Jobs! Fair wages! Affordable utilities!

Center for Community Change. Source: FB.

In Hungary human rights campaigns rarely target market actors. We make the state and the authorities responsible for complying with the laws and guaranteeing our rights, but economic actors should not be left out of this process. The initiative of the Helping Hand Women's Forum from Sajókaza was exemplary when they (collectively, on behalf of 89 families) demanded the implementation of prepaid electricity meters from the local government as well as the electric company. Economic actors make profits by using the resources of the region and processing its minerals; they also have an impact on the environment, and may be subsidized by the state, etc. So they have responsibility for the communities in the region of their operation and for the natural environment. There are several examples in the U.S. of how community organizations make economic actors accountable and/or achieve their cooperation in the name of economic justice, which can be instructive in Central Europe. I collected a bunch of good examples.

In 1998 in California a coalition of community organizing groups and service providers achieved their goal that local unemployed people be hired for a public works railway transportation project - the residents of low-income neighborhoods near where the future rail line was planned. The merits and implementation of the initiative are worth looking at even though it was based on an unacceptable implicit compromise: the contractors provided training and jobs for the residents in exchange for the fact that the construction of the rail line may easily harm their health and erode their quality of life. It was a more favorable argument that in case of state-funded (tax-financed) projects part of the money should trickle down to the community. The initiating working group recruited allies during a summer and finally established a coalition of almost 40 community groups by the fall of 1997. The coalition first researched the amount allocated to the project and the demographics of the neighborhoods. The construction of the mid-segment of the rail line, which was supposed to run through the neighborhoods, was estimated to cost $750 million and create more than 3,000 jobs. The outreach took place at different levels: first, the coalition organized lots of community meetings in the neighborhoods and elaborated demands for the implementing authority; second, they made several allies among elected officials, unions, and other key actors.

Following difficulties, legal debates and negotiations, the coalition made an agreement with the authority by the spring of 1998 that 30 percent of the construction work hours would be performed by local hires from affected communities and the authority guaranteed to train 1,000 residents. The contractors had to agree in their bids that they would comply with the terms of the agreement. One guarantee of the success of the campaign was that the coalition was one step ahead of the authorities as it engaged in the issue well before the construction had started and then it took part in the widespread announcement of the jobs program, and in the recruit and selection of the job applicants. An agreement like this is called a community benefits agreement. It is legally binding, setting forth a range of community benefits regarding a development project, and resulting from substantial community involvement. In case somebody is inspired to implement a community-based jobs program like this, the Center For Community Change and the coalition presents its strategy and the nuts and bolts of the implementation in this manual.

There are other interesting examples of how exploited workers organize. Community Voices Heard (whose representative was recently in Hungary) fought in 2011 to make sure that New York State employed 3,000 welfare recipients for a real salary instead of workfare assignments. The concept of the Transitional Jobs Program is that welfare recipients are employed for publicly subsidized jobs (not for unpaid workfare assignments) that combine real work, skill development and supportive services. In case they do not find a job by the time the program phases out, they receive unemployment benefits (instead of welfare).

Another example is the United Workers which demanded economic justice for workers in a district of Baltimore. In the Inner Harbor rebuilt by a publicly subsidized redevelopment project, newly opened restaurants often did not pay a minimum wage to their employees. Workers, who organized successfully in another district for securing a minimum wage, labelled the district a human rights zone and drew attention to the exploitation of workers with different actions.

In addition, the Vermont Workers' Center in 2010 examined the state budget against human rights standards (the percent of the budget allocated to housing, health care, education, job losses, disability services). And the Latino working group of Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement organizes against human rights abuses against Latino immigrant workers. The organization helps victims of wage theft in advocating to the company or the authorities. The organization is building its base through the working group and through making connections by representing individuals.

Community organizing groups such as National Peoples' Action, PICO, Virginia Organizing and others became part of a national alliance to get people to take their money out of the "big banks" (cause profit loss) which hold the biggest responsibility for the economic recession. The Move Our Money USA campaign has grown out of the Occupy movement and the target is to get customers of JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America and Wells Fargo to divest $1 billion from these banks.

