Troop75Eagle

27 minutes ago, Kudu said:

From Baden-Powell's 1938 POR (Policy, Organization, & Rules)

http://www.inquiry.net/traditional/por/proficiency_badges.htm

Wirelessman

506.      (1)        Have an elementary knowledge of how a thermionic valve works as-

(a)        H.F. Amplifier.

(b)        Detector.

(c)        L.F. Amplifier

In a wireless set, and also how a "Westector" works

(2)        Know the functions of condenser, resistance, inductance, reaction and mains rectifier, transformer.

(3)        Know how to cure hum OR how to build a cheap mains eliminator.

(4)        Know how to locate and cure a simple fault in a wireless set.

(5)        Show a working knowledge of moving coil loud-speakers, both permanent magnet and mains energised  types.

(6)        Draw a simple diagram showing the way to connect up a stage of "resistance coupled" L.F. amplification, and another to illustrate the connections of a "L.F. transformer," and show a knowledge of the principles involved.

(7)        Read a technical diagram and interpret all the symbols ordinarily employed.

(8)        Have assembled a simple wireless receiver which works satisfactorily and know all the distress signals.

(9)        Know the methods of charging and looking after accumulators.

I’ve thought on and off about getting ham license as a challenge to myself at age 52.  Covid and travel have thumped that for a while.  Considered bugling too but I’m afraid my wife would wrap it around my neck

That’s a great idea.  I have looked at bugling again and that definitely has a long and meaningful tradition in scouting everywhere. I saw the Braden Powell scouting does Ham Radio

30 minutes ago, 69RoadRunner said:

No one born in the 1800s and back can meet the woke progressive standards of today's far left cultists.  There's no room for nuance or imperfect people who also did many good things. It doesn't mean you don't discuss the bad things, but you don't erase people like the USSR.

 

One of the difficulties in the past and today seems to be that upheavals and revolutions really have ill defined objectives except to upend the system and recreate a new system, often with the same results.  It often ends up than anyone who represents or speaks against the new amorphous collective is suddenly an intolerable enemy of the state.  Communism and Stalinism were certainly that way.  
 

when I briefly taught inner city high school, and was a substitute teacher in many public schools, I tried to show the impact of language.  The Wannsee Protocols, Article 58 of the Soviet penal code for counter-revolutionary activity, night and fog, and several others.  I showed how language in determined the date of millions.  
 

Fanaticism, ignorance and bigotry from any quarter are lethal, especially combined with language in laws.  Anarchy and sweeping aside our institutions of government leave people do exposed.  These are lessons not known or ignored by these social chaos forces.  

Pulling down as many statues as they can lay hands on is unconscionable.  I bet these people do t even know who grant is, let alone what he did.  He was given a slave and then freed him. He came from an abolitionist family.  Jefferson?  Yeah, I understand the slavery part.  Without those enlightened men operating in the turmoil of their day, these mob groups and anarchists driving them seem not to have an alternate vision of what the results would have been otherwise.  
 

I suppose we have to go back to the time when we have to buy up property to make parks that are accessible but private to erect statues of people.  You get the good examples but the bad, but this scouring of culture is insane. 

I still am flabbergasted by the anti-Catholic  business.  Recent scandals are one thing, but this long history of anti-catholic sentiment really boggles my mind.  In the derp south I know it goes way back...a persistent source of shame among other ills in the south and I know Kennedy Their was hysterics about Kennedy being a cats paw of the Pope.  I guess, just like the resurgence of anti-semitism , I have just not been aware all these decades and for the most part I’ve lived in the south. I guess I’m an example of why clusters of like minded people in the same socioeconomic strata need to get out more. 

3 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Yes, it is about feeling powerless, and seeing that store as someone else's wealth/power to be destroyed.  If I cannot join you in your prosperity, I will destroy yours to even the playing field.

 

Turf control to sell drugs...

 

I think you are right here...mental illness may be the issue

There are a lot of things always at work and always simmering.

First and foremost, there are people who love chaos and will actively do things or goad others into doing it..  That's fun for them. 

Then there are always the borderline personalities and unstable ones.  I blame the internet and television for setting some of them loose in shootings.  They are impressionable and feel empowered and I guess that's their chance for glory.  I know of no REASONABLE way to deal with that issue.  Such people have always been around and always will.  Media is so interconnected that its not going away and neither are means of self defense.  But chaos is currency for them.

Then there are the fools who go to demonstrations and let them get swept up, pushed to the front and nightsticked by police because the organizers lurk in the back stoking the flames.  Our teachers in my all boy's catholic school told us in high school never to go to demonstrations, especially ones that might be violent for that reason.  Mob psychology is real and you attend at your peril.

Then there are the opportunists and social robin hoods, giddy at the prospect of helping to redistribute goods and merchandise from 'donating' businesses.  This seems to bring out the most intense competitive spirit imaginable since no one wants to lose out on getting one new shoe out of the box and a bottle of cheap bourbon. 

