Terry, many thanks for this detailed clarification of my fragmentary and messed-up recollections! Mark On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 10:14:53AM -0800, Terry Goodman wrote: >On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Mark S Bilk wrote: > >>Hi Wendy, >> >>EC is Elections Committee, headed by (as far as I know), >>Carolyn Birden and maybe Patty Heffley. > >The Concerned Friends of WBAI Elections Committee existed in 2001 and >2002 and was associated with the Coalition for a democratic >Pacifica-NY. Its proposal was notable for reserving half of the staff >governance seats to paid staff. The membership of this group were >identified along with other endorsers of the proposal at >http://www.wbai.net/elec/elec_prop_7-18-01.html. > >There have since been one or two WBAI Elections Committees formed to >assist in the local delegate elections, and Carolyn Birden is >currently chair of the PNB Elections Committee, which is a committee >of the Board, not a faction (but also includes Patty Heffley as a >member), so Mark's use of "EC" to identify whatever factions Carolyn >Birden and Patty Heffley are in is especially confusing. > >>JUC is the Justice and Unity Campaign. > >The WBAI Justice and Unity Campaigns were the delegate election >efforts of what was the Unity Caucus, a New York faction with allies >at some other stations, most notably KPFK and WPFW: >http://justiceunity.org. > >>EC's goal was to modify the >>Pacifica Foundation Bylaws to enable elections of >>officials/representatives at various levels by listeners. > >The Coalition for a democratic Pacifica was concerned with modifying >the bylaws to allow listeners and staff to elect governance >representatives, in support of the aims of the Listeners lawsuit. The >Concerned Friends of WBAI Elections Committee was a subgroup offering >specific proposals. The CdP-NY has probably always received >significant funding from Steve Brown, since this group reportedly >handled Roger Manning's travel expenses to chronicle Pacifica board >meetings. CdP-Berkeley is likely funded through Bay Area donations. >The word "officials" above seems misleading. > >>I think JUC initially wanted them elected by the votes >>of various social activist organizations -- Black, >>Hispanic, Feminist, Gay, Labor, etc. -- but the selection >>of, and apportionment of representation to, such >>organizations proved to be conceptually and logically >>impossible to do in a manner that insured fairness. > >The WBAI Unity Caucus, a precursor to JUC, originally argued for a >constituency model of representation along the lines Mark suggests. >The WBAI Committee for a Unified Membership argued against the >constituency model, but in favor of a diversity requirement in the >bylaws. In my opinion, though far less democratic, the constituency >model was more legal. > >>The JUC then pushed for a quota or affirmative action [AA] >>system in the election process that would elect people >>who were proportionally representative of the ethnic >>mix of listeners in each broadcast area. > >A slight oversimplification, but approximately correct. > >>The EC was dead set against AA, claiming that it was >>illegal, and eventually accusing the JUC of trying to >>prevent elections (democratization) entirely. > >Multiple groups were formed on opposing sides of the mandated >diversity issue in the bylaws struggle during the years of the iPNB, >but I think that the old EC was dissolved by then. May of the same >individuals were involved in Listeners and Staff for Progressive >Elections NY: http://www.list-prog.org/. > >>The EC's >>accusation would have been more believable had it not been >>for an incident that happened years before, in which >>Rafael Renteria, representing a West Coast Pacifica >>listener organization, journeyed to New York to meet and >>form an alliance with the EC. However, when (according >>to him) he suggested that the EC do outreach to people >>of color, they balked, and he came away with the belief >>that they were not interested in bringing minorities into >>Pacifica. > >Mr. Renteria is disposed to characterize tactical disagreements in >these terms, so the actual reasons for the failed alliance are likely >somewhat different than his recollection of them. > >>In any case, AA did not make it into the Bylaws. And >>prior to one of the subsequent elections, Steve Brown, a >>millionaire from selling crap on TV, gave the EC a lot >>of money, maybe $5,000, to do a partisan mailing to the >>list of Pacifica (maybe just WBAI) subscribers. > >The delegate slate in New York organized in opposition to the Justice >and Unity Campaign was LIST-PROG, which included Steve Brown. Funding >for the mailing, which went only to WBAI subscribers, was from the >LIST-PROG candidates and their supporters, who held several >fund-raisers for this purpose. Steve Brown probably contributed more >than his share, as he usually does, and he did do much of the work of >preparing the mailing, since that's his area of expertise, but giving >him full credit is unfair to the many others who contributed >significantly to this joint effort. > >>Since, >>as I explained in a previous post, Steve Brown had twice >>collaborated with known Zionists to try to stop Pacifica >>from reporting on the atrocities being perpetrated by >>the Israelis against the Palestinians after 9-11, one >>might conclude that the EC are rather right-wing, being >>anti-minority and having a pro-Israel connection. > >Neither the CF-WBAI-EC nor LIST-PROG can accurately be characterized >as right-wing or anti-minority. There are both Pro-Israel and >pro-Palestinian sentiments within Pacifica and the left. Identifying >Zionist and anti-Zionist factions can be useful in analysis due to the >major influence of Israel on US foreign policy, but this divide >doesn't exactly map to left-wing and right-wing in domestic politics >or in Pacifica politics. There is also a tendency for such an analysis >to ignore or mischaracterize the Pro-Israel, anti-Zionist contingent >and the anti-Israel, anti-Palestinian contingent. > >>Those are my recollections, which may get me reamed by one >>or both sides. Except that Pam has now removed and thereby >>silenced the JUC's most vocal supporter on the list, >>Fred Nguyen, as well as Jim DeMaegt, whose affiliation, >>if any, I'm unsure of, except that Carolyn Birden recently >>smeared him, so he may be with JUC. > >Fred Nguyen's hobby is attacking JUC opponents, so he's nominally in >their camp; but I think he has always been a bit too independent to >submit to their discipline, and his racial rhetoric, though similar, >actually has a rational subtlety that he keeps well-disguised behind >the offensive over-generalizations, because he has special meanings >for his terms of racial discourse. > >Jim DeMaegt is not JUC - he has deep distain for all Pacifica factions >and independents, since few are openly sympathetic to revolutionary >communist ideals. We're all posers in his eyes. > >--Terry Goodman, KPFK Delegate > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Clean water saves lives. Help make water safe for our children. http://us.click.yahoo.com/YNG3nB/VREMAA/E2hLAA/xYTolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> New Pacifica Working Group http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica 'Save Our Stations!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewPacifica/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: NewPacifica-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/