Ladies and Gentlemen…the estimable Fannie Mae Paxton…
Of Shifting Electorates and Failed Strategies for LGBT Equality; the dissonance between People (both queer and straight) of Color communities and the Gay Marriage Movement!
I have been watching the responses to the passage of Proposition 8 in California, Prop. 102 in Arizona, Prop. 2 in Florida and the Arkansas ballot initiative restricting the rights of unmarried couples to adopt children. I see a range of reactions and strategies emerging.
It seems Prop. 8 has become the rallying call for nationwide protest marches, leaving the ballots in Arkansas, Florida and Arizona to fall through the cracks.
More disturbing to me, as an immigrant of color, is an emerging set of responses that blame people of color communities (most often Black and Latino voters) for why these propositions passed and, more importantly, the failures of the organizers and their tactics.
While I can empathize with the pain that rises from losing [badly] in an election year that, in the same moment, ushered in a progressive sounding, bi-racial man to the first office of this nation, I cringe at the inability of the planners and the funders of the "Gay Marriage" movement to help mobilize their base to a broader understanding of their losses.
The unabated rise in racist rhetoric that I have been reading endlessly on blog posts of many (mostly Gay White male) bloggers, and Facebook notes and posts, thoroughly disturbs me. It serves to reiterate how the designers and the organizers of the "Gay Marriage" movement failed to understand the complex ways in which electoral politics in the US has been shifting, responding to large changes in the demographics of the US. States such as California, Florida and Arizona, that have seen a massive increase in the immigrant and people of color populations.
According to the U.S. Census, in 2006 about 35% of the California population were reported to be persons of Hispanic or Latino origin, 12.4% of Asian origin, 6.7% reported to be of black or African origin and 2.4% reported be of two or more races. This is a seismic shift from the late eighties and early 90's. A report from the California Governor's Office indicates increases in every ethnic group between 1990 and 2000, except a sharp 9% drop in the White Non-Hispanic population.
In Arizona the Hispanic population grew by a whopping 80% between 1990 and 2000 and now accounts for fully one quarter of Arizona's 5.1 million people. While in Florida, the Hispanic population went from 12.8% in 1990 to an estimated 20.8% in 2008, and the Black population from 13.7% to that of an estimated 16.6% for the same time period. These shifts in racial and ethnic make-up of these key states have produced very different kinds of voters over a period of time. A larger number of naturalized citizens and children of immigrants, and a more organized Black/African-American voters are now up for grabs by both the conservative and liberal parties and issues.
The "Conservative Evangelical Right", has historically deployed a range of "wedge issues" such as restricting women's access to birth control mechanisms, restricting the ability of undocumented immigrants to access health care and Gay marriage, to build a diverse popular base. In the late 80's and early 90's, responding to the fear of the "browning of the U.S.," several nativist groups, funded by large right-wing foundations like the Olin Foundation, launched several anti-immigrant ballots. Prominent among them was the passage of Proposition 187 in California (which was ultimately nullified by the California Supreme Court), and paved the way for Republicans to introduce a range of odious bills in the U.S. Congress that sought to restrict the rights of immigrants (both documented and undocumented) to access public benefits. The majority of these bills were lumped into the Welfare Reform and Immigration Reform Bills and passed.
The Right Wing, having built its base began to realize that with shifting demographics of key states like California, Florida and Arizona (the laboratory of border wars), they needed to build a base in the growing ethnic/immigrant community organizations and places of worship. The funders of Right Wing strategies sought out local outfits of the Conservative Family Research Council to mobilize ethnic organizations and churches along the lines of "traditional family values," something they knew would float well among communities ravaged by economic and educational disparities, desperately trying to hold on to their families of origin as their sole source of comfort.
The strategy paid off on two levels: 1.) it helped them to mask the economic agenda of their funders, which includes privatization of essential services and reduction of the care-giving functions of the state, and 2.) it helped to keep ethnic and immigrant communities fighting with communities fighting on other progressive issues such as pro-choice and sexual freedom. All tolled, the Right Wing gained from maintaining its hold over U.S. citizen populations (largely white and African-American) by pandering to their "nativist" sentiment, and taking a marked leap over its appeal to newly emerging ethnic/ immigrant communities.
Given the complex electoral strategy of the Right Wing, those of us who find ourselves on the left-progressive side of issues, ranging from health-care-taxes and state control over people's bodies, need to develop a sharper, more broader base, along with a newer array of organizing strategies. As a Queer, South-Asian, immigrant my destiny lies in the betterment of these communities. I cannot afford the luxury of heaping racist comments on my fellow people of color and immigrants, when they have been historically fucked over by largely White power-holding communities. Neither can I afford to separate myself from my Queer community (no matter how angry I get with them). My organizing is, therefore, complex, nuanced and sometimes at the messy crossroads that many communication strategies of national LGBT organizations do not address.