Another initiative linked to Occupy is the Save Our Home campaign when organizations demand remodifications of mortgages for homeowners from banks, and try to prevent primarily members of low-income communities or communities of color from evictions.

The last example is from Texas where low-income people and people of color organize for affordable electricity. The Texas Organizing Project identified a budget line from which the state could substantially extend current subsidy for the electricity consumption of families in need.

Campaigning for the reduction of bank fees, for affordable utilities or for jobs and fair wages is part of the realization of economic rights.

Read it in Hungarian.

The impact of community organizations on party politics

Voter registration drive.
Source: Planned Parenthood

In Hungary, it does not often happen that non-profit organizations would encourage their constituencies to participate in elections. In the United States, however, it is a very widespread activity. If they wish to vote, citizens of each state except North Dakota have to register themselves before (or in some states, on the same day of) the election. Before major elections, non-profit organizations, especially the majority of community organizations, run voter registration drives to increase civic engagement, mainly for constituencies who have been historically underrepresented at the polls.

Activists do door-to-door canvassing in neighborhoods, or go to universities, churches, or talk to people standing at bus stops and have them fill out their voter registration forms, which activists collect and submit to voter registration officials. The approach, commonly referred to as "civic engagement", is a strategic opportunity to involve new people and raise awareness. In Hungary, for example, The City Is For All made an attempt to use this tool among homeless citizens before the 2010 elections.

Naturally, it is against the law that organizers and their non-profit organizations agitate people to vote for a specific party or a political candidate, but in an indirect way (and mostly due to the two-party system), they may have an impact on the outcome of the elections. There are usually overlaps between the agenda of community organizations and that of the Democratic Party, so these organizations will more likely register potential Democratic voters.

It was not accidental that the very influential Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) received a lot of accusations before the 2008 presidential election. They were accused of forgery of voter registration forms because those who lost the election felt that their work registering voters contributed to the victory of President Barack Obama. (The charges helped lead to the downfall of the organization.)

Due to the overlaps, several community organizations purposefully build on potential Democratic voters in recruiting more members or in increasing the number of supporters for a campaign. For example, it is a widespread practice for community organizations to gain access to a public voter database (with a lot of information such as name, phone number, address, gender, age, voting history), which a vendor has merged with commercially obtained data to create a more comprehensive database. The program generates a list based on the needs of the customer, which (besides political organizations and corporations,) non-profit organizations also use as a source for phone banking: they call hundreds of people and urge them to register to vote, to support a cause, to call an elected official or to become a member.

American tax-exempt non-profit organizations come in a variety of shapes, sizes and forms. Even groups that are non-partisan have figured out ways to be effective in lobbying, as well as electoral politics, through voter registration, voter education and get-out-the-vote efforts, based on the issues that are important to their members. Organizations have also built relationships with key people in non-profits that are more actively engaged in political campaigns (because they have a different tax status).  A creative example of how this is done in Montana is reflected in the work of two groups, the Northern Plains Resource Council (NPRC), a community organization fighting for the rights of farmers and ranchers, for clean water and healthy food in Montana and a lobby group, the Montana League of Rural Voters (MLRV).

Read it in Hungarian.

We are the 99 per cent! - or confrontational rural organizing is possible

"We are here and we do not go anywhere."
CCI's Latino Organizing Project
steering committee. Source: FB

I have heard several times from community organizers that it is close to impossible to organize in a confrontational manner in small towns or rural areas. It is possible in Chicago, many say with some exaggeration, but here, where there is no tradition of open conflict among citizens and decision-makers, this does just not work. In rural areas, some organizers say, you cut your organization off from both your members and politicians if you take a confrontational stance. Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement (Iowa CCI) shatters this myth. The organization militantly fights against factory farms, for immigrant rights and for a fair economy. Executive Director Hugh Espey and Organizer David Goodner talk about their methods.


Last year you took part in the Occupy movement in New York City and in Iowa. Nation-wide campaigns continue: together with other organizations, you mobilize people to divest from irresponsible banks such as Wells Fargo and Bank of America, which can be made liable for the recession, and urge citizens to put their dollars into smaller banks who reinvest into the community. How do you assess the Occupy movement?