Then there are the political agitators on and off scene who probably go high up in hidden circles. One of the better books I've read about such thins is called "The Phoenix Program" by Douglas Valentine. 

3 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

All about wealth and/or power...which is why those two things always concentrate together...

Have wealth...get power

Have power...get wealth

Now, there are many who use either or both for good, but that is a relatively new phenomenon in history

Dont forget the in betweens...

Have wealth and power...hold onto it at all costs. 

Don't have wealth or power...get it at all costs

but I admit there are a lot of people who would be happy in between.

thanks for the review.  Thats the trouble with selective news.  One or two stories is not indicative of much, but like many things, negative news travels best.  If you recall Jack in the Box e-coli cases many years ago where people died, I still won't eat there.  People looking for the slightest excuse to bolster a position will certainly gleefully use whatever comes their way but one would hope there is a conditional statement of a tiny instance.

1 hour ago, David CO said:

There are some pretty tough penalties at school for racist behavior.  Kids are good at conforming to the policies, whether they agree with them or not.  Many do not.  When they don't, they mostly keep their mouths shut.  

I agree, from an observational standpoint, that kids appear to be more accepting of the official policies than the adults.  I think this is an illusion.  I think it simply reflects how well the system is doing in muzzling the kids who have opposing opinions.

 

I'll have to say I'm a little surprised the kids don't follow it.  I know kids can be ugly and I've been told that the sexual dis-inhibition has reached all the way down to middle school.  That is really shocking to me, but 40+ years is enough time for a lot of things to change in the interim.  I suppose that its just naivete on my part. 

didn't see the date.  made me feel better to get it out..

I notice it was subscription only too.  I don’t buy into it for a variety of reasons not least because I suspect that the scouts themselves everywhere are not acting in a racist manner.  That is more a curse of the adults.  I have no evidence either way to back my feeling up, but from an observation standpoint, I read of youth 18 and younger being more pro-active and accommodating in traditionally decisive matters.  If I’m wrong, so be it and I’ll gladly (but sadly) accept the reality.  If my hunch is correct, the differences that may exist are perhaps regional and based more on traditional housing patterns and racial population densities.  
 

there are other factors too.  It’s no secret that comfort levels exist among minorities insofar with what groups of people in which they choose to affiliate. I saw that discussed in law school.  That is a reality that is not so much emphasized by active or subtle rescind as it is simple choice of group identity.  That reality, to the degree it is true, is no fault of scouts and should not be perceived as such.  
 

current politics does not do a good job of comparisons and demographics.  If you have a neighborhood that was mixed and not historically separated, the kids already have a huge choice of activities with school and sporting events or clubs.  Many of their peers might well choose to engage in those where activities offer a more community experience in things they like.  With demographic ratios, that may well not leave a significant number of potential scouts from those communities.
 

This competition among activities, comfort level and a desire to be among ones peers is NOT the fault of scouting but a simple reality.  One can advertise and push for recruitment all you want but against these forces, which are difficult to measure, scouting - already facing declining numbers-would have an even more difficult time of things. 

What is going to happen to the OA in the coming years with its traditions and regalia?  I was in in decades ago but have no idea what has transpired since.  I might try to volunteer but it would probably helping keeping a site up do date for camping rather than too much interaction.

15 hours ago, BAJ said:

When I was a scout in the 1980s, I was a member of a troop that was not diverse, not because of anything that the Scouts had done, but because I grew up in an area where African American families were redlined out of their ability to live for an extended period of time.  I didn't know that as a young scout, though as I got somewhat older and learned some of the complicated history of race and politics in the area I came to understand that the way things were when I was a kid depended on things that had been done many years before.  It wasn't a value judgement about my troop or its actions, it wasn't a judgement about me, but the fact that it wasn't my fault didn't make it any less the reality and didn't make it any less unfair.  I heard stories about issues of racism in Scouting, and I certainly witnessed events that made clear to me that the legacy of what had been done intentionally before -- and the reality of things that were still happening then -- meant that there were still forces and realities that affected some members of society in ways that I was not affected as a white learning-to-be-a-man.

As a result, I can say I was proud when I received that email from BSA a few days ago, and -- though some have said that creating a new merit badge isn't substantial -- I thought that was actually a valuable step BSA could take in accordance with what Scouting is supposed to do, educate youth into valuable members of society.  The requirements that are put in place are a statement by the organization of what is important.  Swimming requirements have been in place for a long time.  Sustainability became a merit badge when that was viewed as important.  And now something focused on diversity and inclusion is being added as important.  The goal of the program is to teach, and -- if the new badge is designed well, which given the references to American Cultures and American Heritage, I expect it to be -- I believe that it could make a real contribution to the youth that earn it understanding the complicated history of race in this country, since ignorance of that complexity is not a help in finding a path forward.  I know that some of the merit badges I took as a scout had a lasting impact on my thinking, and I have watched my daughter grow through some of the citizenship and other merit badges she has been working on as well.

