From: Joseph.Miller@f1055.n261.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Miller)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Re: nfb bbs censorship??
Date: 28 Jul 92 17:04:54 GMT
Reply-To: Joseph.Miller@f1055.n261.z1.fidonet.org
Organization: FidoNet node 1:261/1055 - The Keeping Room, Baltimore MD
X-Fidonet: Blink Talk Conference

Index Number: 23404

[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

CC>Maybe none of these things are true, but until one of the organizations
CC>actively *cares* what we think, I think there will remain many of us out
CC>here who could be contributing energy to the NFB or some other
CC>organization who can't be bothered to give it the time of day any more
CC>than it can be bothered with what we think or believe.

The politics of blindness is really no different than any other
politics.  There are people willing to join a political party and "get
their hands dirty" trying to express their opinions and bring others
around to believing what they believe.  Then there are those who are
waiting for some magical organization to come into existence that
reflects their beliefs.  When that organization arrives, they'll join
they say.

It's a fantasy.  The NFB and the ACB exist because there are people
willing to do the work to maintain them.  No reasonable person in either
organization thinks that the organization is perfect.  But neither
organization is improved by people sitting on the outside.

CC>Sure, NFB'ers know about the ACB's stance on them, but do you really
CC>know about (or care about)the perception of the NFB amongst we, the
CC>non-alligned blind population?  Articles like "Blind Loyalty" do
CC>contribute to our perception of the NFB, and, for that reason, alone,
CC>ought to warrant calm, rational counter-discussion.  Perhaps you
CC>truly believe no one is listening.  I'm here to tell you that
CC>ain't so.  Some of us are watching closely, hoping to see what
CC>we're looking for some day-- in the NFB or anywhere else.

The NFB is criticized for being "dogmatic" and its members are
criticized for toeing the "party line."  Or, using the same examples
that produce those two descriptions, on could call the NFB "organized"
and its members "disciplined."  I prefer the latter.

Contrary to what's been said here and elsewhere, no one has ever been
thrown out of the organization for simple disagreement with the
leadership.  There are those who made their disagreements very public
and have tried to bring pressure from outside the organization to change
policy.  This is a violation of the Constitution of the organization
and, if you think about it, what could be less democratic in an
organization than trying to influence its members by bringing pressure
from outside its membership?

Within the organization there is lively debate on almost every topic
imaginable.  But the debate stops at the meeting house door.  If an
organization is to have any clout, especially an organization that
represents such a numerical minority in society, it must be able to
speak with one voice.  It serves no useful purpose for an individual
member to break publicly with the leadership over a single issue when
there are many other issues with which they agree.

There are those who can't, or don't want to, understand that dissent
for its own sake is no virtue.  Or that effective leadership requires
willing followers.  No leader that strays too far from his flock will
remain a leader for long.  Dr. Jernigan has been a leader in the
organized blind movement for four decades.  He's going to have his
detractors and his supporters.  You can tell a lot about a man by the
friends--and the enemies--he makes.

I hope you and others with open minds will consider what I've said here.
The organized blind movement would be stronger with your input and your
participation.  You won't always get your way, but you'll be able to
take pride in the positive things that get accomplished.
___
 X OLX 2.2 X Hello, I am part number ||X||||X||X||X||

--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!261!1055!Joseph.Miller
Internet: Joseph.Miller@f1055.n261.z1.fidonet.org