Hugh: Occupy lifted up the notion that most of us belong to the 99 per cent. "We are the 99 percent," says the slogan. This movement made the huge income inequalities obvious and made it common sense that the richest 1 per cent pays less in taxes in proportion to their income and that corporations have a huge influence on our politics and the government. We don't want this energy to be gone. In order for this, in the spring, National People's Action started The 99% Spring program. The building of the movement started with nation-wide leadership development. Thousands of people have already participated in the online trainings. We think that the Occupy is not over yet.

On July 19 you demanded the resignation of two agricultural investors, Brent and Bruce Rastetter. Although it was not meant to be like that, still, the second half of the action could have been a neat antiglob action: ultimately, you stood up for the rights of Burundian refugees in Tanzania against an American investor in the United States.


David: There are, in fact, multiple strands in these two issues. Factory farms have swept off tons of family farms from the market and caused a lot of environmental damages in Iowa. In the first half of the action, we packed the meeting room of Iowa's Department of Natural Resources. Our members, farmers or residents of neighborhoods affected by the environmental damages, took the floor one after the other, and claimed that the commission should deny permission for a new factory farm in Poweshiek County. They criticized factory farms with harsh words and with a variety of arguments, and they spoke from their hearts. All of them demanded the resignation of Brent Rastetter, who was having extremely unpleasant moments at the commission's table. Brent, who is a factory farmer, is a member of the Environmental Protection Commission, which should oversee the compliance with environmental regulations.

Then we went to the Iowa Ethics and Complaint Disclosure Board to file a complaint against his brother, Bruce Rastetter, who used his position in the Board of Regents for the State of Iowa, an institute overseeing public educational institutions in Iowa, to start a monoculture factory farming in Tanzania - on land where refugees from Burundi have lived for decades and who were relocated by the Tanzanian government without a question. As a closing accord, we filled the governor's office, since he nominates the Board of Regents, and demanded the dismissal of Rastetter due to conflict of interest.

You stopped the construction of nearly 100 factory farms, hurting the interests of many business people. The atmosphere of the organizing meetings and the staff meetings reflects that you, as paid employees of CCI, are not kidding and the militant style is infectious to your members. How do you realize this in a fundamentally rural environment?


Hugh: I think the most important thing is that it is part of our strategy that we leave no stone unturned. We never give in and almost never make a compromise and we harass the decision-makers until they fulfill our demands. If necessary, we protest in front of their homes, send a greeting card with our campaign message to their mother, disrupt their businesses and picket in front of their auto car wash. Naturally, we have been told that it is an intrusion into privacy but we think that if somebody does not want to meet us or consider our interests, we need to overstep a boundary. As a result of this, those who are affected by the issues we deal with start to develop trust in us.

There is something in many people which blocks them from expressing their opinion in public. We have learned that decision-makers are clever and they know what they do. How many times have we heard that "He is the mayor. He knows better." Or from the mayor that "You are not aware of what challenges I have to face." Our belief in the superiority of decision-makers must be dismissed because this is what keeps the incompetent in power. People have to give permission to themselves that they announce their opinion if they feel so. They have to allow themselves to be angry and speak from their heart. We have to make the decision-makers accountable. The other big challenge is that there are people who think that cooperation is a sign of weakness. We faced several times when a farmer proudly says, "I can solve my own problem, I don't need anybody's help." We have to dismiss this notion, because we have more power together. For this, the energy, impulse and enthusiasm of a community organizer is necessary.

What are the main characteristics of rural organizing?


David: I think one of them is that we fill a niche. There are not many advocacy groups in the rural areas. We are the ones who get a place at the table of decision-makers for rural people and their issues. The technological lag between rural and urban areas (e.g., the lack of internet) also makes it harder for the community organizer. It is also important that we frame our messages in a way that it tells something to the decision-makers, to the public and to the people affected. We frame our messages in the language of the local people, based on their values. We talk a lot about equality. We lay great stress on leadership development, we form steering committees, we talk through strategies with our members, and we are slowly giving them more and more responsibility. It is inspiring for the community if community members speak up and in a confrontational manner if needed, therefore we need to position the leaders so that they can show their power. Naturally, debriefings are crucial at the end of the meetings. And last but not least, it is important that we have fun!