In other places this has been characterized as a knee jerk reaction, but I am not sure that I see that.  Having returned to scouting not too long ago since BSA opened to my daughter and because I agreed with the organization's changes to become more tolerant with respect to sexual orientation, I was planning on going to the Wood Badge session before coronavirus disrupted it -- since I felt that it was important that I learned what the organization thought I needed to know to do a good job.  One of my mentors related to our current troop, a very long tenured Scouter, gave me a heads up that an element of diversity and inclusion had been part of the Wood Badge curriculum for some time now, and that I should think about how that would be part of my ticket -- though since I was working with a female troop, my ticket might be viewed as having that already as a part of it.  So I don't see this as knee jerk, even if it is responding to events that are happening in real time.

I also would push back on the characterizations of the content of that statement being anti-police and so somehow BSA not being "pro-police," and -- furthermore -- push back on setting up discussion as a conflict between people protesting for their rights and law enforcement.  The history of policing in this country is also complicated, with extreme good and extreme ill.  Use of force does fall more heavily on some than others, and the outcomes of interactions between law enforcement and individuals can differ based on more than just their behavior when that interaction happens.  And the legacy of what law enforcement has been used for in our country's history, like the past events that led my troop to be all white, still have effects that persist to the present day.  And before you tell me I don't understand police, I do.  I work with police officers as part of my job.  In watching through even the imperfect window that posted cell phone video has given into what has happened in the recent protests, I have seen much to be amazingly proud of in the officers who have successfully both protected public order and protected citizens' exercise of their Constitutional rights.  That doesn't surprise me given some of the men and women I know who are officers and since the oath most of those officers took was to uphold the Constitution, so they have a responsibility to do both.  But I have also seen behavior by officers that I cannot defend, even as someone who has much more knowledge about police tactics, equipment, and procedures than the average person and is less likely to jump to conclusions based on always incomplete evidence.

I also am surprised to have seen in these postings over the last few days a thread of argument that it should be ok for things to be different in troops across the country, and that top down intervention to impose something like this new merit badge is somehow inappropriate.  That has surprised me because, in so many other discussions, the argument seems to always be that there should be uniformity and fundamental standards, with statements like "the program is the program," "units that aren't doing the Patrol Method properly are doing it wrong," and "things must be done with the spirit of Scouting in mind."  Some of that push back was in response to some posts of mine where I was asking questions that were interpreted as pushing boundaries beyond what scouting should be.  But now, when this is the issue, local variation is now presented as the ideal rather than undermining the program.  That troubles me and that, as much as anything, was why I came back to post -- since some of the push back I'd gotten before had led me to the conclusion that perhaps I wasn't as welcome at this campfire as I thought it was and should limit myself to lurking in search of tidbits of information that National hadn't yet gotten around to disseminating broadly to volunteers. 

When I came back to Scouting, I had been impressed by how things were changing.  When my daughter said she wanted to join Scouts BSA -- since she'd been more interested in the stories I told about when I was a scout than what she'd heard about what our local girl scout troops were doing -- I actually sat down to have a sober talk with her about what she might be getting into.  I prepared her for, frankly, discrimination because of how people might react to the change of co-ed Scouting based on what I remembered from my time as a scout years ago.  Interesting that in an organization supposedly fully centered in the Scout Oath and Law, that was my concern going in.  But she wasn't worried, and - at least so far - it turns out she was right.  Even at a camporee far afield from our largely suburban area, the few small female troops who were there didn't get any more flak than the boy troops did, and when some came their way they -- and the scouts from their "brother troop" -- stood side by side and, in both a friendly and courteous way, explained to the source that they weren't living up to the Scout Oath and Law.  And subsequently, when she started working on Scouting Heritage merit badge and was interviewing some of the people who were involved in the forming of their troop, I got more insight into why: when it was being discussed, there was actually some opposition among some adults to the idea of starting a female troop, so the committee decided to ask some members of the existing boy troop what they thought about the idea.  And they advocated for doing it because they thought it was important.  So, in this case, the "progressiveness" that I have heard criticized elsewhere on this board, with the implication it was coming from adults like me, was scout led.  Which I have also heard here is how it should be done. 

Do I think a new merit badge will solve the complexities of race in America?  No, but it is a step to provide an opportunity for some of the next generation to at least be exposed to some of the complicated history about it and think it through for themselves.  My daughter learned more from one of the citizenship merit badge requirements that required her to rewrite a passage from one of our Founding documents in her own words than a week of some of her classes in school.  In the scouts I have had the privilege to help support over the last few months, I have seen extremely intelligent and impressive individuals.  I doubt that all will reach the same conclusions as they do the requirements of such a merit badge as I might, and I doubt that -- whatever the political persuasion of the author of the pamphlet -- the conclusions they will reach can be predetermined.  But, it can expose them to some history that they might not encounter elsewhere, and then they will decide what they think for themselves.  And, just as I think regarding the requirements of many other merit badges, we will all be better for that.

