Rico,
If you feel it is appropriate you are welcom to post the following:
Below is a list of some information sources about Natlfed which I think most people would call neutral viewpoint sources. I put this together as there has been an ongoing dispute over the Natlfed wikipedia article on what sources are neutral. Most firsthand accounts that are available on-line have been dismissed as biased. In addition, information from scholars who are active in writings or groups that oppose and/or expose destructive cults has also been dismissed as biased. Many news articles have been dismissed in the wikipedia discussions as sensationalist. I do not necessarily agree with these characterizations, but none the less think that the following sources should be brought to light as they are written under either academic or journalistic standards, or parts of their content can be argued as objective.Academic Resources:“What About Texas? The Forgotten Cause of Antonio Orendain and the Rio Grande Valley Farm Workers 1966-1982”, Timothy Paul Bowman, May 2005, Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Arlington in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in History. Available at:This is a paper that has alot of research behind it. I find it notable in that it does not mention TFWU as ever being part of natlfed and does not mention Gino Perente as ever being an organizer with TFWU."The Sociologist Looks at Communit y Organizing, A Field Study with the California Homemakers Association", Joyce Burris Shupe, 1976, Project, Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts in Sociology, California State University at Sacramento.If someone has access to databases of university theses and dissertations you can probably get a copy of this. I believe the author is now a professor at Cal State in Sacramento. I emailed her to see if I could get permission to share the dissertation with others and she never replied. Copyright laws prevent me from putting the copy I have on-line. It gives you facts and a flavor of the early days of CHA.“Families Who Wait for Natlfed Survivors”, Sarah Bollinger, 1996, Supervised by Craig Wolff, Columbia University. Again, I have been unable to contact the author to get permission to share this on-line. In addition, it mentions the names of several families and natlfed cadre so I’m not sure I would even if I could get permission.“La Causa in the East: Stony Brook University and the Long Island Farmworkers”, Charlotta Beavers, HIS 422 – Dr. Klubock, Spring 2007.This was shared through the Natlfed Yahoo group by Mitch Cohen who was one of the people interviewed for the paper. I do not have the author’s permission to publish it on-line. It details the history of Stonybrook student's participation in the struggle of farm workers on Long Island and including the beginnings of EFWA as well as the history of the UFWOC boycott. It was also well researchedThere are numerous articles in the New York Times during the late 60s and early 70s on UFWOC and farm workers in Long Island. They are perhaps notable in that they do not mention Gino Perente and put other names to acts which Perente claimed credit to. I can provide a list to anyone interested.There is a site with firsthand participant essays on the work of UFWOC at: http://www.farmworkermovement.org/ . There are a number of firsthand accounts of the NYC boycott and work in Texas. They are again notable in that they do not mention Gino Perente or any natlfed cadre.There are FBI files on Gino Perente and Natlfed available on-line which are notable for what they say about the FBIs involvement or non-involvement and the raid in 1984. The content may not be viewpoint neutral but the fact that they exist and are viewpoint neutral material on what the FBI did and did not do is (in my humble opinion).
Robin Fahlberg
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Academic and Primary Sources of Information on NATLFED
I am posting the following letter from Robin because she's done some good research in tracking down academic work and primary sources on NATLFED entities.
Friday, August 8, 2008
From a Former WSWA Volunteer
Someone named "Kay" sent in the following note about the Western Service Workers Association. An all too typical story of a volunteer who's trust was abused, I'm afraid, but a nicely written description that is worth sharing.
I was involved with WSWA in Northern Ca recently, and I have first hand knowledge of them being what I would surely consider a cult. Yes, they do actually do some charity in the community, but I can assure you, it is just a front for NATLFED. It's how they recruit members. After a couple meetings with them, they became very manipulative towards me, put more and more pressure on me to buy food for their office, and even volunteer full-time. They mocked my life goals and told me the only way to make a difference was to join them. They even urged me to drop out of college.
I knew that I had to get out before I became sucked in to their cult, but even so, I was still pressured to go to their meetings. After I had resolved myself to leaving for good, I recieved a call from one of the leading volunteers that lasted for 45 minutes, with him continuing to trying to manipulate me into coming back, with a mixture of mockery of my lifestyle, and contempt for other political organiations I was supportive of.
After I had made it clear I wasn't coming back, I felt uneasy for weeks because they had all my personal information. Luckily, nothing ever happened, but I would definitely recommend that people not get involved with this organization.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Natlfed and Money
Solid contribution from Robin Spellman Fahlberg, presented in its entirety.
Do I fully agree with her evaluation of the entities and their purity of purpose? No.
Worth reading her analysis anyway? Absolutely. Enjoy.
Do I fully agree with her evaluation of the entities and their purity of purpose? No.
Worth reading her analysis anyway? Absolutely. Enjoy.
Natlfed and MoneyI’ve seen various questions, insinuations, and opinions on sites discussing Natlfed about their finances and handling of money. I thought I would add my two cents in on this subject based on my memories. This information is from the 1979-1994 period, so may be outdated. I would suggest anyone donating to any of the affiliates ask some questions about where the money is going and how those decisions are made. I’ll divide this between the entities and the National Office.Entities:None of the entities (E astern Farm Workers, Eastern Service Workers, etc.) that I know of ever had enough money to even cover all expenses. They were always in debt. Even when they would get out of debt, it would only last a short time. In retrospect I suspect the reason is that we were always ordered to do much more than we had the resources to accomplish. There was a general order that whenever a member came in with a benefit request (clothing, food, medical care, etc.) all motion on the floor would stop until it was dealt with. As you can imagine, trying to deal with every need that every low-income member came in the door with will cause an organization to continually spin in place. Add to that the constant orders to canvass, work on this issue, etc., etc.. There was never enough time to really build a base of support for what we thought we were trying to do – build an organization that would provide the resources for low-income workers to organize.
The fundraising plan and the spending of the money that came in was pretty much the sole discretion of the Operations Manager, with varying degrees of involvement by the Political Commissar -- although this always had to be in line with the regular directives from National administration. Usually an Operations Manager tried to operate off some kind of budget that included rent, utilities, car expenses, telephone bills, cadre individual needs, etc.. Money that came in was logged in 2 ways. Checks went on a check receipt runner. Cash went on the Daily Cash Account Sheet. Money out was either logged on the Check register, or the Daily Cash Account Sheet.
Was money mismanaged? I suppose that depends on a person’s point of view. Since it was one or two people’s discretion it probably varied. That in my view is the main problem. There was no oversight or general direction from a Board or other governing body. There was no published accounting so that supporters could decide for themselves whether their money was being well spent or not.
There was one area where I think there is a big question on the management of funds and that is on what was sent to the National administration. The general rule was that 10% of the entity income was supposed to go to national. I don’t know of any entity that ever followed this as no entity ever had the extra money. However, I do know that=2 0we would often send them donated cars, paper, etc.. Large grant donations were also supposed to go to them. The entity I was in never got any large grants so this was never tested, but I do remember one instance where an entity got a large grant from a religious body for a satellite benefits office. The check went to national. They sent back a directive to write the religious body that we would not be accepting the donation because we were against some policy they had. The entity sent the letter and there was a great deal of confusion because national also cashed the check. So, although I don’t know how much of large grants went to national, I know some did. Again, this may have changed as many entities seem now to be getting large grants to buy offices – and many offices have been bought. But, I would be asking many questions before giving them any grants.