If somebody comes to us with an issue then we ask them to mobilize other people affected. Last time we received a call from Floyd County that the construction of a factory farm is being planned. It will destroy local family farms, so we should help prevent it. "Can you bring 15-20 other people affected to a meeting?" we asked. Yes, he could. For building the organization, it is also important that these people become CCI members. If we invest in the community, we want the community to invest in us, too. Continuously keeping in touch is also important, but because of the great distance it is more likely that we keep in touch on the phone.

You work with a lot of interest groups, from the immigrants and farmers to those whose homes are in foreclosure. How do you bridge the possible inner conflicts, how do you bring them to a common platform?


David: First of all, the notion that we belong to the same organization is a glue. We have not had such a campaign which could have lined up all the different interest groups at once. Statewide meetings give space for members to get to know one another and to listen to one another's stories. It also happened that Latinos spoke up for clean air at an action organized by farmers. These examples obviously increase solidarity.

Read it in Hungarian.

A blink to India: "Social activism is like “onion-peeling” - you successfully peel one layer, but then comes another one."

Source: Navsarjan

Martin Macwan, an Indian lawyer and activist, is the founder of Navsarjan, a grassroots Dalit organisation, based in Gujarat state, India. Being a Dalit himself, he learnt the hard way as a child what caste discrimination means. Dalits, the former "untouchables" in pre-independence India, make up around 166 million of those living in the country, and together with other disadvantaged groups they make up more than 24 per cent of the total population. They are subject to discrimination in numerous fields of society, such as jurisdiction, housing, education or employment.

(The full article is available on the website of MRG's Minority Voices Newsroom.)

You had been working as a lawyer and a human rights defender for eight years before the foundation of Navsarjan. What inspired you to start in a new direction and establish a community-based organisation?
Martin: The events which triggered this were grievous. In the 1980s, I was running a land rights campaign with another organisation. We tried to change the land ownership structure: to liberate land held captive by landlords and to give them back to the people for their use. In fact, we were challenging the power of dominant-caste landlords. Shortly, they realised that if this were to continue, they would lose all their privileges. This infuriated them and, on the 25th January 1986, they ran a massive attack on one of the village communities. I had left the village not long before that, but I was supposed to be there that night. Many people were wounded, houses were burnt and four of my colleagues were shot dead. It was total chaos.

This was the moment when my life took a new turn. I realised that if I wanted to provide the solutions to a systemic problem, and because discrimination was such, I needed to create a broad-based organisation, otherwise each activity would remain an isolated attempt and would put people at risk. After we had filed a lawsuit against the perpetrators, I left the organisation with these thoughts and founded Navsarjan in December 1988. The legal battle had been going on for thirteen years when, eventually, fourteen people were sentenced.

India produced a progressive Constitution in 1950, enshrining the policy of affirmative action for underprivileged groups, and passed many laws that are supposed to aid the inclusion of Dalits and other disadvantaged tribes and classes into society. However, it failed to live up to expectations. What was the reality in the villages in the 1990s?
Martin: What we saw then and what we still see are segregated housing colonies for Dalits, who are treated like slaves by local landlords, who are prohibited from using public services and starting private businesses. Dalit people, especially in villages, are segregated in schools and have access to poorer medical facilities.

In 1989, we started with eight volunteers and opened a legal cell offering services for approximately 50 villages. Listening to the local Dalits, however, we realised that the core of all the cases in the district can be derived back to the improper dissemination of water. It is a common problem all over India: Dalits are either forbidden from using the water sources and toilet tanks used by non-Dalits or they are the last in the row to fetch water. It was the same story here, too: in 1991, Dalits were allowed to fetch water after the buffalos had had enough.

So, instead of taking case after case and continuing to merely fire-fight, we shut the office down and conducted a comprehensive survey. We found that in 42 out of 50 villages, access to water was a problem. No sooner had we assembled the evidence than we started to organise all the village-dwellers.

