Caucuses

June 2, 2011

            Where does the time go! June already, even though it is cool outside! But then we have been blessed not to have the scorching temps that the east coast has had or the tornados and terrible winds, now hitting even Massachusetts.

            The last post was about consensus. I want to write a bit further about our caucus model. The benefits of the caucus system were not known early on. One of the best unintended consequences is that we don’t have a nomination committee for Evergreen. Each caucus acts as it needs to put forth nominations. Talk about sharing of power! Most often in organizations the nominating committee is the real place of power. Without one in Evergreen, power is more dispersed and shared. The caucus system allows this and each caucus handles nominations in its own way. In fact, each caucus is organized in its own way!

            The quorum, across Evergreen is that at least one person from each caucus must be present in order for us to do business. For all people groups, this says, if we don’t show up, it means that the organization cannot go forward. The rules say we can only get along with everyone present! That is a real shift for people of color, it means ownership in a way that is not usual in American Baptist circles anyway.

In addition our caucuses help us reach consensus. Early on in our life, we learned that consensus building as a whole group beyond the Executive Committee (total 7 people) was almost impossible. The caucuses allowed us immediate smaller groups! And that meant that at Association Board meetings caucuses could have some real conversations. I’m convinced that at times conversations happen that just would not happen if the group were ethnically mixed. This is especially true as it relates to conversations about money or anything of importance. Within the relative safety of the caucuses some concerns can be voiced where otherwise they would be silenced or rationales would be put forward. Does it mean that sometimes decisions must be slowed down? Yes! So far that hasn’t been a bad thing. It has helped us all come to more reasoned decisions and decision making.

Exactly how this all works does need to be experienced. It is rather difficult to put down on paper (or out on the web in words) the complete experience. The Euro caucus in particular has had difficulty in understanding why “separating” helps us come together. In my opinion, that has to do, in large part, because the Euro caucus has not dealt deeply enough with our white privilege. While we think we might allow all others in a larger group to participate, we are usually unaware of how we dominate the conversation and the agenda. Our “giving people time” to respond, does not translate for the other caucus groups. It is indeed by our meeting separately that the Black and Asian (and prayerfully one day other caucuses) have their voice.

We are learning, we have not yet arrived.

Marcia