Introduction
This is the anti-racism process observation report for the Liberal
Religious Educators Association (LREDA). The process observation was
based on attendance of the LREDA October Board Meeting and Fall Conference,
and reading of by-laws, proposed Professional Standards, Good Officers
documents, minutes of meetings, newsletters, and brochures. The report
contains three sections and a conclusion.
Section One describes the lens used for the process observation,
which is the Journey Toward Wholeness (JTW) anti-racism analysis,
often referred to simply as "the analysis." The JTW analysis, which
is presented in this report in a severely abbreviated form, focuses
on systemic and institutional racism and its historical evolution
in the United States. The analysis also provides tools for identifying
racism in the structural levels of institutions and for assessing
an institution's progress in transforming itself into a fully inclusive
organization in its identity, structures and practices.
Section Two uses the Structural Levels and the "Continuum" tools
from the JTW analysis to examine how LREDA has institutionalized anti-racism
in its identity, structures and practices. The five structural levels
highlighted in the analysis are (1) Personnel; (2) Policies, Programs
and Practices; (3) Constituency; (4) Organizational Structures; and
(5) Mission, Purpose and Values. The Continuum is an organizational
assessment tool that helps institutions chart their journey through
six stages in becoming anti-racist, anti-oppressive, multicultural,
and inclusive.
Section Three briefly reflects the discussion of the LREDA Anti-Racism
Task Force and Board members who attended the post-Fall Conference
meeting in October. (NOTE: A longer version of this section is available
with additional questions for reflection and more ideas/recommendations
that came out of the group discussion.) Three focus areas guided the
Anti-Racism Task Force and Board members' discussion:
(1) People of Color Constituency/ies: Developing accountability structures
and relationships with communities of color
(2) Leadership: Internalizing (the application of) the anti-racism
analysis as standard operating procedure for the LREDA Board
(3) Membership: Expanding LREDA membership buy-in for (commitment
to) antiracism
The conclusion describes lessons LREDA can apply from its history
as a resistance and empowerment organization to further institutionalize
anti-racism in its identity, structures and practices, and specifies
current organizational practices that support anti-oppression work
and transformation. It is followed by a list of questions intended
to assist leadership in applying the JTW anti-racism analysis to the
focus areas in Section Three.
Section One: The Journey Toward Wholeness Anti-Racism Analysis (The
Lens)
1. Anti-racism is spiritual work and is rooted in Unitarian
Universalist principles, values, and historical tradition. The JTW
represents Unitarian Universalists' commitment to living our principles
and purposes. Our goal of making our community anti-racist, anti-oppressive,
multicultural, and inclusive demonstrates our belief in the inherent
worth and dignity of all people. Applying anti-racism and other anti-oppression
lenses to our structures and standard operating procedures is practicing
our responsible search for truth and meaning. Involving and engaging
marginalized communities in our decision-making, and following the
leadership of those communities, deepens our commitment to the democratic
process, enables us to exercise justice, compassion and equity at
more profound levels of our community, and shows our recognition of
the importance of interdependence in creating the beloved community.
Further, anti-racism is consistent with Unitarian Universalism's heretical
tradition. We are challengers and questioners of the status quo. We
celebrate our role in the vanguard of liberal religious, social and
political movements.
2. To make our institutions anti-racist we need a common analysis
of what racism is and how it operates systemically. The JTW anti-racism
analysis is a "power analysis" that examines systemic and institutional
racism. The assumptions upon which the analysis is based are the following:
A. History of racism: To understand racism today, we need
to know its history, how it evolved historically, and our own institutions'
history in relation to racism (and resistance to racism). The history
of racism corresponds to European colonial expansion in Africa, Asia
and the Americas in the 15th & 16th centuries. In the United States,
racism's history includes early European attempts to subjugate and
exploit indigenous peoples and the lands they occupied. Racism was
also used to justify the enslavement of Africans, who prior to the
"racialization" of slavery, were indentured servants who could earn
their way to freedom just as European indentured workers were allowed
to do. Other actions that further institutionalized racism in the
United States were the annexation of Mexico, the exploitation of Chinese
labor by the railroad industry, the court supported exclusion of persons
who were not classified as white from obtaining citizenship in the
United States, state-enforced Jim Crow laws, and a system of racial
apartheid supported by the federal government up until 1954 with the
Brown versus the Board of Education decision.
During the Civil Rights Era many laws were passed declaring racist
practices illegal. However, the institutions-most of which were created
during times of legal segregation and discrimination -- did not change.
Lack of enforcement of the laws, intentional attempts to avoid or
erode legal mandates, and the entrenchment of institutional practices
and structures that undergird racism have allowed racism to persist,
becoming more insidious.