National OfficeWhen I knew it, the national office included the apartment buildings on Carroll St. in Brooklyn, a design studio and later the Women’s Press Collective, an apartm ent in lower Manhattan where National Pro was run out of, and a penthouse at 145 W. 55th St.. As far as I know, the money to run these came from business enterprises, donations from cadre, money from the entities, and money (or other goods) national cadre raised in the name of the entities.
I can only imagine what the expenses were. At one time there were 60 cadre at various national locations. Just to house and feed this many people was a tremendous expense. Then there were rents, car expenses, etc.. A good deal of the food was donated and national cadre made at least 2 runs a week to pick this up. Most of it was donated to the Coalition of Concerned Medical Professionals on Long Island – or so the donors thought. But, there was also a huge food shopping once a week and daily trips to a local store. Cigarettes must have run into the $1000s each month. I think this made up the bulk of where the money went. From reports some went to feed Gino’s drug habit, pay bribes for people to say Gino was who he said he was, and other obviously unjustified expenses – but I doubt there was much to spare. I remember having some conscience problems with soliciting food for CCMP and then it going to NOC. But, as most I managed to rationalize it. I truly believed we were going to solve all the problems of poor people, and thus it wasn’t really lying to say that was what the people were donating to.
When I first visited NOC, it was only the second floor apartment at 1107 Carroll St.. Natlfed did not own the buildings then but were the Supers. Later Gino told me that we had painted and repaired the first 2 apartments very carefully to get the job as Supers. After that as many corners were cut as possible, including low-cost supplies, while charging the owners the full price. Then there was a court case to get paid which resulted in us getting ownership as payment. I take this with a grain of salt as it was Gino saying it. Later I know we put together a group of investors to buy the whole group of buildings. A sad part of that story includes the investing of an inheritance by an individual cadre. Her parents died and she was an only child so inherited. I remember that right before their deaths and immediately thereafter, she was the recipient of much attention, making regular trips to NOC. She invested the entire inheritance into those buildings.
That brings me to one area of how national got money – through “donations” of cadre. I know of one cadre who signed over an inheritance, and another who was paid for his tenure and donated it. Then there is the letter to MF members in the FBI file where they were solicited for anything of value – as a loan – of course. There was always an effort to get money from any cadre who had assets or income. When I first became a cadre, I remember Gino telling me that the organization did not accept large donations from cadre because we didn’t want this to become a reason for recruitment – obviously a bold-faced lie.
There were several business enterprises the organization ran. When I first started there was a Design Studio. I have no recollection of what happened to that. Then there was the Super job, the law-firm, and I don’t know what other enterprises.
There was a great deal of fundraising through NEJA from NYC and other wealthy donors. This was done through mail solicitations, phone solicitations, and house-meetings in the NYC area. The money was solicited for various projects the entities were running. I can assure you that the entities never saw the money. The rule was that it belonged to who raised it. I’m sure that the donors were not aware of this. I think that the way it came back to NOC was that they wrote a check from NEJA to the entity, and then the entity would transfer that amount of money back to a bank account. The reason I suspect this is that as EFWA Operations Manager I got a $1000 check in the mail from NEJA. I spent it on bills. The next thing I know I got a call telling me to transfer the money to a bank account – and great dismay that it had been spent. Needless to say I never got another check from NEJA. Again, I think that we rationalized this based on what we perceived as the benefit that national provided the entities.
As I said, the entities also sent money or other goods to NOC on occasion. Food and clothing were sent. Cars were sent. Paper was sent. The entities paid NOC for calendars each year as well.This may be totally out of date. From all recent accounts, the national administration is no longer a top heavy and many in the NYC area are actually running organizations such as CCMP or CCLP out of offices. So, take this with a grain of salt. But, if I were contemplating donating to any Natlfed group – I would be asking a lot of questions.
Friday, July 18, 2008
I feel compelled to go through this one more time...
Cheers.
ANONYMOUS wrote:
I used to volunteer for the one in Philly for about 6 months in '06-'07. Volunteer doctors and dentists reserve a day or two each month of their time and provide their services, open to any member. Being a member was free, and the yearly fee was strictly voluntary.July 17, 2008 5:53 PM
When I did phone canvassing, I never took any political or religious information, nor ever instructed to. I did take occupation information, which was used for potential volunteering (e.g., in the medical field, could help with the checkups, business owner, could help donate specific type of goods/service, etc.)
At the time I was there, they also achieved some cool stuff outside of the usual food/clothing/health donations, like preventing illegal evictions at the chiefly senior citizen Hawthorne Apts. on 12th and Fitzwater -- something that wouldn't have happened if they didn't do door-to-door canvassing.
However, I did meet one of the heads of the Boston-area group, and he came off as an abrasive, dogmatic jerk. The people in Philly just came off as people who wanted to have people from all strata come together and raise conditions for the working poor, and had minor victories here and there.
I posted the following response:
So I published the above email, even though it is anonymous and even though it was written by someone who is engaging in NATLFED-speak (Really now - using a term like "strata" we know you are either a hardcore NATLFED-member or a geologist. If you are in fact a geologist, my apologies in advance.).
Pretty typical NATLFED dupe-speak. 'I only ever saw them help people', 'sure they are quaint, and a tad quirky, but they are such pure doers of good that i forgive the idiosyncrasies,' and that sort of thing.
Apparently, the postings that preceded Anonymous' post - the anguished cries of parents seeking to reclaim their children from the cult (there are now several strings of postings like this in various places on the blog) - didn't prompt any re-examination of Anonymous' beliefs about ESWA.
So, Dear Readers, make up your own minds. You can go with the journalists, ex-NATLFED cadre, miserable parents, clergy and progressive community leaders who say ESWA and NATLFED is a cult and scam; or you can go with the occasional Anonymous poster, spouting NATLFED-jargon, claiming that the ESWA are just honest, simple people trying to get through life the best they can, while maybe helping out a few downtrodden souls along the way.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Interesting email on CVSA
Received this from an anonymous emailer. Worth quoting in full. (Also, don't forget to check out the post from Robin Fahlberg in the "Comments" section below.)
-
Thank you for providing this article. I have been reading about the NATLFED ever since I volunteered for the CVSA a few times. I became very quickly suspicious of them and chose to research them online almost immediately.
I thought they were weird because they were so anti government- a little bit more than any group in America should be. They also repeated the same phrases again and again- which was unusual because the volunteers appeared to be intelligent. There is no point in telling an American that there is starvation in America and that the gas prices are high. Instead of doing valuable work, I was lectured on this for what had to be hours.
These people would repeat the same sentences so many times that it was almost akin to being in grade school detention. Imagine my chagrin when I found out that the CVSA and grade school detention have far more in common than just the repetition.
The older woman who runs the place is nice but she is deeply affiliated with the cult. Apparently she was arrested back in 1996, which would mean that she has dedicated the majority of her life to this sick group. I doubt she could function in the real world at this point. I am curious to learn more about her involvement.
Every person who signs up to volunteer at their table in Union Square or a college career fair has their name, address and profession typed out on an index card- which was bizarre to me because no volunteer group I had ever worked with in the past treats their volunteers in this way or uses so much paperwork.