Not surprisingly, women were more sensitive to the issue, because it was their task to fetch water. A year later, we organised an impressive march in which 800 women advanced with a large jar on their heads. This massive amount of people demanding change created such a problem that the administration was forced to solve the water issue in all of the 42 villages. It is ultimately a question of power equation: when you are perceived as weak, they don't listen to you. And fear is an enormous problem. There are millions of people suffering, but they do not dare to stand up for their rights because they feel that they are alone.

Nevertheless, within 10 years of activities, Navsarjan has had local representation in 2 000 villages. Today it is present in more than 3 000.
Martin: We wanted to become a broad-based organisation. For this you need a lot of empowered and passionate people, but you also need responsible leaders who feel ownership for the community and their problems. First we employed non-local, qualified leaders, but that did not work. When they got a better opportunity, they left. At this point, we decided to train local, uneducated young men and women to be leaders. We trained them for three days per month for one year and they were granted a small amount of fellowship. However, even in this case, just to be able to participate in our trainings, women had to jump higher hurdles than men. Until they got familiar with the programme, village people were accusing female participants of being prostitutes, because they spent nights away in the company of unknown people. Women were persistent and their attitude helped me understand that without women no social movement will succeed.

Navsarjan grants women a special role in the fight against caste discrimination.
Martin: We work with both men and women, but, as years of work were passing by, we realised that we can address gender-based discrimination only if we placed women in a leadership position in the social movement. Women face multiple discrimination: once from non-Dalits due to their caste status and once from Dalits and non-Dalits because of their gender. Dalit women are more likely to suffer violence and especially sexual violence, and are least likely to get redress in the courts. They will likely face ostracism from their community or even from their own family.

Accepting gender equality is a long battle everywhere and changes start from small things. When I suggested in the main office that the men should wash their own dishes, it caused such uproar that five men left the organisation without a word. They just left a message at the gatekeeper saying: "We are men. We would sooner die than do a woman's job."

Originally, the "teapot revolution" against the undesirable role of women as kitchen servants was sparked off by two female participants from our vocational training. In DSK, participants primarily acquire a profession, but the training also provides personality development, communication and leadership skills, education on human rights and social equality. The rationale behind this is that after returning to their villages, participants will be able to stand up for the rights of their community.

Based on the concept of equality, these two women started to question the traditional roles in their community. When they were supposed to wash the teapot and the dirty cups after a local meeting of the movement, they instigated other women and together they refused to do so. It was like a bombshell, as nobody was expecting anything like that. The male members were foaming at the mouth: men and women did not talk to each other for weeks. After two months I called the leader and said: "You know, I am trying to set up a museum for Dalit history. Can I get a teapot from your office." The man did not understand: "What is it to do with a pot in a museum?" I said, "I want to write the story of the inequality between Dalit men and women and I need the pot as an illustration." The man then went and washed the pot and the story spread like wildfire to 40 other offices of Navsarjan and all the women started to protest: "If we prepare the tea, men should wash the pot". This would not have been possible if only men had been in the organisation.

You resigned from Navsarjan 6 years ago. What are you currently involved in?
Martin: After completing 25 years in the movement, I was convinced that the leadership must change. A social movement needs new blood to bring in new ideas. Nevertheless, I remained part of the organisation, but in another role, as an activist. I am training teachers in our primary school programme and conducting trainings on gender relationships, power and community in the DSK trainings for 1 000 young men and women annually. When they come here, they can hardly say their names. When they go back to their villages, they can become leaders. Apart from that, I am writing textbooks used by the 30 000 children participating in our primary school programme.

Apart from Navsarjan, my colleagues and I set up two institutions after the World Conference against Racism of 2001 in Durban. I am a founding member of and was previously the chair of the organisation called the Dalit Foundation and I am the current chair of the Indian Institute of Dalit Studies, a national research institute solely dedicated to the issue of caste discrimination. And naturally, there are lots of other organisations where I am invited to conduct trainings.