In my opinion the "Gay Marriage" movement, by choosing to locate its rhetoric and organizing within the individual's Right to Marry, has failed to mobilize a larger base, especially within people of color and ethnic/immigrant communities. The history of liberation and achievement of rights by people of color and the continuing struggles of immigrants, is a story of communal liberation. We did not struggle on the basis of individual rights; we struggled for and continue to fight for community rights. One might say that "Gay Marriage" is also about the rights of the Gay and Lesbian community, to which I assert, is still ideologically rooted in notions of "individualism." It is a notion deeply rooted in neo-liberal ideologies. A neo-liberal social ideology converts every individual into their own actualizing project, almost to the point of separating individuals from their communities. Under this regime, individuals, by becoming efficient risk managers of their own life, can take charge of their life, and live happily in a privatized, nuclear family. This privatized, nuclear family performs the essential care-giving functions of the state, and absorbs the financial and emotional losses.
Such notions of privatizing state's care giving functions and isolating the individual to become a self actualizing project is something I see a lot in the rhetoric of the "Gay Marriage" movement. Their appeal is to protect a very individualized Queer love. Quite frankly, it does nothing to question the location of the dividing line for deserving state's attention between the married vs un-married. I would bet you, if we broadened our debate to the rights of diverse kinds of families (e.g. extended families, adult siblings sharing a household, aging seniors sharing a household, multi-generational households) to access state benefits and protections, that would fly very well with immigrant and people of color communities. And our communities are filled with such families! We would also be able to move away from framing the debate as "sanctity of marriage" (a Right Wing dream come true!) to a more broader economic argument of reinstating and broadening the care-giving functions of the state.
Much of my post might seem to be the rantings of an armchair graduate student! But it is largely based on over 10 years of organizing within domestic violence movements, HIV/AIDS, immigrant rights, Queer people of color and mainstream LGBT movements.
As an immigrant rights organizer, when I sought out the solidarity of LGBT National and State Level organizations, the response I received was nothing short of pitiful! My numerous presentations on the issues of LGBT immigrants, the growth of immigrant populations in many states, and the subsequent need to work with LGBT immigrants at the state level, fell FLAT! The only issue related to immigration that got some attention was the rights of LGBT U.S. citizens to sponsor their immigrant romantic partners. As if, the rights of all the other immigrants could just fall off the road to liberation.
I worked to put together a national coalition of LGBT immigrant rights organizers that put out the first national Queer and Trans-gender Vision Statement on Comprehensive Immigration Reform. As LGBT immigrants, we boldly proclaimed our interconnections with the larger immigrant rights movement and challenged both the immigrant rights and the LGBT rights movement to extend their agendas. We received immense amount of supports from both national and local immigrant rights organizations and formations, while most of the national LGBT organizations did not sign on to the statement. They claimed that our principles were too broad and not solely focused on "Gay issues".
Instead of heaping allegations of "nativism and xenophobia" on them, I chose to look for the few, possible allies; interestingly they all came from LGBT anti-violence programs, Trans-gender and LGBT labor organizations and most equivocally from LGBT of color organizations. Signalling to me the sheer lack of imagination within the LGBT mainstream national organizations, that were and still are so busy with their narrow "Gay Marriage" agenda.
I have news for these national organizations! As long as you keep trekking this narrow, individualist road you will continue to be defeated!
(Image from Amigas Latinas, in Chicago)
Spot On about Prop 8
I'm sure (or I sure hope) this clip is making the rounds. When I heard it on Keith Olbermann's show last night I recognized it as perhaps the most direct and clear spoken case made by a heterosexual for the rights of Gay people to be married. Very moving and spot on.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Py1d_zHmUgY
Barack OBollywood!
http://www.youtube.com/v/sA-451XMsuY
Happy Obama
I slept in this morning.
We worked at CNN until the wee hours of the morning last night, watching and waiting for the ripe fruit of the last few states to fall into the big blue basket of the Democratic column and Obama's historic victory.
Even my big yellow dog didn't demand his Democratic victory walk until I was ready to stir this morning.
I walked out the front door of my building feeling the electricity in the air from last night, still. As I got to the corner, the crossing guard that protects the children going to that school I voted in yesterday from the onslaught of traffic at the crossroad of Classon and St. John's Place raised her voice and hand to everyone who passed and greeted them with a "Happy Obama!"
Happy Obama. Indeed.
It was amazing, gratifying. Brilliant.
It was also maddening.
In many ways, the same voters who made history with the triumphant election of Obama, also opted to vote discrimination into the California constitution. And it is hard for me to separate that from my celebration of Obama's well-deserved victory.
We turn one corner, and come to another. We drive a stake into the heart of one fearful discriminatory impulse in this country that, it seems, rarely does the right thing the first time, and raise up another strawman of fear and loathing on which to focus immature and unimaginative minds.
I don't want to take anything away from this beautiful moment. But I think it is as much a sign of how degraded the American ideal has become in the past eight to 20 years as it is a moment to celebrate. And I think one of the things this President is going to require of all of us is honest self-appraisal.