Along with the history of racism it is important remember the history
of the resistors working against racism who have existed from the
beginning. Traditionally the resistors are excluded from the history
texts, but they serve as inspiration and models of how to dismantle
racism. For example, in 1896 the Supreme Court declared separate but
equal constitutional (Plessy versus Ferguson). Two years later the
Howard University Law School was established to train attorneys who
would fight to overturn the Supreme Court's decision. Several attempts
were made and failed before the Brown versus the Board of Education
ruling in 1954. What is most important to remember is the persistence
and faithfulness of those working against institutionalized racism.
B. Definition of Racism: The JTW analysis defines racism as
Race Prejudice + Systemic and Institutional (Misuse/Abuse) of Power.
There are three ways racism manifests this power: individual racism,
institutional racism, and cultural racism. Individual racism is systemically
transmitted through institutions and the larger culture.
Racism has three powers:
Racism's first power is to oppress people of color. This is the most
obvious power, and receives the most attention in most analyses of
racism.
Racism's second power and its real purpose is to provide privilege
(access) and power (control) for white people. Though other factors
such as gender, sexual orientation, physical or mental ability, and
class may influence the degree of privilege and power a white person
has personally, collectively white people receive more benefits of
society than people of color.
Racism's third and most insidious power is to destroy people of color
and white people based on how it operates to socialize us into race-based
identities of racist oppressors and victims. At this level, racism
becomes the common enemy of white people and people of color.
3. The goal is to transform our institutions-to make them
anti-racist, anti-oppressive, multicultural, and inclusive in their
identity, structures and practice. The first step towards transformation
is claiming an anti-racist identity. Claiming an anti-racist identity
means that an institution has developed a systemic analysis of racism,
and becomes conscious of the ways its structures and practices maintain
privilege and access primarily for white people. Because most of our
institutions were created to serve the needs and interests of white
people, institutions must intentionally assume an anti-racist identity
and incorporate anti-racism in the organizational mission and purpose
as the first step in transformation.
4. Changing institutions requires understanding their structural
levels and how these function, and an understanding of the stages
through which organizations move to become anti-racist. The JTW
Analysis uses a Structural Analysis Chart to identify racist practices
and a Continuum to chart organizational transformation.
The five structural levels and some examples of practices
and structures that provide evidence of racism are: (Note: We look
for evidence of racism and other oppressions based on effects or results,
not intent.)
Personnel-people who provide services, implement program,
perform organizational functions, control entry (gatekeepers) into
the institution. Examples of racism include:
- Inequality in numbers, positions and salary levels
- Ineffective training on racism and race relations
- Inadequate supervision, grievance procedures, or conflict resolution
- Lack of mutual community and trust
Policy/Practice/Programs-the functions that carry out the
institution's mission and purpose for the benefit of its constituency.
Examples of racism include:
- Policies regarding racism and race relations in personnel, finances,
facility use, programs, etc., are absent, inadequate or unenforced
- Programs are not designed to reflect commitments of institution
regarding racism and race relations
Constituency-those served by the institution. Note: there
may be multiple constituencies. There may also be a discrepancy between
the institution's declared constituency and its "real" constituency
or those who receive the benefits and services of the institution.
Examples of racism include:
- Constituency is not representative of community of color
- People of color not adequately or equally served
- Inadequate communication to constituency on racial issues
- Outreach to new constituency does not reflect commitments of institution
regarding racial issues
Organizational Structure-leadership, governance, decision-making;
the place from which strategic direction and policies are developed.
Examples of racism include:
- Geographic or organizational boundaries that are exclusionary or
ineffectively represent people of color
- Anti-racist commitments are not reflected in institutional goals
and strategies, resource distribution, or in structures of leadership,
power, and accountability
Mission and Purpose-the publicly declared reason for the institution's
existence; encompasses the institution's history; includes the identity
shaping documents (by-laws, mission statement, etc.) of the institution.
Examples of racism include:
- Institution does not have an analysis of racism, or an anti-racist
identity and commitment
- The constitution, belief system, mission statement, and other identity
documents reflect the institution's inherited white worldview, assumptions,
values, and principles.
Levels one and two are primarily concerned with the (most visible)
access to the institution. Levels three, four and five correspond
to power in the institution. Most institutions focus their anti-racism
(or more often multicultural diversity) efforts in the areas of Personnel
and Policy/Practice/Programs. However, to make lasting change, anti-racism
transformation must penetrate to the deeper levels of institutional
power.
