“Spirit in Action is an invitation”: Jessie Cocks

Jessie Cocks has been a participant in SIA’s Circles of Change .  Among many other accomplishments, Jessie cofounded the American Peace Test in 1985 (non-violent direct action to end nuclear weapons testing) and was part of the late Carl Sagan’s seven person think tank on building a mass movement for social change (1986-88).  And congratulations to Jessie on being a newly elected member of Kennett Borough Council.  To learn more about Jessie, check out her website.

And if you get inspired by her comments below, remember that Spirit in Action is offering a  Leadership Network Training  in the Philadelphia area in January 2008, and we’re currently accepting applications.   Here’s Jessie on her experience with Spirit in Action:

Pamela and Phyllis are two of the best facilitators I’ve ever seen (and I’ve seen a lot).  Fabulous modeling for all and as a woman of color and a white woman.   Witnessing them as a participant, experiencing them as co-leaders was a training in and of themselves.  They brought co-facilitation to the level of of seamless, organic art – extraordinary. They had obviously done a ton of their own work and totally respected each other.  No one had to be one up.  

Spirit in Action is an invitation to go inside and figure out how our sense of spirit relates to the big picture.  It honors a need that too often gets neglected in our work, as we think, “We don’t have to time, we have to stop the arms race,” or make other excuses not to do the work that has to be done in order to move towards nonviolence.  

Spirit in Action has the vision of how we can do things differently and how to not emotionally abuse each other and ourselves.  It’s a vision of how to honor spirit or how to do self-care, even if someone is an atheist.  There is plenty of room for nonbelievers.  It’s a beautifully nonjudgmental approach to what spirit is that so carefully leaves the definition open.  Circles of change help us identify what we’re for.  Resistance work is so often about what we’re against.  Even when I was doing work against nuclear testing, what I wanted to do was create communities for change that could work on other issues like housing in communities.

Nonviolence is love in action, but that wasn’t considered part of the curriculum.  Nonviolence was the essence of my approach.

At the core of it, it’s the foundation that often gets forgotten, the foundation of a new vision of the future based on nonviolence. 

It’s a brilliant format that can completely fit any movement, from churches, synagogues, pagan circles or any issue focused movement.  At its base, Spirit in Action invites people to work from a place of love instead of from a place of fear.  In 1985, when I was starting the American Peace Test, a national and international nonviolent direct action to stop nuclear weapons testing and building communities of nonviolent resistance around local social change issues, I wanted to call it Spirit in Action or Love in Action instead of the American Peace Test.  So this is a perfect fit for me. 

I think SIA invites us to take a look at the ethical implications of our spirituality and how to include play and humor in our work.  It invites us to look at how we can be led by spirit to deep, lasting social change. 

Unitarian blog praises Spirit in Action

I saw a great blog entry about the workshop we gave at Third Sector New England the other day and I wanted to share it with you. 

Be The Media

Linda Stout spoke in November at an event preceding the Be The Media conference sponsored by PCN/Boston chapter.  Folks can go here to download a report, Raise Every Voice, which includes case studies of the impact of using media in organizing for change.

 

Here is her speech: 

I want to thank our co-sponsors, Solidago and Haymarket.  I also want to thank Solidago for funding the report. 

My first introduction to the power of media was in the early 80’s when I began organizing in rural NC, my home, to change the conditions that affected us as poor people. 

We very quickly began to see our local media – all of which was controlled and owned by the local textile giant – Cannon Mills – as the enemy.  The media always reported negatively on our activities and the issues we were concerned about. Often they made very personal attacks on our organization and on us individually. 

In 1989, we won the National Grassroots Peace Award. We were told that, in addition to the cash prize, we would receive the services of a media consultant to help us run a national media campaign.  I thought about this idea for a minute, and then asked “can we have the money instead?”  I did not see how doing a media campaign could possibly serve us.  But, luckily we were told no: the press campaign was a requirement of the prize. 

After that experience, my understanding of the power of media was transformed.  Not only did we get amazing coverage nationally, but we were able to tell our stories in the local papers and received positive coverage for the first time. 