They also use a social hacking script when they call people- and it was too unusual that a group would find that to be necessary. You have to record whenever you leave a message or whether or not you had a busy signal. The index cards have a lot of useless and invasive information such as what the people do for a living.
They use bizarre vocabulary words like "systemic", and "canvassing." It was all very annoying as if they were using these words to feel more exclusive or special.
What made me the most suspicious of them was how they wanted me to volunteer not only on the weekends for 5 hours minimum (most volunteer groups only need up to 2 hours of your time per week), but during the week immediately after I left work as well. That was not going to happen.
I was to fill out paperwork- and say all sorts of ridiculous sounding things that I know nothing about over the phone. What I was to be doing had nothing to do with the Invest Yourself catalog. I felt like they were just trying to waste my time since I wasn't helping anyone. I also was not helping them with their catalog that is apparently just a front to get money and funds for their shadier organizations.
They took advantage of my willingness to volunteer so that they could further their sick agenda. I had no idea that there were shady people who are so soulless as to use poverty as the bait. UFO cults have more respect from me than these nutjobs- at least their hook is something that you do not see regularly in the street.
As revenge for the attempt to ruin my weekends (and weeks, and etc.), I plan to warn others about this group. Again, thank you for publishing this information on the web. - June 17, 2008 11:45 PM
Monday, June 16, 2008
Air-ball - Advocate Weekly article misses the mark on WMLA
There is a new article in the Advocate Weekly on Western Massachusetts Labor Action. Let's just say that the reporter didn't uphold the highest journalistic standards. Check out the "comments" section, where some of the big names in NATLFED internet debate - including Jeff Whitnack and Robin Fahlberg - provide a little balance.
http://www.advocateweekly.com/ci_9554281
http://www.advocateweekly.com/ci_9554281
Sunday, April 13, 2008
New article on Eastern Service Workers Association in Boston
A worthy read on ESWA, from the now defunct studentunderground.com site.
Uncovering the Eastern Service Workers Association
By Nate Leskovic
Fall 2007/Winter 2008
Fall was descending, and as I bundled up and left the Jamaica Plain Harvest Co-op I was greeted with another reminder of the season. “KeySpan made $43 million last year. Do you know how many people in Boston won’t be able to afford heat this winter?”
They told me.
“Are you tired of being burdened by student loans when the companies that provide them make millions?”
Yes!
“Shouldn’t everyone have access to healthcare and the basic necessities of life?”
Of course!
It seemed I was in solidarity with the people at the table on the sidewalk. I read their flyers and chatted some more—and they made sense. They asked me to sign up, which I thought seemed a bit premature. I told them I’d think about it. Then I mentioned I was a writer and thought they might be a good story.
Silence. They turned their back to me. Strange.
They are the Eastern Service Workers Association (ESWA), described on their flyer as a “free and voluntary unincorporated membership association joining together service workers, seasonal, temporary, and part-time workers and other low-income workers and their families with students, professionals, homemakers, clergy and business owners to fight to improve living and working conditions.”
According to ESWA, they do not represent workers in negotiation with their employers, but use an 11-Point Benefit Program to “aid members in obtaining what is rightfully theirs in a context that promotes their best interests on all levels.”
During my initial conversation I learned they do not use the Internet, but I decided to check them out online anyways. I wanted to know more, and I sensed something was up. I was immediately inundated by exposes, cult watch lists and a Boston Indymedia thread warning potential recruits to stay away from their “Stalinist” tactics. There was a story here, though perhaps a different one than I initially thought.
For ESWA to have existed in Boston since the 1970s, as they stated, they couldn’t be a complete scam, could they? I did not want to blindly trust the Internet. Unfortunately, what I read claimed they were unreceptive to reporters. Instead of risking a bland interview, some rhetoric and the door, I decided I would volunteer and see firsthand what the group does. I could be seen as a potential recruit, not just someone to impress with public relations tactics.
***
ESWA is a front group for the National Labor Federation (NATLFED). Other ESWA’s exist in cities such as Rochester (NY), Trenton (NJ), and Philadelphia. In addition, there are NATLFED “entities” around the country with different names, such as the Eastern Farm Workers Association, California Homemakers Association, Coalition of Concerned Medical Professionals and the Midwest Workers Association. They all basically use the same methods of “strategic organizing,” and they all follow instruction from NATLFED headquarters in Brooklyn.NATLFED began with a man named Gino Perente, whose real name is actually William Doeden. Doeden was a radical, active in San Francisco from the late 1960s through the early 1970s. He organized a group called the Liberation Army of Revolutionary Group Organizations (LARGO) that actually declared war against the state of California in 1970.
After his revolution failed, Doeden disappeared to avoid child support payments and reappeared in 1972 as Gino Perente. He was now in New York, working for Cesar Chavez’s United Farm Workers Organizing Committee. His stint with Chavez was brief, but with the knowledge gained he founded the Eastern Farm Workers Association in Suffolk County on Long Island. This initial success organizing workers outside of official labor unions still serves as the historical basis for NATLFED’s current activities.
During the 1970s, NATLFED grew and established around 20 entities throughout the country. Under the direction of Perente, it developed a political philosophy based on Marx, Lenin and Stalin and began using a highly structured and centralized power system to ensure control of each entity and its volunteers. The strategy for organizing and recruiting new members is dictated by a copyrighted document compiled in 1973, called “The Essential Organizer.”
NATLFED’s methods never vary from this codified plan. The top leaders of NATLFED in Brooklyn are members of the Provisional Communist Party, which is considered clandestine.
Perente, who died in 1995, was your stereotypical cult leader. Aside from assuming a Latino identity—probably to more easily suggest parallels between him, Chavez and Latin American revolutionaries—he is consistently described as a con-artist, alcoholic, drug addict and sexual predator. He is remembered for delivering rambling speeches late into the night, being constantly surrounded by followers who attended to his needs, as well as abusing his followers mentally, verbally and sometimes physically. In short, he was the stereotypical David Koresh or Jim Jones. In its early history, NATLFED was on a trajectory for revolution and set 1984 for its launch.
Obviously, it never happened. The Brooklyn headquarters was raided by the FBI soon after, followed by some legal problems, but the group survived. They were again raided by the NYPD in 1996, but charges were eventually cleared because of illegal search procedures. It was not a major setback either.
NATLFED is basically harmless in terms of insurrection potential. If discussed at all, the concept of revolution is used mainly to instill a sense of purpose and sincerity among its most hardcore followers. NATLFED is not actively planning rebellion, and would not have the resources to begin.
Since Perente’s death, Margaret Ribar has taken control of NATLFED’s National Office Central in Brooklyn. The power structure has remained intact, the organizing work continues, but observers say the more militant edge provided by the presence of Perente seems to have subsided. NATLFED appears to exist mainly to continue its existence—with a somewhat successful community service mission that never really expands.
I write about NATLFED with a degree of fogginess because of the extreme secrecy inherent in the organization. There is also a pervasive paranoia that limits sources. Jeff Whitnack, former full-time volunteer and author of a 1984 expose, told me at one point he had an entire NATLFED legal team harassing him.
Members were only willing to discuss community service. As a result, description of NATLFED requires a synthesis of writings, recollections from past volunteers who often wish to remain anonymous, and some Internet consensus. Most of these sources describe the more shady side of NATLFED operations—but it does do positive work.