 

I appreciate your thoughtful response.  Instead of cherry picking, I will say there is much good to what you have written.  Thoughtful, measured and 
 Reasoned thinking is a welcomed approach here.  The entire focus of this online series of forums is to maximize the scope of possibilities for successful scouting in times of change.  
 

That can only be done by acknowledging the experiences and reasoned thinking others bring to the table.  Many of the comments have been borderline disrespectful and offer no solutions.  We (Generally) might disagree on methods of successful scouting and content or methodology of the program, but that is ok.  Variations of useful thoughts and opinions are welcomed.  
 

it can take a while to carefully write a balanced response and I want to applaud you on doing just that.  Please keep doing it.

8 hours ago, Liz said:

It also shouldn't be a huge surprise that "patriotism and civic pride and service" don't have to equate with "military and law enforcement." 

Civic pride and duty are main reasons that I have my kids in Scouting. It teaches them to work together to make their community a better place.

Killing brown people at home and abroad is NOT a reason I have my kids in Scouting. 

When I was in scouting, the very idea you just mentioned would neither have been suggested, imagined or tolerated.  Military and law enforcement were structure, order and fun were honored tools for boys that resonated and still do.   The people I knew and know were all very civic minded and almost all progressive.  Many are professors. Your correlation and perhaps even veiled suggestion that killing, dividing and conquering were motivators is galling. 
 

most military is support, meaning cooks, nurses, doctors, truck drivers and so forth.  Only a small part are direct combat.  Many who come back from combat are scarred and traumatized for life and fight because they have to.  Police used to be very different and took Knick’s and scuffs more than they do now.  A lot of that modern issue comes from training. 
 

it seems you have a real bone to pick and have lumped anyone who endeavors you serve in either capacity as desires to kill and oppressor exterminate and are in a paramilitary training program.  You also directly smear all those who wear uniform as killers and desirous to kill.  As I recall, perils in both world wars signed up to stop tyrants seeking to control the rest of the world.  We sent whites and blacks and Asians to kill Germans, Austrians and a few other groups in WW1 and German and Japanese and Italians in WW2.  They were largely whites outside of the Japanese who were busy destroying the Chinese and Subjecting other Asian countries. It’s true in Korea and Vietnam we fought Asians but soldiers guerre forced to go.  
 

Police have a mixed history but I’m not sure what vision you have of a country without police dedicated to uphold the safety of their communities and institutions of government.  I said nothing about training killers.  You may loathe the institutions but when they are needed at home or requested abroad, they generally acquit themselves well.  
 

why you would say that Scouts and military and law enforcement are so bad as a mix is beyond comprehension.  If I wanted a training group to do as you state, then I would send them to a reactionary group like the minute men, Michigan militia or others who behave that way in their training.  

Your answer really astonishes me and confirms what I have begun to suspect.  The mind division in scouts is so divided and hostile that even personal experiences and perspectives cannot be expressed without intolerance, condemnation and categorical branding.  You confirm the fact that scouting as we know it will be sorely pressed to survive as a cohesive group.  
 

you are a teacher, and I would have expected far more than I have read.

1 hour ago, BAJ said:

When I was a scout in the 1980s, I was a member of a troop that was not diverse, not because of anything that the Scouts had done, but because I grew up in an area where African American families were redlined out of their ability to live for an extended period of time.  I didn't know that as a young scout, though as I got somewhat older and learned some of the complicated history of race and politics in the area I came to understand that the way things were when I was a kid depended on things that had been done many years before.  It wasn't a value judgement about my troop or its actions, it wasn't a judgement about me, but the fact that it wasn't my fault didn't make it any less the reality and didn't make it any less unfair.  I heard stories about issues of racism in Scouting, and I certainly witnessed events that made clear to me that the legacy of what had been done intentionally before -- and the reality of things that were still happening then -- meant that there were still forces and realities that affected some members of society in ways that I was not affected as a white learning-to-be-a-man.

As a result, I can say I was proud when I received that email from BSA a few days ago, and -- though some have said that creating a new merit badge isn't substantial -- I thought that was actually a valuable step BSA could take in accordance with what Scouting is supposed to do, educate youth into valuable members of society.  The requirements that are put in place are a statement by the organization of what is important.  Swimming requirements have been in place for a long time.  Sustainability became a merit badge when that was viewed as important.  And now something focused on diversity and inclusion is being added as important.  The goal of the program is to teach, and -- if the new badge is designed well, which given the references to American Cultures and American Heritage, I expect it to be -- I believe that it could make a real contribution to the youth that earn it understanding the complicated history of race in this country, since ignorance of that complexity is not a help in finding a path forward.  I know that some of the merit badges I took as a scout had a lasting impact on my thinking, and I have watched my daughter grow through some of the citizenship and other merit badges she has been working on as well.