That was only the beginning.  We took the prize money we won – a huge amount to us –$10,000 – and hired the media consultant to continue working with us.  We learned to use the media to get our messages out, and in doing that, began to build a reputation as experts around the issues that impacted us.  Before long, when the state budget was released, the state paper would call us to talk about how the cuts in the budget was affecting people in our community rather than calling the local economist at the University as they always had in the past.  

We not only saw how our messages were getting out to a much broader public, but noticed that the media began to run more Associated Press stories that covered the kind of issues we were raising.  We began to see much more success in our ability to change public policies; we were able to build credibility among elected officials; Additionally, we were able to grow our membership and our funding significantly as a result of our media work.   

I began to understand that media was critical to our work for social change.  Today, as someone who is both a foundation funder and an organizer, I believe that media is more critical now than it ever has been. 

In 2000 we started Progressive Communicators Network, a national network of communicators working to strengthen and amplify and voices of grassroots groups working for social, economic and environmental justice. 

I have been thrilled to see grassroots groups become more interested in using media over the past few years (as shown today by the fact the conference had to start turning people away because so many people signed up) but I’m also excited by the number of funders who are taking an interest in supporting media work. 

The majority of that interest has been focused on 3 critical areas.  There has been a lot of funding and work on reforming the media – an important, vital part of our work in today’s overwhelming corporate control of information.   

There has also been increased interest and understanding of the need to fund alternative and independent media that is free from corporate control. 

And most recently, there has been a growing awareness of the need to put attention on framing and messaging to reach the broader public. 

But I believe that one of the areas that has been most overlooked by many funders has been the need to support grassroots organizations to receive the training, the support, and the funding to develop and carry out a powerful communications strategy. 

While in some cases independent local media reaches the community, most often alternative media only reaches the “already converted”.  This is important and gives us the true sources of information we need to do our work effectively.  For instance, the work of Democracy Now has played a key role in bringing us the truth that we will never hear from the usual new sources. 

But, in rural NC, we knew that getting an article in the Nation, or MS Magazine, or even on NPR (which didn’t even reach the area we lived in) would never reach the folks in our community.  In order to reach our people, we had to get our messages into the local papers, on the local television stations and in places like Family Circle Magazine.  That’s what people in our communities responded to. 

Another important area of media work that I mentioned earlier is messaging & framing;  Many of us were influenced by George Lakoffs book, “Don’t think about an Elephant,” but it is not enough to just fund “messaging & framing” at the national level.  We must also be funding the grassroots who can develop the messages that most speak to their folks, and who can translate the broader national messages and carry them out into the local communities.  We can develop powerful messages, but without the groups to carry them forward, they will not have the impact we would hope for. 

I want to tell a story about how one of the working groups of Progressive Communicators Network were able to come together to become more effective.  There were several groups who came to our annual gathering that worked on criminal justice.  But they had political & strategic differences between those working on prison reform and other  working on prison abolition.  They realized that they had many different messages and in some cases messages that actually undermined each others work.  They recognized that shared messaging and communications strategy would serve to strengthen everyone’s work on prison issues.   

So 16 people met together for the first time to develop a collective communications strategy.  One of the first things they did was put on the wall all the messages they were currently using.  There was over a 100 different messages.  This often happens when we work in isolated ways.  The result is that instead of having a powerful unified message that gets echoed and becomes part of the public discourse, we find ourselves mumbling and giving the public a confused message at best.  

This gathering focused on a shared vision of creating core strategic messages that would advance many different types of anti-prison work. They worked on developing common messages and all of the participants agreed to quit using messages that undermined each other’s different strategies while at the same time deciding on the importance of putting forward a unified message that “prisons do not make us safer.”  

For the folks who participated, it was the first time they had the opportunity to brainstorm and develop messages together, so all of their work could be more effective and become greater than the sum of their parts. 

I believe it is critical for those of us who want to build a different world to support this kind of strategic communications work at the grassroots. 

You will hear several stories today about how grassroots media strategy has made a difference – we need to ensure that this work continues to grow.  (readers can find these stories in our report, Raise Every Voice)

Thank you so much for your participation and interest in this critical part of our work for social change.