Dr. Ambedkar, the "father of the Indian Constitution", set the cornerstone for the Dalit movement. He is an emblematic figure in your organisation as well, as his portrait is placed above the front door of the training centre.
Martin: Dr. Ambedkar carried forward the tradition of Jyotirao Phule and his wife, Savitribai Phule, social reformers from the 19th century. Jyotirao worked a lot for the removal of untouchability and probably he was the one who first used the term Dalit instead of the "untouchables". Dr. Ambedkar put the issue of the caste system into the context of the national politics and no one has studied the caste system with the depth that he did. He also learnt the hard way, as a child, what caste discrimination means. He was the only Dalit child in his primary school and he was forbidden by the teacher to sit on a chair: he was told to sit on his bag on the ground. This is still a common method for the humiliation of a Dalit person. In 2006, a Dalit Panchayat leader, a village body head in Bihar, was abused for daring to sit on a chair in a meeting.

Every Dalit village-dweller greets you with the conventional "Jai Bhim", meaning Victory to Bhim, i.e. to Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar. However, blank faces will stare back if you pose a few questions about his achievements and it is because he is not included in the curriculum. We produced two books on his life, one for the children and one for the youth, and we disseminate them to our local libraries. But it is not as simple as it sounds. Children say that library volunteers do not do their duty: they are absent or they lock the books away because they are afraid that the books will be stolen. This is the mechanism of social activism: it is like “onion-peeling” - you successfully peel one layer, but then comes another one.

A shorter version of the article has been published in the 2011/19. issue of HVG, a Hungarian economic weekly.

Healthy food at an affordable price for all

Community garden in Louisville

Fresh Stop is a community-supported agricultural program run by the non-profit organization New Roots in Louisville, Kentucky. New Roots's mission is to build a just and thriving food system in the Ohio River Valley region. They do this through their Fresh Stop Model, which trains leaders residing in low-income neighborhoods to provide their neighbors with access to fresh, local and healthy food. The head of the project, Karyn Moskowitz, organizes for food justice.

What is the New Roots Fresh Stop model like?

Karyn: We adopted the model from an organization in Cleveland, called City Fresh, and tailored it to our own needs. The basic concept is that families, based on their income, pool their money and pay an amount of $12-$25 one week in advance to local farmers and in return receive fresh, healthy vegetables. Families decide for themselves how much they can afford to pay, and no one is turned away for lack of money or food stamps. Pooling their money enables the families to pay wholesale prices, which makes the food affordable for everyone. Farmers have not been enthusiastic to start or maintain farmers markets in low-income neighborhoods in Louisville. By pooling their money and guaranteeing payment, risk is eliminated for both eaters and farmers. Farmers simply drop the produce off and volunteers do the rest. Fresh Stops average 50-80 families per week or every other week. Families don't know in advance what vegetables will be delivered, but are assured of a beautiful bounty of whatever is in season. In 2012, New Roots has three churches who contribute their buildings to be the fresh food drop point. Volunteers come to the site to meet the farmers' trucks and to count and sort the produce. Each family gets an equal amount of what is delivered, i.e., two eggplants, five tomatoes, etc.

What is the self-interest of the farmers and the community?

Karyn: Farmers can be sure that their products will be sold that week, while community members receive fresh vegetables at an affordable price. But it needs a lot of organizing to make the supply and the demand meet. Earlier, farmers tried to set up markets in low-income neighborhoods, with little success. It was never a viable business as the demand was always too low. Therefore, we had to bargain with the farmers on the amount of money they want to see in advance which would make their participation worth it. The challenge for low-income people is to switch to buying fresh food which needs to be cooked from scratch. Prices are often lower than at supermarkets and much of the produce is chemical free and picked that day, so the taste is delicious. The $12 low-income shares must be balanced with a small percentage of higher-income $25 shares so that there is enough money to collectively buy a large amount of produce. Families only have to dedicate themselves to paying one week in advance, unlike other community-supported agricultural projects which require a large payment at the beginning of the growing season.

What kind of programs are linked to the Fresh Stop model?

Karyn: We hold community workshops about food sovereignty based on the popular education model, distribute recipes in the market, organize cooking workshops, and inform community members in a newsletter. Community members are involved in work groups: folks are responsible to put together the newsletter, collect the weekly amount of money, organize educational workshops or do the media work. I extend the network with new neighborhoods by interviewing several people who know the community well, like a pastor, and I follow up on their contacts and inform people about the program. New Roots is more than the distribution of healthy food. We want to recreate the food system, we want to create a food community.

Read it in Hungarian.