The Continuum: Institutions, like individuals, go through
developmental stages. The Anti-Racism Continuum defines six stages
that correspond to an organization's identity, practice and structures
with regard to race (and other identities such as gender, sexual orientation,
abilities). These six stages move from Monocultural/Exclusive to Transformed
(Anti-Racist, Anti-Oppressive, Multicultural/Inclusive) and correspond
to the historical periods of the institution's life. The identity
(mission, purpose, history, values) and other structural levels (constituency,
organizational structure, personnel, programs, policies) will reflect
the organization's movement from one stage to another over time.
Note: Institutions may be in more than one place simultaneously.
For example, LREDA's public commitment to become anti-racist and welcoming
shows the organizational leadership moving into Stage 4 (Analytical
Institution), while the larger membership reflects an institutional
identity at Stage 2 (Passive Institution). Note also that institutions
cannot skip over stages, nor do they advance automatically from one
stage to the next. It is possible to fall backwards.
About 90 percent of today's institutions have made public commitments
to multicultural diversity, or the Symbolic Stage (stage 3). At this
stage institutions have actively sought people of color and other
marginalized groups in personnel and have developed programs that
support multicultural diversity. Yet, the institution does not have
a systemic analysis of racism, and therefore, continues to serve primarily
the needs and interests of a white dominated society, and operates
according to white norms. Other signs that an institution is at the
Symbolic Stage (sometimes referred to as "racist multiculturalism")
is that there is no enforcement of policies with regard to race (or
other marginalized identity groups), and the institution does not
have an accountability structure with communities of color (or other
marginalized communities).
The transition to anti-racist identity and practice requires an identity
change, or movement into Stage 4, an Anti-Racist Institution (also
referred to as the Analytic Stage). Stage 4 corresponds to the Mission/Purpose
of the Structural Levels Chart. Here an institution intentionally
claims an anti-racist identity and actively applies an anti-racism
analysis to its structures and practices. A commitment to becoming
anti-racist requires a commitment to changes in accountability and
organizational structures as well. Organizational restructuring corresponds
to Continuum Stage 5 (Structural Change) or a Transforming Institution.
Section Two: How has LREDA institutionalized anti-racism in its identity
and practice to date?
The above question is answered using the five structure levels and
the Continuum, which were explained in Section One. Each heading is
followed by an assessment of LREDA's current place on the continuum.
Keep in mind that the Continuum is an impressionistic tool, though
there are specific evidences that help place organizations in specific
stages.
Personnel: Continuum Stage 2: Passive or "Club" Institution
As an organization with few staff, LREDA depends on volunteers to
carry out many programs and functions. At present, few religious educators
of color serve on volunteer committees. Fall Conference attendance
and comments of those who attended indicate that LREDA membership
is predominantly white. Current staff is also predominantly white.
The small number of people of color who are LREDA members and who
serve on volunteer committees means that people of color will have
less access to various leadership and professional opportunities for
which LREDA membership and volunteer opportunities provide entry.
This includes higher-level staff positions in the UUA's Religious
Education Department and other volunteer leadership opportunities
in LREDA and the larger UU community.
Efforts to bring more people of color into UU religious education
is limited by the fact that LREDA currently does not recruit people
into the profession, though this may change soon. In addition, the
tendency to focus on religious educators as a marginalized group,
which they are, hinders the ability to recognize how LREDA may marginalize
peoples of color in its structures and practices.
Programs, Policies, Procedures: Continuum Stage 3: Symbolic Change
or Multicultural Institution
This is the area in which LREDA best demonstrates a commitment to
anti-racism and where leadership has been most active in incorporating
multicultural diversity. Efforts include the Anti-Racism Lending Library,
a resource for religious educators; a policy that requires congregations
to indicate commitments to anti-racism and anti-homophobia/anti-heterosexism
when applying for the grants program; continuing education modules
that include anti-racism and anti-oppression curricula; participation
of persons of color in the Fahs lecture; regular reporting on the
activities of the Anti-Racism Task Force; and inclusion of anti-racism
and anti-oppression credentialing units among the proposed Professional
Standards. In addition, the Fall Conference included worship resources
from diverse religious and cultural traditions.
What is unclear is how anti-racism guides the selection of resource
materials, the selection of program participants, development of curricula,
and organizational functions such as hiring practices for Good Officers
and other current and proposed positions, nominations for leadership,
and exposure of Board and other leadership to the anti-racism analysis.
Also, absent is a strategy for helping the larger membership understand
and implement anti-racism in their congregations. While members who
spoke to me indicated an awareness of the importance of multicultural
diversity, few were actively involved in programming or in relationship
with communities that address the needs and interests of the children
and youth of color and multiracial families in their congregations.