And I am ashamed and dejected in equal parts to my pride and elation this morning.
I know one thing in my bones: expectations are high for this new President. Everyone is hoping that he is, as they say The One. I read an interview with President Elect Obama in which he spoke about "Gay marriage" (a term I'm not entirely comfortable with) in which he said he believed that "marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman" and he wasn't willing to degrade that in any way.
How can such a brilliant man be so abysmally ignorant?
So, I have high expectations of this man, too. But I am also realistic in my belief that we are all bound to be disappointed in him in some way, at some point. But here is my pragmatic expectation: that someone, somewhere, somehow sits down with this brilliant and inspiring man and explain to him in painfully exquisite detail the gulf of difference between "holy matrimony" and "marriage."
Explain to him how the former is "church" and the latter is "state" and that somehow, in the same way that that unholy alliance once justified slavery and the oppression of Black people that we now justly celebrate the death of…is now being employed to hurt loving men and women, who pay taxes and raise children (or not) and are undeserving of having their civil rights, their human rights unjustly curtailed because of the superstitious tyranny of the majority.
Keep your "holy matrimony" President-elect Obama.
Holy Matrimony is a religious ritual. Marriage is a civil right.
Give LGBT people the same, equal, civilly righteous protections every other citizen in this country has under the sacred language of our constitution, no matter how many times the radical religious right wastes our time, money and souls in the pursuit of their fearful discrimination.
And we will have those rights, Mr. President-elect.
Yes…we will.
A Song for Election Results
I'm a bit speechless about the results. It's simply amazing.
So I won't try to over analyze and let two strong women speak for me.
Enjoy the next few days!
On the line…
I got up at 5:30 this morning, posted the Gay Wisdom mailing to the internet, put on some pants and a shirt, a jacket and a hat, leashed Brewster and took him out for his morning business. It was still dark out, though the earliest light was visible on the far reaches of the horizon.
The first thing I noticed was the odd number of people out at this normally quiet time in my busy, noisy neighborhood, Prospect Heights, in the shadow of the Brooklyn Museum. Usually I might see a car in the morning, or an early delivery truck. But not people. This morning, I counted a dozen people, coming from different directions, but all heading in the same direction, the Elijah Stroud Middle School on the corner of Sterling and Classon Avenue. I rushed Brewster through his walk, took him back home and left him with my partner and, grabbing a cup of coffee and my paper, I dashed out the door, and out on to the street.
Even more people out there now. I walked across the street and down the one block to Stroud elementary, and turned the corner to see the line. I have voted in this neighborhood for the past seven years, and the longest line I've ever seen was one snaking out from the gymnasium where the booths are, to the front door, about 20 feet away.
This morning, the line stretched past that point, out through the cast iron gates, turned to the left, and went nearly halfway down the New York City block street to Washington Avenue. It was 6:00 a.m. There were hundreds of people already on line, waiting patiently to cast their vote.
There was definitely excitement in the air. And more African-Americans than I had ever seen on any election day before. And young people. My neighborhood is very Caribbean (the largest Caribbean Day Parade goes right down Eastern Parkway, two blocks from my apartment), and becoming "hip" so there is a huge influx of young people seeking low(er) rents.
You could hear people talking ("wow…look at the line!" "Can you imagine what it's going to be like later?") And everyone I looked at was smiling. Not as much as they were smiling when they came out of the voting booth. Then they were positively beaming…men, women, young, old. Everyone I saw coming out of the booth had this almost beatific grin on their face. Some people actually came out singing. They greeted one another. Joked. They had a spring in their step. It was beautiful…this was the place to be!
The line moved pretty fast. From the time I got on line, until the time I was waiting outside the voting book was precisely one hour. But the line was always moving. My district had two voting booths (like the one pictured…something like 513 moving parts!) but one of them was already broken. So, that slowed things down a bit. But start to finish, one hour, reading Dreams From My Father on my Kindle, listening to Mozart and Stan Getz.
It was the best line I have ever been on.
WC78 – Table of Contents
Fall 2008
COMMUNITY
Hi Friends!
Below are excerpts from
our Fall 2008 issue on Community.
Please understand that we rely on the
support of subscribers to keep going.
So, subscribe today and keep the conversation going! Consider giving a gift subscription to your friends who could use some wisdom!
