Agree with the statement “that the democratic process as practiced in our UU congregations and the UUA is the problem.” Addressing Diversity, Equity and Inclusion via a truly democratic process is a model worth striving towards.
Systems exist to get people to engage in repetitive behavior. That is the source of both their power to do good and their resistance to change. Systems change, it seems to me, when they are led to see that change is the best or only way they can remain what they most truly are. That insight is almost always very painful, and most of the time it comes too late.
Are you suggesting that “the problem” is the democratic process? Current critics of the UUA contend that the 5th Principle is being abandoned on the altar of “progress”.
Let’s see. The “Democratic process” in the UU faith has been weaponized repeatedly to hold up progress and ensure that a small minority gets to air the same — sometimes harmful — grievances again and again, such as by sending the same speakers to the Con line on every issue, or by using their knowledge of procedures (especially when Robert’s Rules were still in play) to stall debate by use of the procedural mic to nitpick semicolon placement in the Bylaws.
A system which maintains power among those with specialized knowledge isn’t a just system.
The model of democracy in the US is similarly used to ensure that those with power stay in power.
A congregation that uses a strong, agile covenant to actively engage conflict and create consensus, which accepts that conflict is a healthy part of human behavior, and that ensures that progress lies in the actual majority opinion rather than being stalled by a vocal few… is going to actually make the changes needed to live our values.
Oh, and when the needs of everybody are taken into consideration rather than only the needs of the folks holding the official or unofficial power… that’s another one. Don’t try to make any decisions about buildings and grounds unless you’ve got Dave on board.
Newcomers, young people, Queer & Trans folk, IBPOC folk, disabled people, children, and others who aren’t in the “in” crowd don’t get heard. That isn’t democracy. And it ensures change will never happen because changes almost never benefit the people in power.
So, Rev Kimberley might not be implying that the democratic process as practiced in our UU congregations and the UUA is the problem, but it is.
And the people who are out there shouting about how the Fifth Principle is being abandoned, interestingly enough, are the same people who weaponize the system to ensure their opinion gets heard more frequently than others, who stall debate by nitpicking language or arguing procedure, who fear accountability. They benefit from the system as it stands and they fear change. Hilariously they’re mostly the Boomers who were out protesting Vietnam. “The Times, They Are A-Changing.” It’s sad we have to remind the very people that song was written about.
Covenant is truly the answer, but the UU system fails when members of the congregation don't understand or feel bound by covenant. The good of the whole rather than individual's
right to have things their own way must be the guiding principle, and this flies in the face of the individualistic approach ("anything goes" and "lowest common denominator") of the UU movement. We need glue and guardrails. One approach may be a deep dive into the Seven Principles.
I learned how one person can disrupt consensus during the anti-nuclear movement in the 1960s and 70s. Sometimes I thought that one individual who broke consensus might be a plant from the opposition, but usually it was a random white male trying to assert power for the sake of being seen. I learned it again during the early days of the Trump administration when right-wing/Nazi groups were trying to disrupt gatherings for racial equity and immigrant rights. When we talked about using the principles of non-violence as taught by Martin Luther King, many participants said "yes, I'll be non-violent, until they attack children" or seniors, or another group.
The key to changing systems is to help people learn to trust each other even when things are not going the way they think they should. Each of us has to put aside our own beliefs and trust the whole. Sometimes it may mean that mistakes will be made, and that is all right. To trust is to believe in something that cannot be seen, that logic tells you may be a mistake. I think that is one of the ways to describe faith.
Agree with the statement “that the democratic process as practiced in our UU congregations and the UUA is the problem.” Addressing Diversity, Equity and Inclusion via a truly democratic process is a model worth striving towards.
Systems exist to get people to engage in repetitive behavior. That is the source of both their power to do good and their resistance to change. Systems change, it seems to me, when they are led to see that change is the best or only way they can remain what they most truly are. That insight is almost always very painful, and most of the time it comes too late.
Thank you for this. It’s so good to have a reminder about the importance of covenant.
Thank you so much for this, Kimberley. It is so timely right now both in my congregational work and in my continental work.
Are you suggesting that “the problem” is the democratic process? Current critics of the UUA contend that the 5th Principle is being abandoned on the altar of “progress”.
Let’s see. The “Democratic process” in the UU faith has been weaponized repeatedly to hold up progress and ensure that a small minority gets to air the same — sometimes harmful — grievances again and again, such as by sending the same speakers to the Con line on every issue, or by using their knowledge of procedures (especially when Robert’s Rules were still in play) to stall debate by use of the procedural mic to nitpick semicolon placement in the Bylaws.
A system which maintains power among those with specialized knowledge isn’t a just system.
The model of democracy in the US is similarly used to ensure that those with power stay in power.
A congregation that uses a strong, agile covenant to actively engage conflict and create consensus, which accepts that conflict is a healthy part of human behavior, and that ensures that progress lies in the actual majority opinion rather than being stalled by a vocal few… is going to actually make the changes needed to live our values.
Oh, and when the needs of everybody are taken into consideration rather than only the needs of the folks holding the official or unofficial power… that’s another one. Don’t try to make any decisions about buildings and grounds unless you’ve got Dave on board.
Newcomers, young people, Queer & Trans folk, IBPOC folk, disabled people, children, and others who aren’t in the “in” crowd don’t get heard. That isn’t democracy. And it ensures change will never happen because changes almost never benefit the people in power.
So, Rev Kimberley might not be implying that the democratic process as practiced in our UU congregations and the UUA is the problem, but it is.
And the people who are out there shouting about how the Fifth Principle is being abandoned, interestingly enough, are the same people who weaponize the system to ensure their opinion gets heard more frequently than others, who stall debate by nitpicking language or arguing procedure, who fear accountability. They benefit from the system as it stands and they fear change. Hilariously they’re mostly the Boomers who were out protesting Vietnam. “The Times, They Are A-Changing.” It’s sad we have to remind the very people that song was written about.
Covenant is truly the answer, but the UU system fails when members of the congregation don't understand or feel bound by covenant. The good of the whole rather than individual's
right to have things their own way must be the guiding principle, and this flies in the face of the individualistic approach ("anything goes" and "lowest common denominator") of the UU movement. We need glue and guardrails. One approach may be a deep dive into the Seven Principles.
I learned how one person can disrupt consensus during the anti-nuclear movement in the 1960s and 70s. Sometimes I thought that one individual who broke consensus might be a plant from the opposition, but usually it was a random white male trying to assert power for the sake of being seen. I learned it again during the early days of the Trump administration when right-wing/Nazi groups were trying to disrupt gatherings for racial equity and immigrant rights. When we talked about using the principles of non-violence as taught by Martin Luther King, many participants said "yes, I'll be non-violent, until they attack children" or seniors, or another group.
The key to changing systems is to help people learn to trust each other even when things are not going the way they think they should. Each of us has to put aside our own beliefs and trust the whole. Sometimes it may mean that mistakes will be made, and that is all right. To trust is to believe in something that cannot be seen, that logic tells you may be a mistake. I think that is one of the ways to describe faith.