***
Each NATLFED entity sets up what they call a “mutual benefits association” in order to provide services to its members. This is what ESWA does out of their office at 48 Blue Hill Ave. in Roxbury. Benefits distributed include food, dental care, legal advocacy and clothing. They solicit members, local organizations, businesses, lawyers, medical professionals and volunteers to donate services and goods.
I spent three days volunteering with ESWA and took part in some rewarding activity. On my first day, I helped out at a holiday party thrown for its members using donated space in a neighborhood church. I saw families enjoying an enormous meal of donated food, parents grateful to receive donated toys and children dancing to live music and playing with Santa.
During my second day I distributed food. ESWA had secured and sorted items to provide a box or bag for almost 100 families. They had an entire rental truck filled with the goods and I loaded up my car and dropped it off on doorsteps. While I was working, they were able to find a place to stay for a victim of domestic abuse and her child, and got heat turned on for a struggling family.
On my third day I intended to see the advocacy work ESWA was doing for its members, but I soon ended up alone in a room with a full-time volunteer. Surprise! I was being recruited to join ESWA as a full-time, “cadre” member. From my research, I expected this treatment.
ESWA is doing community service work in Boston. Aside from my participation, I spoke with members at the party and they were nothing but grateful. I also spoke with Chris Durkin, Director of Community Relations at Harvest Co-op, and inquired about ESWA recruiting in front of their stores. He sent me even more positive feedback from the community, recommendations he used to justify Harvest’s relationship with ESWA, despite the controversy surrounding it.
However, the service ESWA does is only part of their mission. Some claim it is merely an elaborate NATLFED façade. ESWA and the other NATLFED entities use their benefit program to recruit socially-conscious and charitable young adults into full-time volunteer positions.
***
Former cadre Whitnack believes by maintaining the pretense of the mutual benefit association, NATLFED entities keep their organization alive, retain high profile members and business partners, and appear like a just another service group.
“They have a ton of doctors and lawyers,” says Whitnack. “The bigger fish, they let them have independence. They don’t want to lie to them. It’s all basically flypaper to suck in new members.”
An anonymous, former full-time volunteer who NATLFED convinced to drop out of college about ten years ago – I’ll call him Bob—explained his feelings about this tactic: “It’s my understanding the number one thing they want is not to help poor or increase donations. The number one thing they want is to recruit more members that will allow them to continue their organization, just to keep it going. New organizers come so terribly slowly that they have to reach thousands to get one to be full-time.”
These cadre positions are famous for their 16- to 18-hour work days, demanded seven days a week. The schedule naturally results in loss of contact with family and friends. Recruits are required to quit their jobs and move out of their homes. Cadre do not receive pay and NATLFED provides them with donated food and shelter.
“These are the pushiest people you will ever volunteer for,” warns Bob. “They will take everything that you give them and ask you for more, and if you surrender your independence to them, they will make it very painful for you to reclaim it.”
When Bob became cadre, he was given a memo from NATLFED headquarters. “Participation will only be considered on a full-time basis,” it said. “That means 24 hours/day, 365 days/yr. You may be as religious as you want, but church attendance is not part of the program for professional revolutionary. Visits to close friends/family in the hospital may be permitted on request and with supervision.”
NATLFED recruitment begins with tabling at strategic locations, such as college campuses or summer festivals, or through door-to-door canvassing in low-income neighborhoods. On my first day I participated in a canvass and saw a few people sign up. The pitch is enticing to anyone facing daily hardship or those with a social conscience:
“Too many of us, for too long, have suffered from low-paying jobs with no benefits…We keep finding that minimum wage is our maximum wage…ESWA joins together those who realize that as long as any of us are left behind in poverty, none of us are safe…We know that we need an organization with no strings attached to fight to end our second-class status…ESWA is that organization and invites you to sign-up as a member today!”
To join, you are only asked to pay $0.62 a month! If you can’t afford that (!), you don’t even have to. The fee is symbolic of the hourly wage earned by the first workers organized by Perente. If you agree to join or volunteer, ESWA asks for your phone number. That is what they really want.
Once they have your number, you will continuously receive calls regarding your participation. “Can you volunteer for this event? When are you coming next? Can we set up a more
permanent schedule? We need your help to make a difference!”
***
ESWA refers to this tactic as “arm’s-length systemic organizing,” and it made me extremely thankful to have caller ID on my phone. When I asked about the strategy, they explained they could more easily secure commitments from people by phone. I also discovered getting people within “arm’s length” ensures opportunity for NATLFED philosophy indoctrination.
During my limited time with ESWA, I was constantly bombarded with discussion-less canned rhetoric. The ideas were obviously part of the “party line,” and each cadre used the same lingo and catch phrases. As with the pitch, the orientation and lessons I witnessed were read mostly verbatim from a written text. While talking about potential opponents during one lecture, a full-time volunteer apologized for the language—blaming it on “70s humor”—but still recited, “You better run motherfucker! We’re coming after your mother!”
Another strategy designed specifically to ensnare was the frequent persuading to increase the time you devote to ESWA. Each time I showed up, as well as during each phone call I actually answered, I was always questioned about my participation. Each NATLFED recruit is designated a tabular volunteer or a viable volunteer. This is determined through their analysis of your potential to become full-time, usually done with informal chats and more formal interviews.
Most are set aside as unlikely to become a cadre member, such as those with families and established careers, but people who have neither—like myself at the time—are targeted.
Once you are singled out, cadre members continuously probe you about your opinions on labor issues, economics and politics. As they delicately weave their ideas into the conversation, they challenge you to defend your participation—or lack thereof—in your previous activism.
According to NATLFED cadre, they are the only organization that actually accomplishes anything. They hope you realize you have not been doing enough to make change in this world, and that they have the only effective solution.
“They have the upper hand once they get you in the office,” said Bob. “They try to make you believe there is no plan on the planet that can address the problems of poor people like theirs can…I had a difficult time saying no. When someone says to you, ‘I have given up my job and an ordinary life to pursue the goal of ending world poverty,’ you can’t just look at them in the eye and say no like you can to a salesman…They are genuine, but manipulative to the point that it’s not funny.”
Of course, I was only briefly subjected to these tactics. I had also done my research and could easily spot their subtle techniques. But for someone a bit more naive, a little less confident in their worldview and in a transitional period in their life, I can imagine how the path to full-time NATLFED volunteer unfolds.
The other main technique used to recruit is pure hard work. This involves not only completing the tedious tasks assigned, but continuous busy-work that numbs the mind. By combining a steady stream of rhetoric with never-ending activity, NATLFED attempts to breed pseudo-revolutionary zealot zombies. There was little conversation within ESWA about anything other than ESWA. If you listen constantly to one philosophy, are provided no opportunity to discuss and constantly face a guilt-trip regarding your devotion, you could soon find yourself on the slippery slope towards entrapment.
When distributing food, I chatted with a member I’ll call Joe. He explained that he joined ESWA because he was going through hard times financially and was about to be evicted. Joe hoped ESWA would help and was working hard in return.
“I don’t think they understand the word volunteer. No one ever works enough for them. They keep calling and asking for more,” he said.
Joe told me he had shown up almost every day for the past few months. Except for some food, he hadn’t received much in benefits. “If they don’t find Joe a place to stay, I’m gone,” he said.
