BSA and Dissent

[Guest OldGreyEagle]

I don't know if this counts, but the Venturing President for the Northeast Region is from my Crew. A few years back the Crew started expressing interest in Regional and National Ventuting activities. Nothing happened over ovrnight I can tell you, but now, we have a Crew Member who wears Gold tabs, was at the National Meeting in Chicago and will be in Irving for training along with the other Venture presidents.

 

If you want it to happen, you have to start trying

[Bob White 20]

If you know how the program works then what do you not understand?

 

"Regardless, people are selected for these committees in part because it is believed that they are "representative" of Scouts and Scouters throughout the organization."

 

You make a false assumption. These people are selected for what they bring as an individual, their skills, knowledge and experience. If the task requires feedback from the field then the committee will search that out. But you cannot run a programs this size through consensus.

 

National is made up of numerous volunteer committee in all three program areas. Many of them contain youth members. I have no idea the specific number of either at any given time. it depends on what is being worked on. Yet even without this knowledge thousands of scout units meet every week and have no problem doing their jobs? How can this be?(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[NeilLup 13]

I can speak a little about one National Committee where I do have some knowledge.

 

I believe there are three youth members on the National Boy Scouting Committee:

 

The National OA Chief (who is also a member of the National Executive Board)

The National OA Vice Chief

The Antarctic Scout (who is also a member of the National Executive Board)

 

The OA Chief and Vice Chief are selected in a double selection process where all the voters are youth.

The Antarctic Scout is selected in an extremely rigorous process involving volunteers and pros coordinated with the National Science Foundation.

The OA Chief and Vice Chief have one year terms. The Antarctic Scout has a two year term but a substantial part of his term is spent in Antarctica.

 

As far as the degree of dissent which is appropriate, one guidance is the Scout Law:

 

OBEDIENT

A Scout follows the rules of his family, school, and troop. He obeys the laws of his community and country. If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobey them.

 

Now "orderly" is an interesting word. One wonders where George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, and Nelson Mandella would fit on the "orderly" scale.

[LovetoCamp 9]

Why would anyone place this communist terrorist Mandela in the same sentence as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson? Not even close.

[evmori 11]

Trail Pounder,

You gotta explain that last post!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[scoutingagain 20]

"These people are selected for what they bring as an individual, their skills, knowledge and experience. If the task requires feedback from the field then the committee will search that out. But you cannot run a programs this size through consensus."

 

With all due respect Bob W.,( and I do mean that,) I am a member of professional societies, investor in some large corporations, and a citizen of the US. All these organizations seem to be able to govern themselves quite nicely using a relatively open and democratic system where members, or shareholders, get to elect their leadership. This is also true of many religious organizations. Some are larger and older than the BSA.

 

I have been associated with scouting for over 20 of my 47 years. I can't ever recall being asked to send a vote in for anyone seeking a position at the national level. I can't even recall ever being told a local person that might be elected to a leadership position in an OA lodge would have a say in who might be selected to a national leadership position.

 

I fully support the BSA and probably agree with 90 - 99% of their policies and positions. I fully support their goals. I just find it ironic that the BSA teaches democracy to our youth but does not appear practice it at a level other private organizations seem to be able to.

 

SA

 

 

[LovetoCamp 9]

It's a free country. People can write and think how they want to. But, you will never catch Trail Pounder equating Washington and Jefferson, two of the greatest of Great Americans with Ghandi, King, and Mandela. They don't belong in the same sentence. What exactly was it that King did for these United States? A few marches, a few speeches, and several weeks of rioting and looting in major urban areas? Why is it that Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, President who purchased from France half the country, doesn't rate his own national holiday? Eisenhower, two term president, and hero of WWII? Roosevelt, 4 term president, who guided us to victory in WWII and out of the Great Depression? Teddy Roosevelt, Medal of Honor recipient, U.S. Grant won the Civil War with his generalship.....

[Bob White 20]

The Cub Pack is certainly not a democracy. Neither is the Scout Troop. For that matter neither is the U.S..

 

We operate our government, our scout troops and our councils as republics.

 

You cannot put the BSA in a structural box as other companies. It will not fit. Since the implementation of councils in 1916 the BSA has used this same unique structure.

 

Charter organizations that use scouting provide representatives, Representatives elect Members at Large. These two groups form District/council committees to administrate the local council. Then they select representatives to the Regional and National Committees.

 

National BSA Council is made of representatives that are selected both locally and nationally. But many of the committees are functions of the National Office not the national Council. Since many national committees are ad-hoc, the members are selected for the resources they bring to that specific topic or project.

 

Standing National Council committees are made of the regional and national volunteers selected by the Council and Regional committees.