In other places this has been characterized as a knee jerk reaction, but I am not sure that I see that.  Having returned to scouting not too long ago since BSA opened to my daughter and because I agreed with the organization's changes to become more tolerant with respect to sexual orientation, I was planning on going to the Wood Badge session before coronavirus disrupted it -- since I felt that it was important that I learned what the organization thought I needed to know to do a good job.  One of my mentors related to our current troop, a very long tenured Scouter, gave me a heads up that an element of diversity and inclusion had been part of the Wood Badge curriculum for some time now, and that I should think about how that would be part of my ticket -- though since I was working with a female troop, my ticket might be viewed as having that already as a part of it.  So I don't see this as knee jerk, even if it is responding to events that are happening in real time.

I also would push back on the characterizations of the content of that statement being anti-police and so somehow BSA not being "pro-police," and -- furthermore -- push back on setting up discussion as a conflict between people protesting for their rights and law enforcement.  The history of policing in this country is also complicated, with extreme good and extreme ill.  Use of force does fall more heavily on some than others, and the outcomes of interactions between law enforcement and individuals can differ based on more than just their behavior when that interaction happens.  And the legacy of what law enforcement has been used for in our country's history, like the past events that led my troop to be all white, still have effects that persist to the present day.  And before you tell me I don't understand police, I do.  I work with police officers as part of my job.  In watching through even the imperfect window that posted cell phone video has given into what has happened in the recent protests, I have seen much to be amazingly proud of in the officers who have successfully both protected public order and protected citizens' exercise of their Constitutional rights.  That doesn't surprise me given some of the men and women I know who are officers and since the oath most of those officers took was to uphold the Constitution, so they have a responsibility to do both.  But I have also seen behavior by officers that I cannot defend, even as someone who has much more knowledge about police tactics, equipment, and procedures than the average person and is less likely to jump to conclusions based on always incomplete evidence.

I also am surprised to have seen in these postings over the last few days a thread of argument that it should be ok for things to be different in troops across the country, and that top down intervention to impose something like this new merit badge is somehow inappropriate.  That has surprised me because, in so many other discussions, the argument seems to always be that there should be uniformity and fundamental standards, with statements like "the program is the program," "units that aren't doing the Patrol Method properly are doing it wrong," and "things must be done with the spirit of Scouting in mind."  Some of that push back was in response to some posts of mine where I was asking questions that were interpreted as pushing boundaries beyond what scouting should be.  But now, when this is the issue, local variation is now presented as the ideal rather than undermining the program.  That troubles me and that, as much as anything, was why I came back to post -- since some of the push back I'd gotten before had led me to the conclusion that perhaps I wasn't as welcome at this campfire as I thought it was and should limit myself to lurking in search of tidbits of information that National hadn't yet gotten around to disseminating broadly to volunteers. 

When I came back to Scouting, I had been impressed by how things were changing.  When my daughter said she wanted to join Scouts BSA -- since she'd been more interested in the stories I told about when I was a scout than what she'd heard about what our local girl scout troops were doing -- I actually sat down to have a sober talk with her about what she might be getting into.  I prepared her for, frankly, discrimination because of how people might react to the change of co-ed Scouting based on what I remembered from my time as a scout years ago.  Interesting that in an organization supposedly fully centered in the Scout Oath and Law, that was my concern going in.  But she wasn't worried, and - at least so far - it turns out she was right.  Even at a camporee far afield from our largely suburban area, the few small female troops who were there didn't get any more flak than the boy troops did, and when some came their way they -- and the scouts from their "brother troop" -- stood side by side and, in both a friendly and courteous way, explained to the source that they weren't living up to the Scout Oath and Law.  And subsequently, when she started working on Scouting Heritage merit badge and was interviewing some of the people who were involved in the forming of their troop, I got more insight into why: when it was being discussed, there was actually some opposition among some adults to the idea of starting a female troop, so the committee decided to ask some members of the existing boy troop what they thought about the idea.  And they advocated for doing it because they thought it was important.  So, in this case, the "progressiveness" that I have heard criticized elsewhere on this board, with the implication it was coming from adults like me, was scout led.  Which I have also heard here is how it should be done. 