Circles of Change as Organizing: Cynthia Suarez

Cynthia Suarez has been a participant in SIA’s Circles of Change  program.  (Her comments are also relevant to the Leadership Training Network, which is currently accepting applications for a training coming up in January).  Here are some of Cindy’s thoughts about Circles of Change:

I’ve been trained in Circles before, in a very different way, in the Yukon with indigenous people. It was out in the wild and very experiential. They were more concerned with having you understand the values and life that support circles, and not big on methodology. One thing that I was seeking and got from the Spirit in Action training was more of a sense of structure. The focus on healing divisions was particularly important. The Yukon model is a restorative justice model, which starts with an assumption of sameness. It was good to experience ways of actually working with difference head on. I like having a variety of approaches available.

I’m the Training Director in my network, and I’m a black Puerto Rican woman. Our new strategic directions has a core goal of connecting mostly white-led statewide groups to community-based groups, and in doing so to more groups led and defined by people of color. I suggested that how we do this work is very important. We don’t want to go into these sessions asking people of color we don’t know to join our predetermined projects. It’s a fine balance of working together to advance our goals and being open enough to build authentic relationships and learn. We plan to use circles as a core process for this work.

I exposed the organizers in my network to circles and they loved it. Some were concerned about their ability to do them. I felt they were thinking, “I’m not a charismatic person of color, how could I do this?” For me, Spirit In Action demystifies circle leadership. It provides concrete planning steps, as well as create a space were the principles are lived so you get a clear sense of how it ties together.

People want to do this relationship building, vision developing work, but are at a loss for how to start. Organizers in my network struggle to balance leadership development and the campaign driven outcomes central to the work.   

We use a one-on-one relationship building model and while it is great, I think another space, a group space, will help us do leadership development in a more exponential way. Rather than one organizer “developing” a group of leaders, the organizer creates conditions where the leaders learn together, from many sources. The circle model brings in a much needed heart focus, so that it’s not just the analytical approach of “do this because it’s in your own best interest.” 

The circle model also moves us closer to a systemic view. By hearing different people you get a better sense of what the system looks like. Everyone is in the position to teach something as well as learn.   

I’ve used circles to help one of our state-wide groups develop their strategic plan for the year. It’s been a tough year for this group, and when you have a group of passionate activists, there’s always a potential for tension. They developed a shared understanding of the work they wanted to do this year, obstacles to doing that work, principles to drive their work, and a detailed plan of action for the year. It was the first time they were able to have this sort of collective input and build understanding and buy-in. Their ability to work together is really taking off. Linda helped me plan these circles.

I’ve used the Healing Divisions exercises in a gathering we held recently that had a focus on racial justice. It included the state groups in our network in six New England states and New York state, plus other groups working on racial justice that we want to build relationships with. We’re just starting to use circles in this work.

The circles model is important in working towards equalizing the voices at the table. It tends to be organizers, who are the lynchpins of the work, who want this. An organizer who is a man of color said to me, “I don’t want to bring other people into an organization where I don’t have a voice.” The circles exercises are a great start for doing what is really difficult work.

I haven’t experienced many approaches to collective visioning. I love those exercises, how it moves you from your individual vision to the collective vision. It helps move the work from being issue driven to vision driven. 

Linda is a great support. It’s great to have someone so smart and experienced to talk through circle design. She’s a life-saver. It helps me to have someone of her stature devoting her energy to circle work. It’s so different being committed to racial justice and actually having the skills to do something about it. She keeps in close contact with me. She’s driven out to meet with me in Boston. She’s been so interested in what I have to say. It’s rare for experienced people in their fifties to be interested in the ideas of people in their thirties the way she is. She says that she thinks that we’re the source of new ideas for alternative paradigms and frameworks, which I think is true. But this is not often even acknowledged, much less valued by nonprofit leaders. When my friends and I have met to talk about this stuff, there is an overwhelming feeling that we might not be able to shift organizations that exist. But Linda share my vision of what could be. She values questioning everything, our very assumptions, which I love, but seems to be scary and “not the work” for many nonprofit leaders. That gives me faith and helps me feel more confident in what I know. 

In my network we focus on infrastructure building. I’ve been thinking about how to create spaces where paradigm pioneers can thrive, spaces for creativity that are not driven by direct outcomes, spaces for regeneration, visioning, and hope. I think of them as generative nodes in the infrastructure, between organizations, as opposed to a think tank model.