I’m sorry to say that — apart from an exercise in airing grievances — the fixing the UUA campaign didn’t say much. I think I’m with Steve Caldwell (or what he intimates at least) that first reforms should not depend on UUA Bylaws changes. I’m also not keen on proposing as a reform platform — streamlining the UUA or sharing best bractices — that reasonable people would already want, and which might be effectively attempted for want of spare effort and labor to accomplish them. None of the rest of the suggestions say anything to me, so I’ll not be voting.
Of course, this might be the longest sustained think-out-loud experience of people wanting to change UUA systems I’ve ever heard (boozy ministerial dinners don’t count) and that’s worth the effort in the first place. So thanks to ChaliceChick for kicking it off.
A thought: the suggestions seem to rest in the institutional and procedural “middle.” Not the small-scale incremental steps that you or I could take to begin a groundswell, and not the big meta-ideas that can help frame a general platform (and a real fight.) That’s a problem, because “middle” ideas are too big and too small to be the stuff of passion. I ain’t falling on the St. Louis headquarters or biennial GA sword, and I think few will.
And that’s the difference between a think-exercise (which UUs do well) and subtantive change, and perhaps we can keep this up and find our feet in subsequent rounds.
I thought it was pretty much what I expected – brainstorming. It didnt go far enough or deep enough, of course, probably because most of us do some other things during the week. I was surprised to see some folks thinking it was a attempt at revolution and the start of CC storming the baracades – or that it was an attempt by disgrunted folks to shut down UU (although one poster might just fit that description). Certainly if CC was a serious revoutionary, she would have her own revoluution website, right? (im sticking the extra U to help her come up with a cute name for it).
One of the things that struck me that was said without being said, was that one of the concerns is indeed about spending money (that the association doesnt have) and the priorities for that money. Unless Im mistaken, its been almost 40 years since the UUA had big money (part of the problem in the early 70s was thinking there was still money when it was all spent).
I saw on an UUA affliated group’s website the belief that if we were serious about solving one problem, we would give away half the UUA money to another charity – which I thought would be a nice effective way to kill the UUA for good. It wouldnt have funds to even send email…..I note none of the ideas on Fixing UU were that drastic….
Of course, looking at the money then comes back to what role do we want the UUA to be, what is its function.
And that’s a big question.