Columns
Opening Words "Communing" The Editors
Updrafts by Dan Vera
Owner’s Manual “Stocking the Cellar” by Jeff Huyett
PRAXIS “Community Trust” by Andrew Ramer
Departments
Opening Words "Communing" The Editors
Call for Submissions
Subscriber Information
Contribution Information
Taking Issue
Circle Voting: A White Crane Conversation with Murray Edelman
by Bo Young & Peter Montgomery
Queering Community: A White Crane Conversation with Chris Bartlett
by Christopher Murray
In Search of Gay Community by Bryn Marlow
The Gay Community In Crisis: Commentary on “Gay People at a Critical Crossroads: Assimilation or Affirmation” Thirty Years Later by Don Kilhefner
On Transnational Community Building by Debanuj DasGupta
With Death As My Witness by Timothy J. Kelleher
The Resurrection of Corpus Christi by Steve Susoyev
On The Angels of Light by James “Jet” Tressler
Speech And Debate by Bill Siksay
Building Community Through The Arts by Bob Barzan
A Community of 2 Malcolm Boyd
Welcome Home Brian Gleason
Culture Reviews
Steven LaVigne on Mark Matousek’s When You're Falling, Dive
Jay Michaelson on Eliezer Sobel’s The 99th Monkey
Steven LaVigne on by L. B. White’s Tales of a Zany Mystic
Steven LaVigne on John Simpson’s Murder Most Gay
Chris Freeman on Aaron Raz Link and Hilda Link’s What Becomes You
Bo Young on Theo Bleckmann’s Las Vegas Rhapsody and
Songs of Love and War, Peace and Exile
Subscribe today and keep the conversation going! Consider giving a gift subscription to your friends who could use some wisdom! If there's an article listed above that was not excerpted online, copies of this issue are available for purchase. Contact us at editors@gaywisdom.org
WC78 – Editors’ Note
Communing
Opening Words from the Editors
By Dan Vera and Bo Young
Bo: Once again we return to a subject that is really in our DNA
Dan: We return to a subject that seems connected to every other theme we’ve ever done.
Bo: From the start, this was a circle of friends who met in Bob Barzan’s living room to talk to one another
Dan: And the newsletter was Bob’s way of staying in touch and keeping that circle open to others outside that small group.
Bo: I think that’s something Toby Johnson carried on and that we have too. How poignant that as we went to press with this issue we received word of the passing of John Burnside, Harry Hay’s partner. Poignant because our own friendship and association arises out of spending time with the two of them at the Faerie sanctuary in Oregon doing the “Sex Magic” workshops and forming our own “Circle of Loving Companions.”
Dan: Maybe we need to provide a little background for our readers. Harry Hay was considered the father of the Gay Rights movement in the 1950s and later one of the founders of the Radical Faerie “development” (as he liked to call it). In the last decades of his life Harry began an annual series of weeklong workshops with his partner John Burnside.
Bo: God. Do we really need to tell people who Harry Hay is?
Dan: Surprisingly yes. I was struck at talking to a younger gay brother in his 20s who had no idea who Harvey Milk was. We were chatting about the amazing movie trailer online for the Harvey Milk film coming out in November and he looked at me and said “Who’s Harvey Milk?” I was frankly stunned for a second but then had to remind myself that we still come out of erasure and that schools still don’t teach out heroes or our history. None of them do or damn few so as to be negligible. But back to Harry and John. They had this idea of bringing small groups of Gay men together to see if it was possible for Gay men to work through a lot of our baggage and “teach each other” ways of being that were gentle and kind. A very elegant and romantic vision whose success can be seen in the work of that circle and in our friendship, and as you point out, in the nature of this magazine so many years later. John was the last one of that pair that called forth those circles and, in keeping with his training as a scientist, oversaw that experiment of heart and community.
Bo: For me, the interesting thing behind “Community” is to talk about the diversity in it. Not that we are all alike, but that we are a variety of people trying to live together, not a group of people who share every particular of our lives. I think Murray Edelman’s piece in this issue, about Circle Voting, speaks to this idea of putting ourselves in contact with people who don’t necessarily share our point of view about everything…and how we have all become more and more insulated from differing opinions, factionalized into only ever coming into contact with those with whom we agree. By the same token, this magazine has always tried to stay focused narrowly, and be a voice of, by and for Gay men. It’s that kind of paradox that always gets me…not either/or, but both/and.
Dan: I want to go back to Harry and John’s workshop. Without speaking too much about the particulars that experience for me was of being in a circle with fifteen other Gay men for the first time in my life (all strangers to me till that experience) and reaching the ability to share the most intimate experiences of oneself in a circle of absolute trust. Frankly I’m not sure I ever thought that kind of intimacy and trust was possible before that experience and certainly not among gay men. Beyond the basic internalized homophobia stuff, I realized I’d sucked in the “brokenness of gay people” to a point where I didn’t realize that we had the potential to heal each other and to hear each other to build a community. It was a convention shattering experience for me.
Bo: Interestingly, one of the central ideas of those workshops was withdrawing and sequestering ourselves from the “larger community” for a period so we could come back to the larger community with more clearly drawn boundaries of self, a stronger core definition. I think the real idea, and Murray talks about this in his interview, is that we are all part of many different communities…some overlapping, some that hardly come in contact and one of the central ideas of this publication was to provide a place where those differences could come together in conversation.
Dan: I especially enjoyed and appreciated Bryn Marlow’s essay in this issue about building community. The nuts and bolts experience of someone coming out and trying to figure out what it’s all about. I think most Gay men are left alone to try to figure it out for themselves with very few resources. Bryn’s piece offers that narrative. How do you navigate yourself in this strange new world and how for Darwin’s sake, HOW do you build community?