During my volunteer time, neither I nor anyone else was ever allowed to be idle. I was sent to the truck more than once to count the number of food boxes inside, when everyone already knew the number. While working at the holiday party I was constantly asked what I was doing and barely had an opportunity to chat with the attendees. In the office I was given paperwork to check and when it was done I had to check it again. I witnessed one cadre member moving swiftly around the office for 15 minutes. However, I saw he was only shuffling the same papers from one binder to another, to a different cabinet, back to another binder, into another cabinet….
***
I was further convinced that their tactics were less than honest when I made my final phone call to ESWA. Phyllis Kornblum, organizing director and one of four full-time cadre, appeared quiet, calm and determined during my volunteer work. She, like the others, was warm, kind, and caring in a somewhat unemotional way. I was expecting some degree of anger when I revealed I was no longer interested in volunteering with the group—and that instead I was planning on writing about them—but I was not prepared for the extreme change in character she displayed.
Nor did I think she would still attempt to recruit me.
I explained to her that I had witnessed some of the community service ESWA does, but that I had spoken with former cadre and done research which led me to believe ESWA—along with NATLFED—was more than just a mutual benefits association. I explained the accusations to her, and I could soon tell she was trained for this situation. Kornblum immediately became hostile and confronted me.
“We’re talking about people whose lives are on the line…If you were really interested and were really concerned, you would spend more time with us…How many canvasses have you been on? How many advocacy sessions have you done?...If you are interested in helping out, I’d be happy to talk with you…What are you doing to help people?”
I reminded her again that I did spend time volunteering, and I saw the good they were doing for the community, but that I wanted to discuss other aspects of the group. Kornblum ignored my request once again and asked me to spend more time volunteering. It was as if she was reading from a script on dealing with anyone who asks too many questions: play the guilt trip; get them to come back; hope they will eventually succumb.
“I know about all the crap that is said about us,” said Kornblum. “It’s from people who aren’t doing jack shit. If you want to take that shit and you want to buy it, go ahead. If you want to talk to real people who are doing things to help others than you can talk to us.”
Along with their recruiting practices, the inherent secrecy and deception of NATLFED raises concern. As my final conversation with Kornblum showed, the cadre of ESWA were unwilling to discuss connections with NATLFED when I asked—let alone any long-term strategies for change beyond the mutual benefits association. They either deflected my questions or gave me some vague, idealistic phrase.
“We’re building a voice to stop poverty conditions,” they said. “Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and Communists are all members of ESWA. We’re a collective, organizing for systemic change. We are creating a force to reckon with.”
Why would a group working to improve the lives of the underprivileged withhold their true identity and philosophy from the very people they are organizing to accomplish this? Was this secrecy another form of control?
Former cadre Whitnack sees the leadership as inherently dishonest. “Fidel never lied about his goals,” he says. “NATLFED is not trying to hide from the government, but it is hiding from the public and its own members.”
NATLFED assumes your everyday tabular volunteer has no need to know about revolutionary ideas. In fact it may only serve to alienate them, thereby losing their contributions to the mutual benefits association. However, once a viable volunteer is brought to the full-time cadre level, revealing the secrets and mythical ties to past revolutionary movements NATLFED has could bolster their loyalty. Being an instrumental part of an underground club, especially one that is going to “change the world,” could be very enticing.
“If you never tell people what your real philosophy is until they agree to it,” writes one anonymous former full-time volunteer online, “then you will never have to deal with criticism from people who disagree with you.”
This secrecy also pertains to finances. NATLFED entities are not charities and are therefore not required to report anything publicly. This means no one can have any definitive knowledge of what is donated or distributed. It also means no one knows how much is siphoned off to the cadre, or to NATLFED headquarters.
ESWA has conspicuously stayed under the radar in Boston. For a group that has been in existence since 1977 and claims to have the only proven, effective method of organizing, it has failed to expand beyond its small benefit program. When asked about membership numbers, ESWA can only give a figure of some 20,000 people who have signed up since its inception. They have no idea how many of these are active members.
I did a survey of various neighborhood groups in Boston, such as the Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative, La Alianza Hispana, the Urban League, Action for Boston Community Development, the Cape Verdean Community UNIDO, and others. The organizations had either no knowledge of ESWA or they had heard limited anecdotes regarding its community service work. City Councilor Chuck Turner knew little and former Councilor Felix Arroyo’s office did not know the group at all. If ESWA was making an impact in Boston’s urban communities, one might suspect they would be better known.
When I asked ESWA what groups they collaborated with, they claimed it was futile to work with or within any existing strategies. Former cadre Bob described their philosophy: “The system cannot be fixed and the only thing you can do is work with us. If you think you know differently, you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.”
Perhaps NATLFED desires only enough success to keep itself alive and keep its leaders in power. If NATLFED entities were to enjoy significant accomplishments, it would inevitably result in changes to the power dynamic of its structure. Those who succeed would expect to gain more control over operations, which would dilute the power of the established leadership.
Robin Fahlberg, who volunteered full-time for 14 years beginning in 1979, believes this to be the case. “There is some draw into believing that you are a big revolutionary,” she says. “As long as the methodology never proves you wrong, as long as you never get past step one, you never fail. Here are people who want other people to look at them as if they were gods. It doesn’t matter what they accomplish, as long as they have people following them in admiration.”
Success would ultimately bring NATLFED closer to their purported goal of permanent societal change or—gulp—revolution. Some believe the leadership actually engages in deliberate sabotage to prevent disruption of the status quo.
“I was totally dependent on the national organization for instruction,” says Fahlberg. “As I became more experienced I began to question them, but experienced a lot of mental and verbal abuse. I had to call in to national every night, and if I didn’t do enough or get the right results I would get screamed at…. For one week we would do a canvass campaign. If you kept going on it you could recruit people. Then once it started going, you had to stop and move to a different strategy. There was no continuity in directions.”
“There had to be a party with discipline,” she says. “So you took orders. Eventually they hope you will stop trying or caring, and just accept what comes down from above. After a period of time in a community you should start to build, and that has never happened with any of the NATLFED entities.”
She also described how headquarters would deliberately tell other cadre in her entity conflicting information, essentially pitting one against the other. “At first I thought it was ineffectiveness and bureaucratic problems,” she said. “Then I found out that the whole thing was purposeful.”
This analysis of NATLFED tactics leads to the cult question. What else can you call a self-perpetuating, yet never advancing organization that controls its members through a highly secretive and structured pattern of power? A quick glance at cult watch lists finds NATLFED right up there with the Moonies and the LaRouchies.
But who’s to say one shouldn’t get involved with an organization that does actual community service, however small its impact? Why should one be discouraged from participating if they feel they are helping to make the world a better place?
An anonymous post on Boston Indymedia wrote, “For two years I worked my butt off and was
isolated from my friends and family—but… certainly no harder than the cadre of other organizations who are passionately serious about their agenda. The articles and exposes fail to mention that the Catholic Church has cadre, the Democratic and Republican parties have their cadre who sleep in the office…Stockbrokers work unbelievably long hours.”
The Boston College PULSE Program for Service Learning decided its students should not work with ESWA. Director Dave McMenamin explained that a few students volunteered during the 2004-05 school year, but discontinued their relationship with ESWA the following year.
“I [initially] imposed a condition,” said McMenamin. “If we were going to offer them as a service site, I demanded that [students] would not be pressured for time beyond the time required by our program. I did not want our students canvassing in neighborhoods that weren’t theirs either. They wanted to push the students to canvass. They were asked continually to participate more. They experienced pressure.”