Do I think a new merit badge will solve the complexities of race in America?  No, but it is a step to provide an opportunity for some of the next generation to at least be exposed to some of the complicated history about it and think it through for themselves.  My daughter learned more from one of the citizenship merit badge requirements that required her to rewrite a passage from one of our Founding documents in her own words than a week of some of her classes in school.  In the scouts I have had the privilege to help support over the last few months, I have seen extremely intelligent and impressive individuals.  I doubt that all will reach the same conclusions as they do the requirements of such a merit badge as I might, and I doubt that -- whatever the political persuasion of the author of the pamphlet -- the conclusions they will reach can be predetermined.  But, it can expose them to some history that they might not encounter elsewhere, and then they will decide what they think for themselves.  And, just as I think regarding the requirements of many other merit badges, we will all be better for that.

 

I enjoyed reading your thoughtful post.  I too received my Eagle in the 80’s and had an all white troop. I was in Memphis if that means anything,  Yet I never once heard the first racist or elitist word.  30+years does, however, play games with memory as I’m finding out. 
 

i am one who advocates local control but not as an excuse to discriminate.  That’s how such statements come across...as a pale echo of states rights which has all sorts of nefarious baggage with it.  
 

i, and I suspect others, recognize that local people within the troop that are of a community and are parents are the ones that are in the best and natural position to moderate and temper their child’s growth. In the midst of volatile culture clashes, being dictated to from a national organization that tries to govern all with a single edict that suggests parents and leaders have been negligent or don’t know what they’re doing is an affront.  
 

Local people run things.  Local people appeal to one another.  Local people have common interests and find opportunities to have fun and grow in mutually appealing activities.  That is a fact.  A national chapter is an accepted fiction, of a sort.  There are many people that are solid state citizens that never preach hate, are not bigots, reactionaries or misanthropes.  Instead, they use common sense and the tools available to guide youth while they expand and have fun.  They provide wisdom over passion.  
 

when someone speaks of a knee jerk reaction, this suggests a lack of wisdom and reflection if not panic.  In the case of scouting, one social revolution after the next with changes runs up flags that chaos abounds and a desire to please social engineers is overpowering.  This suggests that local interests that are in fact common interest are being shuttled aside to please others.  That’s not a crime, but it appeals only to certain people.  Three colossal changes to the scouting systems in a short time?  One must accept that many people believe scouting has done a tremendous job in allowing leaders and good young men to grow.  Notwithstanding its most recent problems, many people enjoyed the particular framework and traditions that did well.  That too is no crime nor are they ignorant, backwards, dolts, or bigots for preserving a system that has worked wonders. 
 

The Merit badge issue is a side show but as I’ve said elsewhere is easily addressed with some tweaking in the Citizenship merit badges.  To create a diversity merit badge seems superfluous and a weak cave in to appease social pundits yet again.  The concern becomes how much change and dignity will be sacrificed to satisfy various groups before the entire existing organization transmogrifies into something so different the original no longer exists.  The lack of consent is galling.  That rankles many and do many, like LDS may choose traditions without politics.  But it’s the scouts themselves that will determine the future. No participation, it’s dead.

1 hour ago, DuctTape said:

The main problems with the "local option" argument are:

1.That is exactly what allowed segregation to exist in BSA troops until the 1970s. 

2. Hypocritically, it was some outside COs, troops, councils,... who pushed the "no gay scouts & leaders" doctrine to disallow gay scouts and scouters in troops which were not theirs. The Dale case was the result. We know the rest.

I understand some have significant personal objections regarding those who are gay. There were those who had significant objections to mixed race troops too. It took 50 years and we are mostly past the latter. Hopefully it won't take 50 more years to be mostly past the former too.

 

I hear what you are saying. But it must be remembered that affiliation is a choice people make.  When I was in law school, the black professor from Georgetown law, also a Naval Intel Officer,  asked the black students why they all sat together.  It was a novel question.  The answer was that it was a comfort and cultural identity factor. Who could begrudge them that?  

Are we going to tell someone in a troop to make people feel unwelcome?  I doubt it though there are always jokers to prove me wrong.  Are we going to tell someone they are wrong for choosing to go where they feel comfortable and can identify?  I hope not. 

Scouts were one of the first, I am given to understand, to actively recruit and embrace blacks in the 1920s.  That’s quite astounding considering the era.  It’s no question that parents may have bucked the trend but scouting as a whole did it without external mandates.  If you try to dictate to reasonable people that they must do things differently be cause you think they have to, you’re courting disaster.  It may work in some cases with federal legislation but when it comes to children, that’s sacred turf.

41 minutes ago, Liz said:

Yes, and we still suffer from that reputation to this day. It's the main reason none of my friends will let their kids give BSA a chance. 

With regard to pro law enforcement and military, I don’t think that it can be denied that scouting functions on several levels.  The nuts and bolts of camping, skills, self improvement and develupment we with peers are very Much at the center.  