Bo: I love those first person accounts…it’s what we have always looked for here…the personal statement. And Malcolm Boyd’s “Community of Two” another one of our central ideas is that this is not meant to be the writings of experts and scholars here (though it seems we’ve gotten a reputation as “scholarly” but the shared opinions…and that out of that sharing of individual stories, a greater truth comes out. Not opinions but stories. The larger story of Community with a capital “C” out of many smaller communities. Just as we’ve always hoped that each issue might be used to stimulate those smaller groups like the one Bob started in his living room.
Dan: I think the importance of valuable symbols or metaphors for living is highly undervalued in our culture. So Marlow and Boyd’s pieces are so key to making sense of one’s life because part of that whole “making sense of oneself” has to do with finding the symbols that work in describing one’s place in the journey. So we need to drop the negative fallacious stereotypes and find those that are expansive enough to help us as we navigate through life.
Bo: Could you elaborate on what you think the positive symbols and metaphors might be?
Dan: I think we can fall into over complicating the whole thing. I’d like to think that a healthy community is one that allows you the room to explore your life, to examine why you are here and why “we” are here (a key question for Harry). In that regard the search for an examined life is a universal but Gay men start with having to get rid of a lot of excess garbage and some draconian baggage they had little to do with packing. So, for us it’s about clearing through a lot of this stuff and making sure we’re approaching our lives from a symbolic point that’s authentic and that can serve us for a long time. I think White Crane, at our brightest points, serves to be an instrument to connect people with some authentic wisdom, that is, the hard fought, “discerned” discovery about our lives. There are so few places for this in the world. And for those regarding gay life and experience precious few.
Bo: Not only clearing out the garbage, but also reconnecting with a history that has been hidden, too…I think that is actually, for me at least it was, a critical part of coming to terms with who I am, literally, “coming to terms,” finding old language, like Whitman and Carpenter, and Harry…but also one another. Certainly there are very few that are not about trying to assimilate, and become more like heterosexual people, fitting in, and spending and buying like a good little market niche I think as soon as we “buy in” to the idea that all we have is our economic power, we’re giving up a huge part of who we are as a community.
Dan: One way of looking at this metaphorically is the difference between thin and deep. That is, thin and deep culture. I know we’re small potatoes compared to the large publications that are out there targeting the “gay” community. But what we offer is a transmission of culture, a sharing of wisdom from writer to reader and from reader to writer. I’m okay if we’re “small potatoes” compared to the GLOBOGAYCORP media stuff. That’s thin competition. We are Russian blue potatoes compared with the kind of instant mashed potatoes in a box being peddled by most gay publications. It might just be a “community of 2,” of you and me in two different cities putting this together, but we’re connected to so many brothers around the world who want something richer and deeper. Who hunger for something more substantive, who know that life finds its glory in its discovery, and in our case, it’s recovery. That’s the basis of our community.
This is just an excerpt from this issue of White Crane. We are a reader-supported journal and need you to subscribe to keep this conversation going. So to read more from this wonderful issue SUBSCRIBE to White Crane. Thanks!
Bo lives in Brooklyn, NY a few blocks from a museum and
Dan lives in Washington, DC a few blocks from a Shrine. Dan's proud to report he has a new book of poetry out from Beothuk Books. His website is at www.danvera.com
You can write them at editors@gaywisdom.org
WC78 – Circle Voting – Murray Edelman
Circle Voting
A White Crane Conversation with Murray Edelman
By Bo Young and Pete Montgomery
Murray Edelman was the editorial director of Voter News Service, a consortium of ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, NBC, and the Associated Press that famously was involved in the 2000 Bush/Gore contest and the fate of the Florida vote. He helped develop the first exit polls and has conducted them for over 20 years. One of his legacies is the only continuous body of Gay/Lesbian voting data from the exit poll since 1990. Edelman received his BS in Mathematics from the University of Illinois and his PhD in Human Development from the University of Chicago in 1973. He has been the only openly Gay President of the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR), the largest and most influential body of survey research professionals.
While a graduate student in 1969 at the University of Chicago, he co-founded a Gay liberation group that became the powerful Liberation Movement in Chicago and the around the Midwest. In 1973 he moved to San Francisco where he co-founded the first modern day Faerie Circle with Arthur Evans. He led ground breaking intimacy and sexually weekends for Gay men and “a Different Kind of Night at the Baths” that Joseph Kramer has cited as one of his inspirations for Body Electric. Harry Hay invited Murray to present his work at the first Radical Faerie conference in 1979. He studied and taught an intensive meditation in the 80s and is currently president of the Naraya Cultural Preservation Council (www.ncpc.info) and is an elder in that Naraya community, which he has been part of since 1991.
Bo Young and White Crane Board member, Pete Montgomery, sat down for a discussion with Edelman about a current project he is working on, Circle Voting.