McMenamin mentioned one of his students, who was a local resident, had the sense ESWA did little to benefit the community. “There was just enough to make me wary,” he says. “I didn’t feel like I could trust them.”
Former full-time volunteer Fahlberg says she is still dealing with the effects of NATLFED. Until recently, she had repressed all memories of her time with the group and it took work with a therapist to move on and speak about it. “When I left, even though I knew intellectually that no one would come after me, I still looked over my shoulder,” she says. “The words ‘Communist Party Provisional’ would put me into a physical panic attack.”
Those who oppose NATLFED claim the positives do not outweigh the toll it takes on its volunteers. “Unfortunately it results in burning out people,” says Fahlberg. “They get sucked into a black hole and then they don’t participate in activism even if they get out.”
“I think it’s a real tragedy,” says Whitnack. “The people that join are some of the best humanity has. When you look at all the people and all the years, it does a great harm to the progressive movement and takes away a lot of potential strength.”
“There is a lot to be commended in what they are doing,” says Bob. “But it comes at a cost to the personalities of the volunteers. They need to be crushed to keep the continuance and structure of the organization. I really couldn’t stand it. I just hated my existence and left.”
Chip Berlet, who works for Political Research Associates in Somerville and studies authoritarian movements in the states, also agrees with this analysis: “I continue to feel that the negative aspects [of NATLFED] outweigh the positive aspects. This is a group which continues to misrepresent its history and effectiveness. They never seem to do anything other than parallel the work of existing service organizations, and they have never been able to show seriously that they can provide anything that is different or better. What’s the point? People can be a part of existing effective groups. They are a tiny group with almost no impact and a long history of spending a lot of energy in a relatively nonproductive way. The only point is to continue the existence of a group founded by a charlatan.”
No doubt, ESWA does assist the underprivileged in Boston. You can see it and they will tell you all about it, but there is much more they won’t say.
Author’s note: This piece was written more than a year ago, though never published due to various reasons. While ESWA may have changed its ways since, it is highly doubtful when considering the history of the group. I recently witnessed some of its members outside the J.P. Harvest Co-op spewing their same-old shtick.
Uncovering the Eastern Service Workers Association
By Nate Leskovic
Fall 2007/Winter 2008
Fall was descending, and as I bundled up and left the Jamaica Plain Harvest Co-op I was greeted with another reminder of the season. “KeySpan made $43 million last year. Do you know how many people in Boston won’t be able to afford heat this winter?”
They told me.
“Are you tired of being burdened by student loans when the companies that provide them make millions?”
Yes!
“Shouldn’t everyone have access to healthcare and the basic necessities of life?”
Of course!
It seemed I was in solidarity with the people at the table on the sidewalk. I read their flyers and chatted some more—and they made sense. They asked me to sign up, which I thought seemed a bit premature. I told them I’d think about it. Then I mentioned I was a writer and thought they might be a good story.
Silence. They turned their back to me. Strange.
They are the Eastern Service Workers Association (ESWA), described on their flyer as a “free and voluntary unincorporated membership association joining together service workers, seasonal, temporary, and part-time workers and other low-income workers and their families with students, professionals, homemakers, clergy and business owners to fight to improve living and working conditions.”
According to ESWA, they do not represent workers in negotiation with their employers, but use an 11-Point Benefit Program to “aid members in obtaining what is rightfully theirs in a context that promotes their best interests on all levels.”
During my initial conversation I learned they do not use the Internet, but I decided to check them out online anyways. I wanted to know more, and I sensed something was up. I was immediately inundated by exposes, cult watch lists and a Boston Indymedia thread warning potential recruits to stay away from their “Stalinist” tactics. There was a story here, though perhaps a different one than I initially thought.
For ESWA to have existed in Boston since the 1970s, as they stated, they couldn’t be a complete scam, could they? I did not want to blindly trust the Internet. Unfortunately, what I read claimed they were unreceptive to reporters. Instead of risking a bland interview, some rhetoric and the door, I decided I would volunteer and see firsthand what the group does. I could be seen as a potential recruit, not just someone to impress with public relations tactics.
***
ESWA is a front group for the National Labor Federation (NATLFED). Other ESWA’s exist in cities such as Rochester (NY), Trenton (NJ), and Philadelphia. In addition, there are NATLFED “entities” around the country with different names, such as the Eastern Farm Workers Association, California Homemakers Association, Coalition of Concerned Medical Professionals and the Midwest Workers Association. They all basically use the same methods of “strategic organizing,” and they all follow instruction from NATLFED headquarters in Brooklyn.NATLFED began with a man named Gino Perente, whose real name is actually William Doeden. Doeden was a radical, active in San Francisco from the late 1960s through the early 1970s. He organized a group called the Liberation Army of Revolutionary Group Organizations (LARGO) that actually declared war against the state of California in 1970.
After his revolution failed, Doeden disappeared to avoid child support payments and reappeared in 1972 as Gino Perente. He was now in New York, working for Cesar Chavez’s United Farm Workers Organizing Committee. His stint with Chavez was brief, but with the knowledge gained he founded the Eastern Farm Workers Association in Suffolk County on Long Island. This initial success organizing workers outside of official labor unions still serves as the historical basis for NATLFED’s current activities.
During the 1970s, NATLFED grew and established around 20 entities throughout the country. Under the direction of Perente, it developed a political philosophy based on Marx, Lenin and Stalin and began using a highly structured and centralized power system to ensure control of each entity and its volunteers. The strategy for organizing and recruiting new members is dictated by a copyrighted document compiled in 1973, called “The Essential Organizer.”
NATLFED’s methods never vary from this codified plan. The top leaders of NATLFED in Brooklyn are members of the Provisional Communist Party, which is considered clandestine.
Perente, who died in 1995, was your stereotypical cult leader. Aside from assuming a Latino identity—probably to more easily suggest parallels between him, Chavez and Latin American revolutionaries—he is consistently described as a con-artist, alcoholic, drug addict and sexual predator. He is remembered for delivering rambling speeches late into the night, being constantly surrounded by followers who attended to his needs, as well as abusing his followers mentally, verbally and sometimes physically. In short, he was the stereotypical David Koresh or Jim Jones. In its early history, NATLFED was on a trajectory for revolution and set 1984 for its launch.
Obviously, it never happened. The Brooklyn headquarters was raided by the FBI soon after, followed by some legal problems, but the group survived. They were again raided by the NYPD in 1996, but charges were eventually cleared because of illegal search procedures. It was not a major setback either.
NATLFED is basically harmless in terms of insurrection potential. If discussed at all, the concept of revolution is used mainly to instill a sense of purpose and sincerity among its most hardcore followers. NATLFED is not actively planning rebellion, and would not have the resources to begin.
Since Perente’s death, Margaret Ribar has taken control of NATLFED’s National Office Central in Brooklyn. The power structure has remained intact, the organizing work continues, but observers say the more militant edge provided by the presence of Perente seems to have subsided. NATLFED appears to exist mainly to continue its existence—with a somewhat successful community service mission that never really expands.
I write about NATLFED with a degree of fogginess because of the extreme secrecy inherent in the organization. There is also a pervasive paranoia that limits sources. Jeff Whitnack, former full-time volunteer and author of a 1984 expose, told me at one point he had an entire NATLFED legal team harassing him.