But, in a larger historical sense, scouting does have a different secondary role though it may be less commonly realized.  It is definitely a child of nationalism.  If you step back and think, it makes sense. The British Empire, American age of Imperialism, WW1 and 2, Cold War, etc.  scouts trained and still trains youth for pro-American history m, vision and institutions.  It’s established in rank, respect, awards, medals in the chest and incorporates terms like troop, platoon, pioneering, martial and survival skills.  It should come as no surprise that concurrent with that is a martial spirit, Duty, honor, organization, discipline, law and order.  Just about every idea you can imagine geared towards a pro-police and military mindset you can get.  Even ‘dress right dress’ and marching are concurrent.  

Each nation that has a form of scouting does the same thing in its own form.  It is a patriotic institution.  Every nation has known that reaching the young is a must for future generations of leaders.  Scouting is another soft power tool for that.  Is it any wonder that creating the vision of the future for scouts is so contentious.  We don’t talk about it but it is there whether people choose to acknowledge it or not.  But it’s not bad at all.  It’s vital to the life blood and identity of a nations future leaders.  I grew up with generations of patriotism with founders of the Virginia  Bay Company, a signer if the Declaration of Independence, revolutionary war vets, Civil War vets, WW 1&2, and Vietnam.  I did my bit.  Scouts were a part of it and I never once thought of it any less than a fantastically fun patriotic organization. I took exceptional pride and zeal in it as did many others.  Indeed, there were many who went in to be servicemen. We had prior service adult leaders who were not only businessmen, but judges, law enforcement and lawyers. 

So realizing this absolute fact,  It should come as no surprise to anyone that patriotism, military and law enforcement with civic pride and service are integral to the US scouting tradition.,

in many ways, contemporary politics is an unconscious assault in those mainstays. Regardless of what one feels about military, law enforcement and social justice in the headlines, those areas are largely sacrosanct for many.  Maybe it’s not talked about enough.  But any perceived assaults on those traditions provoke a backlash though people may not understand why.  This is one reason scouts as we have known it may be in gor cultural dismemberment. No one will be happy and so parents and communities that believe in parts of the traditional scouting visions will not be party to social reconstruction.  Names and ugliness may follow, but then irreconcilable differences are one reason people part ways.

1 hour ago, PACAN said:

I think you misinterpreted...maybe your experience is different but scouts still procrastinate until the last minute and therefore are only concerned with checking off the last blocks on their MBs.   You can yell, scream, jump up and down, cajole and explain keeping ahead of the game but they still do what they do.  Eventually it is their responsibility. Why is the average age a scout earns Eagle 17.8 y/o.

The value of scouting to me is enormous.  Been doing this for close to 50 years. However you cannot get in the middle of a family's responsibility when it comes to their role as parent. You will lose every time.   I have had single parents, homeless scouts, ugly divorces, parental deaths and other tragic situations where the leaders have provided a great amount of assistance as far as we could so please take a step back when you ask me why I do this. 

I’m with you.  This is precisely why local influence and control has to have the final word over fluctuating external pressure for ideology.  Grandiose ideas are fantastic sounding and can whip up people in a frenzy, but in the trenches, one on one in a community and with each scout, it’s a different reality.  

2 hours ago, yknot said:

When you've been a stick in the mud, if not an actual dam in the mud, regarding other issues like girls in scouting or differently gendered kids in scouting, it is hard to have credibility when addressing things like racism. BP was a flawed individual, but what he showed through his actions as he evolved through time is that he was always youth first as best he understood that to be.  Scouts lately has not been youth first. It's been church first, special interest first, rank first, Eagle scout first, adults first, politics first, or money first. It needs to get back to youth first. And outdoors first. Otherwise it's not relevant. 

5 minutes ago, Navybone said:

That the guy they have also attacking women on video, before he uses mace and then shoots a guy during a protest.  You are right, that is not scouting.  

Hmm...the point being that action-reaction with increasing fervor is not scouting.  Isolating the events of the video is hardly the point.  The escalation of explosive politics and injecting that into BSA as has been occurring and ripping it asunder.  That is the point.

27 minutes ago, Navybone said:

I have decided to look at this current situation and look at myself to see how I can work to make change, to do my part not to support or tolerate racism.  I am adamant that the status quo is not enough.  It obviously is not.  It has not Contributed to changing the situation, and we have a significant number of our American population who are disenfranchised because racism is tolerated.   I applause BSA for being willing to participate in the confersation, knowing that it has a national presence across this great country and can make a difference, and not just bury it head in the sand and refuse to see an issue or a way to resolve it.  Scouts is all about being a change agent, it’s entire fundamental concept is creating men and women who are meaningful members of society, rocks for their community, and there to help those who need it.  What makes it so unique and successful is the menthol in which it does this.  
 

discrimination of an y type does not have to be accepted.  It has to be confronted.  Otherwise women would not have the right to vote, blacks would still be slaves, pogroms of Jews would be allowed, etc.  For being a melting pot of a nation, we constantly push back against discrimination - the Irish, the Italians, the Chinese, the Japanese.   
 