Bo: Tell us about Circle Voting Murray.
Murray: Circle Voting is voting as a community concerned about the future: the environment, education, our health, our rights, Some people follow politics a lot, like some people follow sports, while others could care less about politics. But when only half of the community votes in the community’s interest we all lose. I use “circle” because each of us is part of many communities but the principle is the same. In Circle Voting, those that are politically motivated encourage others of like mind to vote and share their information and vote choices so that the community has the biggest impact.
Bo: Why the emphasis on sharing information?
Murray: From many years of political discussions with my spiritual friends, I’ve learned that many people, including two important teachers to me, are confirmed nonvoters and many others are occasional voters. Basically they don’t want to put any energy into the fear, anger and melodrama that is so much a part of politics. I think that is a good reason to not spend much time on politics. But I don’t think it is a good enough reason to not vote. So Circle Voting can serve as a shortcut for users to vote in their own interest in minutes.
Peter: How does this sharing of information work?
Murray: It is common for organizations to endorse candidates. Sometimes the endorsements take the form of a voter guide and sometimes it is a palm card to be taken into the voting booth.
In Circle Voting, we will collect endorsements from organizations as well as encourage politically motivated users to enter their own recommendations and the reasons for them. The user recommendations would be only available to friends of the user, while the organizational ones are already publicly available.
Users will then be able to create a Council of Advisor from like-minded organizations and friends and by entering their locality, create their own personal voter’s guide from these endorsements summarized for every race on their own ballot. And then they can click down for the reasons.
Bo: Where can a reader find Circle Voting?
Murray: At www.circlevoting.com. You can see plans for the personal voters guide. I hope to have an abbreviated version online for this election. The other tools, such as registering to vote and applying for an absentee ballot will be online by the time this is published. I am hoping to be an application on Facebook, but that might have to wait until next year. Perhaps one of your readers could conjure up a Facebook developer for me?
Peter: Is this like Move On or other organizations of like minded people?
Murray: Circle Voting is inspired by the past successes of the Religious Right and labor unions. And the success of the Religious Right is way out of proportion to their numbers because they have mobilized the less motivated voters to turn out consistently and in state and local elections. They put a lot of pressure on their members to vote and provide Voting Guides to identify the good “Christian” candidates.
MoveOn, like the Religious Right and labor unions, make endorsements. They also raise money and often help in the campaigns. Circle Voting does not make endorsements. It only collects them. There is no fundraising and involvement in the campaigns. There is really no organization here; just enough to keep the website going.
Peter: Is it a voter education process or a get out the vote drive?
Murray: It is more of a “bring out your own” voter drive. Bring them to Circle Voting where they can get help in registering or applying for an absentee ballot and then later get your recommendations and have a dialogue about their reluctance to vote and suggest new ways to look at voting.
Currently, voting is seen as a private act and I think that is conducive to many people not voting in their own interests. Voter education puts the burden on the voter and I think it is too much of a burden especially since the candidate do everything they can to confuse the voter.
We don't know how most software works, but we know people that can help us. We don't see every movie, but we know people of similar taste that see movies. Similarly we can make votes in our best interest by relying on like minded friends and save a lot of time and energy.
Bo: I'm interested by the idea that people are voting against their personal interests…I was speaking to a single mother the other day, from Texas, and she was ready to vote for John McCain even though, as we spoke, it became clear that this was against her own personal interests….so how would Circle voting work in this one-on-one setting?
Murray: If she was basing her choice from following the news etc, it CV wouldn’t mean much. But many voters don't have much information when they vote. That’s why negative ads are so effective. This person might see summarized the voting preference and reasons from people in her circle of like mind. She could see the endorsements from groups that represented her interests. This could all be presented in a nice easy
Peter: A quick look at Circle Voting makes me think it could be especially useful for down-ballot races – so many people, including me, show up and know next-to-nothing about a school board race, or judge – but if I saw how what some neighborhood activists thought, that would help shape my thinking."
Murray: Right, Peter. I got this idea because in local election in New York, I always call a friend that was very active in local politics and ask him who to vote for. Circle Voting could become very important in a state or local elections where a few additional votes can make a difference in zoning or a position on the school board. I am looking forward to the New York City primary in September.
Peter: Could you articulate the spiritual principles underlying Circle Voting ?
Murray: I’ve seen so many times that when we come from a place of an open heart and connection with spirit, we see abundance and possibilities everywhere. When we come from fear and anger, we see limitations and create more divisions. Politics today thrives on the latter, possibly more so now than ever.
Many avoid voting for this reason. But haven’t you found that which you avoid, usually comes back to haunt you? You know, what Jung call “shadow.” There is a parallel here. It really doesn’t matter if 30% or 40% vote. What matters who wins, and mathematically a non-vote is the same as a vote for the winner. So, for example, that non-vote, in a local race, could have helped elect that official that just caved in on an important zoning issue involving some land that you love.
