resources.  As we move on in a more public way - the Solidarity Rally, supporting Carleton's similar efforts, meeting with administrators, etc - we can hopefully become a more interdependent, coalition-based movement.

Ultimately, I think our struggle to be the most effective, sustainable movement we can be comes down to the wise words of Maya Angelou:

Do the best you can until you know better.

Then when you know better, do better.

Enough! is doing the best that we can,
and as we know better we will do better.

Social Networks and Second-Generation Class Migrants

     In her chapter "The Class Culture Gap," Joan C. Williams addresses the oft-ignored, but ever-important, differing expectations and values between the Missing Middle class (median incomes of $35,000 to $55,000) and the Professional-Managerial class (median income of $125,000 - the top 15% of U.S. households).  One of the major differences that Williams describes is the Professional-Managerial’s focus on their children’s self-actualization versus the Missing Middle’s focus on their children’s self-regulation.

    A consequence and cause of these expectations is a difference in social and employment networks.  Williams claims that the Missing Middle is comprised of smaller and denser social networks.  These relationships, though fewer in number, are stronger in connection and support - often different members of families reside within miles of each other and talk daily.  The members of these communities, whether familial or not, depend on each other more heavily than do members of Professional-Managerial communities.  Professional-Managerial networks tend to be broader and weaker.  They know more people and have more far-reaching connections, but those connections are less maintained and provide fewer direct supports.

    Today's reading about class cultures was particularly striking after having come home from Spring Break.  My mom is what Williams would call a class migrant - someone who was raised in the Missing Middle class, but moved economically to the Professional-Managerial class when she became a successful dentist with her own private practice.  As such, she was raised within the small, dense social network that stresses self-regulation.  I, however, was raised in the Professional-Managerial class and, especially due to my time at St. Olaf College, have learned to navigate the network that relies upon the “strength of weak ties” and tells me to find self-fulfillment.  Due to past networking in order to gain a variety of experiences, I qualified for a job next year that will take me to Latin America - far away from my Nebraskan family.

    As a “second-generation” Professional-Managerial class member, I am still expected by my Missing Middle family to stay close to home, find a stable job, and be successful that way.  By my own Professional-Managerial expectations and peers I am expected to go out into the world, discover my vocation and identity, and achieve self-actualization.  I am moving to Latin America next year, that is decided, but I do feel conflicted about leaving my family.  I cherish our tight bonds, even though I might not be as physically present in their maintenance.  I wonder, do second or third generation class migrants ever fully leave their class background behind?  Should we?  Or is it better to combine the strengths of the two?