Members were only willing to discuss community service. As a result, description of NATLFED requires a synthesis of writings, recollections from past volunteers who often wish to remain anonymous, and some Internet consensus. Most of these sources describe the more shady side of NATLFED operations—but it does do positive work.
***
Each NATLFED entity sets up what they call a “mutual benefits association” in order to provide services to its members. This is what ESWA does out of their office at 48 Blue Hill Ave. in Roxbury. Benefits distributed include food, dental care, legal advocacy and clothing. They solicit members, local organizations, businesses, lawyers, medical professionals and volunteers to donate services and goods.
I spent three days volunteering with ESWA and took part in some rewarding activity. On my first day, I helped out at a holiday party thrown for its members using donated space in a neighborhood church. I saw families enjoying an enormous meal of donated food, parents grateful to receive donated toys and children dancing to live music and playing with Santa.
During my second day I distributed food. ESWA had secured and sorted items to provide a box or bag for almost 100 families. They had an entire rental truck filled with the goods and I loaded up my car and dropped it off on doorsteps. While I was working, they were able to find a place to stay for a victim of domestic abuse and her child, and got heat turned on for a struggling family.
On my third day I intended to see the advocacy work ESWA was doing for its members, but I soon ended up alone in a room with a full-time volunteer. Surprise! I was being recruited to join ESWA as a full-time, “cadre” member. From my research, I expected this treatment.
ESWA is doing community service work in Boston. Aside from my participation, I spoke with members at the party and they were nothing but grateful. I also spoke with Chris Durkin, Director of Community Relations at Harvest Co-op, and inquired about ESWA recruiting in front of their stores. He sent me even more positive feedback from the community, recommendations he used to justify Harvest’s relationship with ESWA, despite the controversy surrounding it.
However, the service ESWA does is only part of their mission. Some claim it is merely an elaborate NATLFED façade. ESWA and the other NATLFED entities use their benefit program to recruit socially-conscious and charitable young adults into full-time volunteer positions.
***
Former cadre Whitnack believes by maintaining the pretense of the mutual benefit association, NATLFED entities keep their organization alive, retain high profile members and business partners, and appear like a just another service group.
“They have a ton of doctors and lawyers,” says Whitnack. “The bigger fish, they let them have independence. They don’t want to lie to them. It’s all basically flypaper to suck in new members.”
An anonymous, former full-time volunteer who NATLFED convinced to drop out of college about ten years ago – I’ll call him Bob—explained his feelings about this tactic: “It’s my understanding the number one thing they want is not to help poor or increase donations. The number one thing they want is to recruit more members that will allow them to continue their organization, just to keep it going. New organizers come so terribly slowly that they have to reach thousands to get one to be full-time.”
These cadre positions are famous for their 16- to 18-hour work days, demanded seven days a week. The schedule naturally results in loss of contact with family and friends. Recruits are required to quit their jobs and move out of their homes. Cadre do not receive pay and NATLFED provides them with donated food and shelter.
“These are the pushiest people you will ever volunteer for,” warns Bob. “They will take everything that you give them and ask you for more, and if you surrender your independence to them, they will make it very painful for you to reclaim it.”
When Bob became cadre, he was given a memo from NATLFED headquarters. “Participation will only be considered on a full-time basis,” it said. “That means 24 hours/day, 365 days/yr. You may be as religious as you want, but church attendance is not part of the program for professional revolutionary. Visits to close friends/family in the hospital may be permitted on request and with supervision.”
NATLFED recruitment begins with tabling at strategic locations, such as college campuses or summer festivals, or through door-to-door canvassing in low-income neighborhoods. On my first day I participated in a canvass and saw a few people sign up. The pitch is enticing to anyone facing daily hardship or those with a social conscience:
“Too many of us, for too long, have suffered from low-paying jobs with no benefits…We keep finding that minimum wage is our maximum wage…ESWA joins together those who realize that as long as any of us are left behind in poverty, none of us are safe…We know that we need an organization with no strings attached to fight to end our second-class status…ESWA is that organization and invites you to sign-up as a member today!”
To join, you are only asked to pay $0.62 a month! If you can’t afford that (!), you don’t even have to. The fee is symbolic of the hourly wage earned by the first workers organized by Perente. If you agree to join or volunteer, ESWA asks for your phone number. That is what they really want.
Once they have your number, you will continuously receive calls regarding your participation. “Can you volunteer for this event? When are you coming next? Can we set up a more
permanent schedule? We need your help to make a difference!”
***
ESWA refers to this tactic as “arm’s-length systemic organizing,” and it made me extremely thankful to have caller ID on my phone. When I asked about the strategy, they explained they could more easily secure commitments from people by phone. I also discovered getting people within “arm’s length” ensures opportunity for NATLFED philosophy indoctrination.
During my limited time with ESWA, I was constantly bombarded with discussion-less canned rhetoric. The ideas were obviously part of the “party line,” and each cadre used the same lingo and catch phrases. As with the pitch, the orientation and lessons I witnessed were read mostly verbatim from a written text. While talking about potential opponents during one lecture, a full-time volunteer apologized for the language—blaming it on “70s humor”—but still recited, “You better run motherfucker! We’re coming after your mother!”
Another strategy designed specifically to ensnare was the frequent persuading to increase the time you devote to ESWA. Each time I showed up, as well as during each phone call I actually answered, I was always questioned about my participation. Each NATLFED recruit is designated a tabular volunteer or a viable volunteer. This is determined through their analysis of your potential to become full-time, usually done with informal chats and more formal interviews.
Most are set aside as unlikely to become a cadre member, such as those with families and established careers, but people who have neither—like myself at the time—are targeted.
Once you are singled out, cadre members continuously probe you about your opinions on labor issues, economics and politics. As they delicately weave their ideas into the conversation, they challenge you to defend your participation—or lack thereof—in your previous activism.
According to NATLFED cadre, they are the only organization that actually accomplishes anything. They hope you realize you have not been doing enough to make change in this world, and that they have the only effective solution.
“They have the upper hand once they get you in the office,” said Bob. “They try to make you believe there is no plan on the planet that can address the problems of poor people like theirs can…I had a difficult time saying no. When someone says to you, ‘I have given up my job and an ordinary life to pursue the goal of ending world poverty,’ you can’t just look at them in the eye and say no like you can to a salesman…They are genuine, but manipulative to the point that it’s not funny.”
Of course, I was only briefly subjected to these tactics. I had also done my research and could easily spot their subtle techniques. But for someone a bit more naive, a little less confident in their worldview and in a transitional period in their life, I can imagine how the path to full-time NATLFED volunteer unfolds.
The other main technique used to recruit is pure hard work. This involves not only completing the tedious tasks assigned, but continuous busy-work that numbs the mind. By combining a steady stream of rhetoric with never-ending activity, NATLFED attempts to breed pseudo-revolutionary zealot zombies. There was little conversation within ESWA about anything other than ESWA. If you listen constantly to one philosophy, are provided no opportunity to discuss and constantly face a guilt-trip regarding your devotion, you could soon find yourself on the slippery slope towards entrapment.
When distributing food, I chatted with a member I’ll call Joe. He explained that he joined ESWA because he was going through hard times financially and was about to be evicted. Joe hoped ESWA would help and was working hard in return.