I believe when we focus on our hopes and dreams, we draw upon limitless energy. My love of Mother Earth strengthens me. When we can tie voting to what matters to us, we will want to talk to people about it, we will want to vote and we will want to encourage others to vote. A current choice of candidates is just a short term choice, and not much more than that. But, it is still an important action.
So Circle Voting is a way to come into balance with politics. In a sense, take responsibility for our actions and inactions. The important thing is informed voting, not some old idea of “getting involved” in politics. It only needs to be a few minutes of time, but it is a lot better use of time than even a few minutes of recycling. And it is another way to act in community, by supporting the judgment and research of people of like mind.
Bo: OK…I’ll ask the question we all hear: But does one vote really matter that much?
Murray: In our spiritual work, we’ve seen the ripple effect, how one person’s changes affects others. Each reader that comes into new consciousness around voting will affect many others .and if they pass on the link to CircleVoting.com so much the better. So you could live in New York and effect votes in a key state like Virginia just from the ripple.
And we know the power of attraction: the energy and intention that we put out brings us what we need. In politics, it is the same. It is not an accident that for the most part conservative candidates are elected where there are conservative voters. Green party candidates appear where there is support for them. But bringing out our vote especially in local elections where only 5% to 10% vote, we could encourage a lot of new and creative candidates to run.
Bo: It sounds almost like you are suggesting a new kind political consciousness.
Murray: In a sense it is. It is putting elections in their proper place. We must participate at every voting opportunity, but we don’t have to do much more than that. And we don’t have to necessarily agree with each other. If this consciousness were to grow in a big way, it could really affect the political system. You’ve probably heard “Money is the mother’s milk of politics.” It is even more true today with our first billion dollar presidential campaign. Money is important because it allows the candidate to control their message especially close to the election and to bring out their vote and depress the other candidate’s with negative campaigning.
As more and more people avoid all this misinformation, and yet still vote regularly, the money will have less impact. New candidates, not beholden to their large contributors will have a chance.
Bo: You mentioned something to me in an earlier conversation…a factoid about how many people say they intend to vote…and then how many people actually vote…"
Murray: Most people I talk to say, "All my friends vote.” So they don't need this…
Bo: I would certainly say that.
Murray: But here is some hard data: In late October 2004, 81% in a CBS News/NY Times poll said that they would "definitely vote" or they had already voted." Yet the comparable number of actual voters in 2004 is 55%. That means 26% were sure they would vote but didn’t. And I didn’t include the ones that said they would "probably vote".
And let’s not bury the lead here. Once we remove those ineligible to vote, we end up with 40% did not vote in the highest turnout election in decades. And the number is even higher among those making under 100K and also those 18-25. Know any people like that in your own circle?
Another survey factoid: The previous number was about intention to vote. How about what they remember about voting? In July 2008, 86% in a NBC/Wall St journal Poll said they voted in November 2004." Now, 31% of the people said that they actually voted, when they didn’t really vote.
Bo: So is this one of those 'telling the pollster what they want to hear’? Or what the respondent thinks is the "right" answer?" “Good” citizens vote so I'm going to say I voted, even if I didn't.
Murray: Perhaps. They are telling this to a stranger; that they did the socially approved behavior. But what do they tell friends? How many people do you know who advertise that they didn't vote? I submit only the confirmed nonvoter.
And given my own informal survey in different spiritual groups, I suggest that each of your readers is surrounded by nonvoters in their own circles, perhaps as many as half of them. What a great place to start if you care about the environment, etc. And in a state and a local election where the turnout is much lowers, there are lots more nonvoters in our own circles.
Bo: So Circle Voting is a kind of "focused peer pressure"?"
Murray: It is using the power of social networks. There is research showing that people are more likely to quit smoking if those in their social networks have quit and that they are more likely to gain weight if those in their social networks gained weight. The point is we are linked in many ways — obviously not an original thought — but our interdependence is growing and voting can and should reflect this more. This could be used to access other viewpoints. It is up to the person to pick those that they want to hear from."
Peter: So part of the power is the connection — an individual, in a circle, is also the center of his or her own circle, etc. How the 125 people I'm attached to on LinkedIn gives me access to something like 100,000 friends of friends, etc, etc.
Murray: The Religious Right clearly knows the importance of mobilizing their members, especially those that are not involved politically. And yes, Peter, that is how it could grow. The catch is getting it moving.
Bo: In a way, isn't this how the Obama campaign has been functioning? They've sort of plugged into the internet and used it in brand new ways to network…
Murray: Yes. Obama is using the net really well.
Bo: Would you call what he's doing "circle campaigning"?
Murray: You could probably say Obama is doing that. The difference is that his people are pushing his brand and that is important in getting out his vote.
Bo: Wouldn't I or Pete be pushing our set of ideas in my circle vote in the same way?