It is also unclear what role anti-racism plays in the Good Officers
recruitment, hiring and training.
Constituency: Continuum Stage 2.5: Moving from Passive/Club to
Symbolic/Multicultural
LREDA's current membership is predominantly white. If the emphasis
is on serving the needs of existing membership then logically LREDA
reflects the interests, culture and norms of its predominantly white
constituency. Based on this reality, the challenge is how to incorporate
the interests, values and norms of peoples of color, that is to develop
practices and structures that are accountable to peoples of color.
Also, LREDA does not have a formal accountability relationship with
an organization that represents the interest of peoples of color.
This is significant because LREDA makes decisions that influence all
religious educators in the UUA. Without the voice and involvement
of peoples of color who will feel the impact of LREDA's decisions,
there is the risk that policies, programs, and structures may foster
exclusivity rather than inclusiveness for religious educators of color.
Establishing "accountability relationships" with peoples of color
is a way of involving those "under-represented voices" that Rev. Sharon
Thornton described in her Fall Conference presentation in LREDA's
institutional transformation. By establishing "accountability relationships"
with communities of color, predominantly white institutions begin
to develop structures and practices that open access to their institutions,
and engage with peoples of color in creating institutional change.
It is also important that the persons representing the under-represented
voices (in this case peoples of color) are recognized and designated
by community/ies of color to perform this role. In other words, the
representative needs to have an accountability to for whom s/he speaks.
Note: The UUA Board of Trustees, General Assembly Planning Committee,
and UU Ministers Association, as well as the Thomas Jefferson District
JTW Transformation Team, have also struggled with the issue of accountability
to peoples of color. These groups, along with the Journey Toward Wholeness
Transformation Committee (JTWTC) can serve as resources to LREDA in
thinking about options for accountability structures.
Organizational Structure: Continuum Stage 2: Passive/Club Institution
LREDA's leadership (Executive Committee, At-large Board, Nominating
Committee) currently reflect the predominantly white membership. Few
peoples of color are involved in committees that shape organizational
direction with regard to priorities, programming and policies. In
addition, it does not appear that anti-racism is part of the "portfolio"
of all board members and committees in shaping policy and strategic
priorities. Nor is there a procedure for ensuring that new leadership
receives the JTW analysis training.
Mission/Purpose/Values: Continuum Stage 3.5: Moving from
Symbolic/Multicultural Institution to Identity Change (Analytic)/Anti-Racist
Institution
LREDA has been a predominantly white organization for much of its
history, though religious educators of color were involved in the
organization from its earliest history. In addition, LREDA is a leader
among UU affiliate organizations because it is the first to make a
public commitment to becoming anti-racist and welcoming. This public
position is prominent in LREDA's membership brochure, newsletter,
conference literature, and anti-racism task force brochure. However,
there is no statement of LREDA's commitment to anti-racism in the
by-laws, one of the primary "identity documents" of an organization.
Section Three: How can LREDA deepen its efforts to institutionalize
anti-racism in its organizational identity and practice?
Developing an anti-racism identity and practice throughout LREDA
will require working at deeper structural levels (constituency, organizational
structure, mission/purpose) AND continuing to make changes at the
more visible levels (program, policy, practice, personnel) of the
organization. During the feedback session in October, members of the
board and anti-racism task force divided into smaller groups to reflect
on three areas to move anti-racism forward in LREDA. A summary of
the small group sharing appears below along with questions and brainstorms/recommendations
for each of the three areas: (1) People of Color Constituency/ies,
(2) Leadership and (3) Membership.
(1) People of Color Constituency/ies: Developing accountability
structures and relationships with communities of color
Note: In establishing accountability with an identity group, it is
critical that the persons representing a community be designated by
and accountable to the communities they represent. Consider the difference
between having a religious educator invited as an individual to represent
the constituent group of which s/he is a member and having a religious
educator chosen by LREDA to speak for the interests the profession
and its practitioners. The representative chosen by LREDA not only
has more institutional strength backing her/him but also has a network
or community providing counsel and support.
There are several organizations and committees within the UU community
that can serve as resources for developing accountability structures
that involve and serve Unitarian Universalists of color. The Journey
Toward Wholeness Transformation Committee is a multiracial group,
appointed by the UUA Board of Trustees, to monitor, assess and evaluate
anti-racism efforts of the UUA. The JTWTC is also a resource to UU
affiliates engaged in anti-racist transformation.
Diverse Revolutionary UU Multicultural Ministries (DRUUMM) is an
organization committed to supporting anti-racism and anti-oppression
that exists to represent and serve the interests of UUs of color.
