Neighborhoods and Diverse Networks

During that session, I asked the group whether or not they wanted the truth. In asking first, I was granted permission to adhere to a neighborhood-based point of view v. a nonprofit/social sector point of view. In doing this, the space for conversation or exposition (as it was mostly a monologue due to the time contraints), was open to express an objective perspective factoring in race, gender and nationality issues as experienced in relationship to government and the social sector. From that standpoint, I shared the following points:

1. The centralization of internet based interactions as the way things are done or expressed is not the experience of working class people. For those of us who are working class, an ingrained fact of our lives is that our bodily safety is always at issue, so our face to face relationships is where our security and survival are anchored. Therefore, it continues to be necessary for working class people to know people by their actions, not just by their words.

2. The worst thing that has happened to the nonprofit sector has to do with the professionalization of the field, which further impedes the development, identification and inclusion of diverse leadership along the lines of race and class.

3. The truth is that the nonprofit sector uses the framework of "participation" as a way to capitalize of indigenous ideas and critiques to keep itself in business while oftentimes failing to give due credit, share the wealth and fully integrate itself in the patterns and the strengths of diverse networks.

4. Racial profiling has left an indelible mark on police/community relationships. Making that right is bigger than a strategy or a grant. It implies deep community processes that needs to be supported and weathered by the leadership of the institutions that have perpetrated these unfair practices on entire neighborhoods. Just because we have a change of heart or strategy now, does not mean that the community's behavioral patterns will change on command; quite the contrary. It will take a lot of forgiving to see the police as partners.

5. Schools, the same. If the school's language does not meet the community's, it will continue to speak its language regardless of the schools... this means that people will not show so they don't have to experience disempowerment from yet another institution that is supposed to serve them. Parent engagement has to do with become a seamless part of community, language included.

6. Cronyism in city government or favoritism, contributes to the lack of transparency in government. If communities/diverse networks/whatever you want to call it cannot trust the fair and just administration of government, our capacity to witness social capital and partake will be diminished, as these networks will continue to operate underground.

7. Ultimately, the issue of racism is front and center here. You cannot expect the batterer in a family violence situation to be the one that helps the victims get through dealing with the trauma that has been created... at some point you need other people in the situation that can guide that process....especially if the batterer keeps claiming that the battering was not real, or not that bad, or not going to happen any more.....

8.There are a few core assumptions that I have embraced as a result of my 20 year's worth of trying to figure out how to live and thrive as a queer woman of color who is an immigrant and an orphan:

I. Communities do the best they can, always.

II. Systems must connect with communities (not the other way around)

III. We need bold solutions generated by dialogue, transparency, courage and hard work... even at the expense of nonprofit organizations or city structures that are strong by not very effective....