◆ SpookStack

9 than to maintain complete independence. There are certain advantages stemming from national affiliation, including financial help, staff help, legal aid, and reputation. Organization implies bureaucracy. Every organization has bureaucracy, and this is nota “dirty"' word necessarily. It simply means that there is a chain of command or communication through which decisions are carried out. Bureau- cracy becomes "dirty".only when decision-making no longer reflects the rank and file membership, and/or when the structure interferes with carry- ing decisions out. This happens when the struc- ture becomes too large, or when decision-making processes are unclear so that decisiveness is lacking, or when routine alone becomes central in the life of the organization. Every organization, whether it is the U.S. Army, a business corporation, or a peace or civil rights group, must have a chain of command. Our assumption is that the chain of command should go from the bottom up, that is, should be democratic. This is so because democracy is (a) efficient, moreso than dictatorship in the long run; (b) better able to move in the direc- tion of creating a more human society because it involves people in the determination of their own destinies, hence in the fuller involvement and development of their personalities; and (c) more able to recruit the kind of forces needed really to overcome oppression and in- _justice because in the long run movements based on demagogy do not result in justice ~- the means helys in determining the ends. 20 There are ways in which democratic decision-making and full participation by the rank-and-file can be undercut, Early in the formation of a group a decision must be made as to structure, and while democratic structure does not guarantee democracy, it does help. A decision must also be made on how decisions are to be taken: by parliamentary or by consensus (the Quaker "sense of the meeting") methods. Both have advantages, and both have disadvantages. Consensus tends to work best when the members of the group have a lot of agreement on basic philosophy, while the parliamentary ystem tends to guaran- tee representation to organized minorities and recognizes the importance of caucuses. Both systems can be manipulated, by persons with the best intentions, not to speak of those with oral cutloek tess than the -highes less than the highest moral outlook. Several kinds of conditions help to under~ mine democracy aside from outright manipulation, or help make manipulation possible: wearing the group out with late and boring meetings, or holding the group until most members gone, leaves the way open for a well-organized minority to railroad ideas through. Having present officers appoint or elect other officers should generally be regarded with suspicion. Nominating committees for officers, rather than nm: s rom the floor are another technique for keeping the decision-making within a small group. Most important of all are the develop- ment of informal person-to-person relationships: shortcuts, doing favors, and the praiseworthy but misdirected desire to want to avoid mistakes, hence letting "experts" do all the jobs. This tends to happen particularly in the midst of crises 21 VV