I believe in the scout oath and the scout law.  And where is says a scout is brave, the scout needs to understand and learn how to stand up to racism, not let it see the light of day.  

 

 

Scouts has certainly been an agent of change, there is no question of that.  The manner in which that change as it applies to scouts is what is at issue.  While what you say regarding disenfranchisement and historical social ills is true, the idea of attempting to hijack parent and leader guidance in a one size fits all everywhere is not always the best approach.  As will be noticed, the LDS certainly does not agree with a unilateral forced dictation.  
 

the real strength and power of Scouts lies in the local people.  This sort of orders problem is becoming more and more prevalent and comes perilously close to presuming local people are too stupid, ignorant or obstructionist to educate their own in a healthy manner.  The adults serve as brakes and a source of collective wisdom on youthful passion and perspective.  The web, YouTube, Twitter and other media are frequently not sources of thoughtful wisdom but agents of tailored information sculpted to maximize reaction and minimize reflection.  

most parents, I think, especially in scouting are pretty smart decent people who do not want to simply allow their children to be stirred up with a flood of mixed messages.  With the degree of institutional changes being forced, and they are being forced from the top down, there is an increased probability that the sources at the top will be viewed as a servant of social change with the participants as mere pawns. an attempt to assert more authority may well bring greater backlash and departure.  Some may welcome those that leave and decide to totally change the nature, content and structure.  The inheritors will represent only a sliver of the population. That has yet to be decided.  But the only thing that will be accomplished is the further fracturing of a great institution. 
 

I’m not a betting man on something like this. But at this point, it would be hard if not impossible to dispute the reason for the action.  Everyone must accept that no place or activity is immune from the effects of explosive politics forcibly injected into everything.  My statement isn’t a value judgement, just an acknowledgement of how the world has come to be in this country. 

with regard to scouts being in danger, I will hasten to add this, if you go and google search for Albuquerque man chased down, you will see protesters chasing a solitary man, laying hands on and threatening to kill.  As a last resort, the man pulls his own weapon and shoots.  The circumstances are definitely a mixed bag of cause and effect but the point is the growing volatility, reaction and counter reaction.

in Portland, Oregon, a statue of Jefferson has been toppled as racist.  There is a lot that is going on that is assaulting Scouting traditions.  Each day it gets worse it seems.  Isolated incidents do not make for a new norm.  News is designed to be emotional and inflammatory and has become volatile to an extreme.  Scouts is being dragged into this mire more and more. 

I can think of a number of new avenues that, if one is not careful, the BSA will become a reactive institution scrambling to constantly appeal to every social blip on the radar.  That is not scouting.  

I will hasten to add this, if you go and search for Albuquerque man chased down, you will see protesters chasing a solitary man, laying hands on and threatening to kill.  As a last resort, the man pulls his own weapon and shoots.

in Portland, Oregon, a statue of Jefferson has been toppled as racist.  There is a lot that is going on that is assaulting Scouting traditions.  Each day it gets worse it seems.  Isolated incidents do not make for a new norm.  News is designed to be emotional and inflammatory and has become volatile to an extreme.  Scouts is being dragged into this mire more and more.  
 

I can think of a number of new avenues that, if one is not careful, the BSA will become a reactive institution scrambling to constantly appeal to every social blip on the radar.  That is not scouting.  

47 minutes ago, David CO said:

Spell check.  BSA spells it commissioners.

I was twisting the knife because that’s what the Soviet NKVD had to be sure all units were in line

46 minutes ago, David CO said:

I agree.  The lawyers end up owning the house.

Indeed!  But there are lawyers and judges in scouts.  That is where they step up to do what is needed.

I agree entirely.  Every culture in history has emphasized that statement "Love your neighbor as yourself" (they vary a bit on God)

If someone isn't willing to love their neighbor, no training, no pleading no cultural sensitivity , diversity training or even law will work.  In that instance, they have decided.  What seems to be occurring is a forced pill shoved down the throat with a bellows on a patient.  Its as if one group of people believe the others don't know or are just too stupid to what is going on among communities.  We have Citizenship in the Community, Nation and  merit badges which offer forums for exactly this sort of issue.  Those could be tweaked to include any additional concerns but the content of those badges are quite sufficient and always have been to introduce young scouts to issues of the day.  Indeed, I agree Scouting is not an agent of change - though they quickly included and recruited blacks in the early years of its inception here in the states.  Scouts do NOT need to be made an extension of politics. Diversity has been and continues to be a hallmark of scouts in religion (God and Country) and national and international forums.  If scouts is to be political about anything, its focus on Citizen knowledge of American institutions and civic responsibility are the keys.  The rest is up to parents and the community at large outside of the troop , otherwise, you will have to resort to installing political commissars in each troop to be sure the proper party line is being towed.  Extreme? yes, but no less than the dynamics ripping up the scouts and driving people out.