That's the point columnist Phil Reese makes at The Bilerico Project:
Across America, our leaders today--even our 'grassroots' leaders--are not enticing us to buy into the strategy at all, because they see no reason to offer us a stake of ownership. They 'know' what works, and we don't, and they want us to trust them but stay out of the way. If they do offer us ownership in the 'agenda,' it's on their benevolent terms--we can sit and watch and learn how it's really done. Familiarity breeds contempt--organizers need to stay above the fray--but exclusion also breeds contempt. They're feeling the hot breath of criticism getting a little too close.
Leaders have to know when to stand their ground and say "No, that is not a strategy we will use," but they also need to know when--regardless of 'conventional wisdom'--to get everyone on board and to take a chance on new roads to victory.
Click here to read the entire post.
So readers, what is your take on the leadership of LGBT activist initiatives today? Discuss.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Our defacto "leaders" need to do more listening and less lecturing. Take the Human Rights Campaign, for instance: they're commonly looked upon by the media and the political parties as the voice of LGBTQ America. However all of their communication with us us unidirectional. Their emails and web sight offer no means by which to contact them or voice an opinion/suggestion. Sure, their website has a "contact us" button, but they don't respond to it.
ReplyDelete