 

They are not elected by unit volunteers because our membership and authority is tied to the unit and extends no further. The BSA does not belong to the unit volunteer. It is the program delivered by the unit volunteer. The program belongs to the Chartered Organizations that use the scouting program. They do not elect a representative to the council, they assign them, the Charter Rep.

 

Does that make more sense?

 

 

[Hunt 11]

It seems to me after reading this thread and others that there are different levels of disagreement and dissent, and it often muddies the waters to lump them all together.

1. There are people who are enemies of BSA. Most of these are outside, and so their views are not very persuasive.

2. There are people within BSA who feel strongly that BSA should change its policy in some way. Some of these people may choose to take active steps, either within the organization or by speaking up outside, to try to get that policy changed. If they feel so strongly that they begin to denounce the organization, they can expect to be expelled, if they don't quit first.

3. There are people who disagree with BSA on some policy, but don't feel very strongly about it. If they were asked in a poll what they thought, they'd express their views. If they had the opportunity to elect representatives, they might take it into accout in voting.

4. There are people who aren't sure whether they agree with BSA or not, but are ready to discuss the pros and cons.

 

I think it's important to note that even for people in category (2), their disagreement is not necessarily a make-or-break point on maintaining their relationship with the organization. If you're in category (3), obviously you're not going to quit over your disagreement--you would perhaps prefer that things be done differently, but it's not central to you.

 

I think we can all understand how some peripheral issue, say about what the uniform should look like, is something that people can disagree strongly about, but that nobody would either quit or be expelled over. But I think other issues, such as gay leadership, can be similar. That's where I am on that issue, for example--category (3). If I were given a vote, I would probably say that the issue should be "local option." But I don't feel so strongly about it that I would crusade for a rule change. I don't think that makes me a hypocrite--it just means that I'm able to look at the big picture, and judge what is important enough to me to spend my time on. That also doesn't mean I don't like the program--the opposite is true--or that I don't accept the core values of scouting. I just have my doubts about how close to the "core" this particular policy is.

[NeilLup 13]

There may be a subset of dissent which is worth mentioning -- maybe it is the same thing, maybe not.

 

There may be those of us whose feelings on a particular issue, like gay leadership, are not particularly strong one way or another but who are concerned that by taking the extremely adamant view that the BSA has, it risks marginalizing itself and no longer being the broad scope, nation-wide, unifying organization that it has tried to be through its history.

 

At one time, we said "Scouting is for all boys." Is that still the case? Should that be the case?

 

One side may say "Our values are not for sale." The other group can then say "Of course our values are for sale. You've sold out to the other side."

 

I guess my point is that there are at least two areas of concern. One is the issues themselves (gays, atheists, etc.) The other is whether Scouting, particularly in some parts of the country, is becoming perceived as a much more narrow, politically motivated, special interest type of youth organization and whether that will diminish the value and the impact which Scouting as a movement will have in our country.(This message has been edited by NeilLup)

[packsaddle 753]

Hunt, I agree, nice post. NeilLup, I appreciate your point as well.

 

Trail Pounder, Ghandi and Mandela both helped deliver greater freedom to majorities in their countries. I agree with your opinions of our patriots and presidents. However, I think Martin Luther King and the movement he represented forced our country to review our conscience regarding what it means to be a citizen. The good that he and the civil rights movement did was not limited to the benefit of minorities but to the benefit of all Americans, including you. Perhaps you could elaborate on your views of him and civil rights?

 

And the issue of a holiday: I'd support elimination of any or all holidays if they are so divisive to our society.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[evmori 11]

Trail Pounder,

So King, Ghandi & Mandela weren't great men? Why?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[scoutingagain 20]

BobW, again thanks for the explanation. I think I have a better picture now.

 

The Charter Organizations appoint representatives (COR) that do have some say in how their particular organization is represented at the national level. However the BSA, as a private organization, can choose to accept or reject those organizations it wishes to grant a charter to, exercising it's right to associate with those organizations is wishes to associate with.

 

So while the BSA is not governed by representatives of it's membership, it is governed to some degree by representatives of those chartered organizations that are accepted by the BSA.

 

I can see where this would be confusing to the membership though, since many of us are members of organizations where we have direct input to the leadership of the organization we are members of. Not so with the BSA. We are told what the program is and can choose to be a member or not based on where we might fall on Hunt's scale of dissent. (On THE issue, I would probably be a 3 as well.)

 

SA

 

 

 

 

[SR540Beaver 116]

Trail Pounder,

 

Considering the number of Presidents we have had in over 200 hundred years, we would soon be approaching an average of one federal holiday per week in addition to all of the other holidays we observe. Now, I have no problem with having a four day work week and a three day weekend, but I don't think industry would care too much for it. Therefore, we do have a holiday that honors ALL Presidents. It is called President's Day and it is the 3rd Monday in February.

[LovetoCamp 9]

Grover Cleveland doesn't need one.