Murray: My vision is that the networks in Circle Vote could persist from election to election and promote progressive ideas. I think the approach is different. In “Obama-land, someone would be saying “Vote for Obama — I'll help you.” In Circle Voting that individual would be saying, “We are of like mind. It is in our interest that we vote regularly. Here are my thoughts. I hope other friends will offer you theirs.
Bo: I think the interesting thing is to get people out of the immediate circle of "people who agree with me" and bring them into contact with new ideas. It seems to me one of the biggest social problems we are facing, something that seems benign, is that we all tend to read the papers and watch the programs and listen only to the ideas with which we already agree. Everyone on the spectrum is constantly seeking affirmation of their own point of view…how does Circle Voting move people past that…or does it?"
Murray: I agree there is a lot of segmenting of thought.
Peter: Even among my circle of lefty friends we have our annual and quadrennial debates about voting for the Democrat versus voting Green or sitting it out because the two major parties are both corporate, etc… This could create online space for some of those debates…of course so do a lot of blogs.
Bo: This whole idea is an interesting hybrid of your professional work and your personal work …can you talk a little about that?"
Murray: Let me answer by telling you more about how this vision came to me. I was at a Faerie fire after the Naraya at Wolf Creek sanctuary. Earlier that day, I had given a talk about my early Gay liberation days and how we took chances and followed our hearts. We had visions, but none of them were very accurate. But something wonderful came from our courage and insight. And we didn't know what at the time.
So at this fire, they were doing a very typical Faerie thing of trashing the government. For different things and there is no shortage of things to find fault with, of course. And at one point I started a chant "Think bigger, think bigger…" They really got into it, as Faeries do, and then they asked "What should we do?" And I said "vote” …and it caused a great deal of chaos. And in that chaos, I saw how much I had to say about how things really work and that is what I've been working on since."
It was like my whole life was integrating before me — all my Gay liberation, Marxist days, along with all my years of in politics and media and surveys. The struggle has been to articulate this and create a place where people can see it working. So Circle Voting could energize our community to use their interlocking networks, where there are some that really know politics to inform and encourage the very many that just don't care." And as I worked with it, I saw that could apply to many communities.
In my earlier days, I thought that a vision was more of an endpoint, a solution. But this energy just keeps propelling me into some of my more difficult spaces, like being articulate. This interview process has helped my clarify things a lot. But it has also been very difficult for me. So my advice to people looking for a vision: Be careful what you ask for.
Bo: If I have one problem with people in general it is that I think a lot of them would often rather sit around and complain than act. Because acting runs the risk of failure. So nothing happens, but a lot of complaining and kvetching and everyone gets to feel catharsis and they go home. You're calling on people to act and to interact"
Peter: I'm now seeing the spirit and ethic of the heart circle in your proposal. Creating an online circle and speaking from the heart — and in ways that help people decide how to take meaningful action.
Murray: Yes and I just need a few people to buy into it. Because it really is easy. We need people to cast votes in their interest. We don't need them to read and understand “politics" per se. That is a losing cause.
Bo: I know personally it is one of the reasons I withdrew from my active political involvement. Politics is, by its nature, a win-lose proposition. Someone always wins. Someone always loses. You’re asking that people find win-win communities…where shared interests and shared objectives benefit everyone in the community. In a way…no, in fact, it's co-opting what the mega-churches and the radical religious right has been perfecting for a decade or more…and they’ve shown that it works.
Murray: Yes. In a sense it is empowering people by using existing relationships of community. There is a similarity to the religious right, but that is still top down. I can’t see the progressives I know acting top down. There is a kind of anarchism in this in that circles can form in different ways in different times. There is no one calling the shots here. Water is finding its own level. Circle Voting would empower people in voting by using their existing relationships of community and create a synergy with those knowledgeable about politics with those of like mind but not that concerned or immediately involved. Independents probably experience this in general elections.
Bo: What would you like to see readers of this conversation do then? Presumably people reading are likely to be "like-minded.” And what attracted me to your idea is that White Crane has always set as its mission "a deeper relationship with yourself and your community" and you are inviting people to do just that in a very pragmatic way"
Murray: I would ask readers to check out www.CircleVoting.com. Give me feedback and join the circle. The next step would be send emails to like-minded people in their own circles, encouraging them to check it out. It could be one email or a series of up to three.
The first email could also encourage registration, saying that 10% of the people think they are registered. But they aren’t. And many don’t register because of the mistaken belief that immediate become eligible for jury duty. A second email could offer this Circle Voting as a place to get an absentee ballot. A third email, close to the election, could offer the personal voting guide (if available) and encouragement to vote.
Bo: Aren’t you concerned about creating a lot of spam from this?
Murray: I brought that up with my computer person and he said that was a good problem to have and there will be ways to avoid that.
Bo: Anything else?
Murray: Yes, take stock of your own voting behavior. Do you vote in all local elections? Do you take the time to make an informed vote? And could you imagine what would happen if enough people really did make informed votes on the issues of the future that really mattered to them?
For more about Circle Voting visit www.circlevoting.org