I learned through years of hands-on practical experience that both a public administrator and an activist doing organizing are shaped almost entirely by their personal political training or lack of it. When an organization or someone hasn’t been trained in co-structured organizing of affected people, they end up inventing methods on the fly. That improvisation might work in the short term, but it rarely produces consistent, trauma‑informed, or scalable practices. We need better standards and more mutual agreements to have communication before non-impacted individuals and groups self-choose to advocate for affected people. I’d like more organizers to recognize that the absence of uniform networking policies is a core structural problem. Without shared standards, the wrong people often rise to leadership, not because they’re the most capable, but because they’re the loudest, the most emotional, or simply the first to step forward. Clear, transparent policies would shift leadership toward people who are prepared, accountable, and aligned with community calls for redress. We can all help by insisting that organizers set up communication‑exchange agreements before engaging victims or potential victims. These agreements protect people, set expectations, and prevent the kind of ad‑hoc, emotionally reactive organizing that leads to confusion, traumatization, and poor outcomes. When communities demand these agreements, they raise the standard for everyone involved.
Comments
Post a Comment