Latino/a UU Networking Association (LUUNA) is a multiracial UU affiliate
that promotes the inclusion of Latino culture in Unitarian Universalism.
YRUU has established a Youth of Color Advisory Council. JTW District
Transformation Teams in the Thomas Jefferson District and Joseph Priestly
District, Unitarian Society of New Haven (Hamlin, CT), and the UU
Society of Greater Springfield, MA are evolving strategies for involving
UUs of color and other communities of color in their anti-racism work.
Questions for reflection:
- How does LREDA build accountability relationships with communities
of color?
- Does LREDA have an idea of what an accountability relationship looks
like?
- What does it mean to be a person of color serving a white religious
education community?
(2) Leadership: Internalizing (the application of) the anti-racism
analysis as standard operating procedure for the LREDA Board
Developing internal accountability at the organizational structure
(leadership/decision-making) level of an organization is another way
of expressing the concept of internalizing or "institutionalizing"
the anti-racism analysis. Some ways that other UU leaders, departments,
committees, and affiliates have made anti-racism part of their practice
is by regularly reviewing the JTW analysis and using it as a tool
in decision-making and evaluation. These groups encourage continued
education in anti-racism and anti-oppression as well.
Questions for Reflection:
- How can LREDA deepen anti-racism analysis among board members (and
membership), including internal accountability structures for anti-racism?
- What kind of internal accountability structure can LREDA create?
- How can the anti-racism lens impact each board portfolio?
- What next steps will institutionalize anti-racism in each portfolio?
- Constituency: To whom are we (the Board) accountable?
(3) Membership: Expanding LREDA membership buy-in for (commitment
to) antiracism
Questions for Reflection:
How can LREDA deliver anti-racism education, information to religious
educators who don't attend General Assembly or Fall Conference?
How do we overcome the sense of "too big"?
How do we start this conversation ?
Conclusion
While there is much work to be done to fully institutionalize anti-racism
in LREDA, encouragement should be taken from what this organization
has achieved in empowering religious education as a profession as
well as those who serve the profession. Religious educators have always
been in the business of transformation because education is a transformative
process.
For LREDA, the commitment to become anti-racist and welcoming is
consistent with a 50-plus year history of resisting marginalization
and empowering persons at the margins of Unitarian Universalism. When
UU religious educators began to organize in 1949, they assumed a new
role-that of resistors advocating for a marginalized constituency.
From a history of elevating religious education as a profession,
and advocating for full recognition of the needs and interests of
religious educators, LREDA has developed its own "lens" or power analysis
for identifying practices and structures that disempower its constituency.
LREDA's experience with sexism, as well as the marginalization of
religious professionals, provides the organization with another lens
for identifying inequities in power and power relationships. Together,
these lenses serve as a common understanding from which to develop
strategies for change that advance religious education and its practitioners.
Applying an anti-racism lens, and other anti-oppression lenses, is
a deepening of LREDA's already established (or internalized) practice
of examining institutional identity, structures and practices for
ways they disempower and empower marginalized members of the community.
Though initially this may feel like adding another layer of work to
an already overloaded volunteer organization, anti-racism is not another
task or program. Rather it is internalizing a consciousness that transforms
(and eventually informs) how an organization carries out its mission,
purpose, programs, and policies to serve varied constituencies. This
internalization is also reflected in how the institution structures
itself to reflect this transformed consciousness.
There are current organizational practices and culture in LREDA that
support anti-racist transformation. Specifically, LREDA members exhibit
organizing knowledge and skills in professional planning and conference
planning. Your leadership practices a culture of acknowledgement,
appreciation and affirmation. Cooperation is valued. People volunteer
to assist each other with tasks. New members of the board are mentored
by experienced board leaders. In addition, the LREDA Board exercises
a practice of self-assessment and accountability regarding organizational
priorities by asking each board member what they have done to advance
LREDA's three priorities. In the words of board members, LREDA exhibits
"self-knowing, self-caring, listening, humor, self-forgiveness, capability."
Finally, the LREDA board sings well together, a demonstration of
community building skills and esprit de corps. This last point is
important because of the relational nature of anti-racism and all
anti-oppression work. The respect for relationship, balanced by an
organizational culture that seeks to honor both task and process,
provides a solid foundation to support antiracism and institutional
change in LREDA.
LREDA has begun the journey to a destination more imagined than real.
Beginnings, particularly in anti-oppression work, can feel chaotic
and overwhelming. However, LREDA is taking this journey in community
with other UUs who have learned that the path to anti-racism is truly
a path made by walking. Working together, learning together, organizing
and transforming Unitarian Universalism together, we will arrive at
the realization that the long road toward wholeness is a path that
turns to joy.