“I don’t think they understand the word volunteer. No one ever works enough for them. They keep calling and asking for more,” he said.
Joe told me he had shown up almost every day for the past few months. Except for some food, he hadn’t received much in benefits. “If they don’t find Joe a place to stay, I’m gone,” he said.
During my volunteer time, neither I nor anyone else was ever allowed to be idle. I was sent to the truck more than once to count the number of food boxes inside, when everyone already knew the number. While working at the holiday party I was constantly asked what I was doing and barely had an opportunity to chat with the attendees. In the office I was given paperwork to check and when it was done I had to check it again. I witnessed one cadre member moving swiftly around the office for 15 minutes. However, I saw he was only shuffling the same papers from one binder to another, to a different cabinet, back to another binder, into another cabinet….
***
I was further convinced that their tactics were less than honest when I made my final phone call to ESWA. Phyllis Kornblum, organizing director and one of four full-time cadre, appeared quiet, calm and determined during my volunteer work. She, like the others, was warm, kind, and caring in a somewhat unemotional way. I was expecting some degree of anger when I revealed I was no longer interested in volunteering with the group—and that instead I was planning on writing about them—but I was not prepared for the extreme change in character she displayed.
Nor did I think she would still attempt to recruit me.
I explained to her that I had witnessed some of the community service ESWA does, but that I had spoken with former cadre and done research which led me to believe ESWA—along with NATLFED—was more than just a mutual benefits association. I explained the accusations to her, and I could soon tell she was trained for this situation. Kornblum immediately became hostile and confronted me.
“We’re talking about people whose lives are on the line…If you were really interested and were really concerned, you would spend more time with us…How many canvasses have you been on? How many advocacy sessions have you done?...If you are interested in helping out, I’d be happy to talk with you…What are you doing to help people?”
I reminded her again that I did spend time volunteering, and I saw the good they were doing for the community, but that I wanted to discuss other aspects of the group. Kornblum ignored my request once again and asked me to spend more time volunteering. It was as if she was reading from a script on dealing with anyone who asks too many questions: play the guilt trip; get them to come back; hope they will eventually succumb.
“I know about all the crap that is said about us,” said Kornblum. “It’s from people who aren’t doing jack shit. If you want to take that shit and you want to buy it, go ahead. If you want to talk to real people who are doing things to help others than you can talk to us.”
Along with their recruiting practices, the inherent secrecy and deception of NATLFED raises concern. As my final conversation with Kornblum showed, the cadre of ESWA were unwilling to discuss connections with NATLFED when I asked—let alone any long-term strategies for change beyond the mutual benefits association. They either deflected my questions or gave me some vague, idealistic phrase.
“We’re building a voice to stop poverty conditions,” they said. “Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and Communists are all members of ESWA. We’re a collective, organizing for systemic change. We are creating a force to reckon with.”
Why would a group working to improve the lives of the underprivileged withhold their true identity and philosophy from the very people they are organizing to accomplish this? Was this secrecy another form of control?
Former cadre Whitnack sees the leadership as inherently dishonest. “Fidel never lied about his goals,” he says. “NATLFED is not trying to hide from the government, but it is hiding from the public and its own members.”
NATLFED assumes your everyday tabular volunteer has no need to know about revolutionary ideas. In fact it may only serve to alienate them, thereby losing their contributions to the mutual benefits association. However, once a viable volunteer is brought to the full-time cadre level, revealing the secrets and mythical ties to past revolutionary movements NATLFED has could bolster their loyalty. Being an instrumental part of an underground club, especially one that is going to “change the world,” could be very enticing.
“If you never tell people what your real philosophy is until they agree to it,” writes one anonymous former full-time volunteer online, “then you will never have to deal with criticism from people who disagree with you.”
This secrecy also pertains to finances. NATLFED entities are not charities and are therefore not required to report anything publicly. This means no one can have any definitive knowledge of what is donated or distributed. It also means no one knows how much is siphoned off to the cadre, or to NATLFED headquarters.
ESWA has conspicuously stayed under the radar in Boston. For a group that has been in existence since 1977 and claims to have the only proven, effective method of organizing, it has failed to expand beyond its small benefit program. When asked about membership numbers, ESWA can only give a figure of some 20,000 people who have signed up since its inception. They have no idea how many of these are active members.
I did a survey of various neighborhood groups in Boston, such as the Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative, La Alianza Hispana, the Urban League, Action for Boston Community Development, the Cape Verdean Community UNIDO, and others. The organizations had either no knowledge of ESWA or they had heard limited anecdotes regarding its community service work. City Councilor Chuck Turner knew little and former Councilor Felix Arroyo’s office did not know the group at all. If ESWA was making an impact in Boston’s urban communities, one might suspect they would be better known.
When I asked ESWA what groups they collaborated with, they claimed it was futile to work with or within any existing strategies. Former cadre Bob described their philosophy: “The system cannot be fixed and the only thing you can do is work with us. If you think you know differently, you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.”
Perhaps NATLFED desires only enough success to keep itself alive and keep its leaders in power. If NATLFED entities were to enjoy significant accomplishments, it would inevitably result in changes to the power dynamic of its structure. Those who succeed would expect to gain more control over operations, which would dilute the power of the established leadership.
Robin Fahlberg, who volunteered full-time for 14 years beginning in 1979, believes this to be the case. “There is some draw into believing that you are a big revolutionary,” she says. “As long as the methodology never proves you wrong, as long as you never get past step one, you never fail. Here are people who want other people to look at them as if they were gods. It doesn’t matter what they accomplish, as long as they have people following them in admiration.”
Success would ultimately bring NATLFED closer to their purported goal of permanent societal change or—gulp—revolution. Some believe the leadership actually engages in deliberate sabotage to prevent disruption of the status quo.
“I was totally dependent on the national organization for instruction,” says Fahlberg. “As I became more experienced I began to question them, but experienced a lot of mental and verbal abuse. I had to call in to national every night, and if I didn’t do enough or get the right results I would get screamed at…. For one week we would do a canvass campaign. If you kept going on it you could recruit people. Then once it started going, you had to stop and move to a different strategy. There was no continuity in directions.”
“There had to be a party with discipline,” she says. “So you took orders. Eventually they hope you will stop trying or caring, and just accept what comes down from above. After a period of time in a community you should start to build, and that has never happened with any of the NATLFED entities.”
She also described how headquarters would deliberately tell other cadre in her entity conflicting information, essentially pitting one against the other. “At first I thought it was ineffectiveness and bureaucratic problems,” she said. “Then I found out that the whole thing was purposeful.”
This analysis of NATLFED tactics leads to the cult question. What else can you call a self-perpetuating, yet never advancing organization that controls its members through a highly secretive and structured pattern of power? A quick glance at cult watch lists finds NATLFED right up there with the Moonies and the LaRouchies.
But who’s to say one shouldn’t get involved with an organization that does actual community service, however small its impact? Why should one be discouraged from participating if they feel they are helping to make the world a better place?
An anonymous post on Boston Indymedia wrote, “For two years I worked my butt off and was
isolated from my friends and family—but… certainly no harder than the cadre of other organizations who are passionately serious about their agenda. The articles and exposes fail to mention that the Catholic Church has cadre, the Democratic and Republican parties have their cadre who sleep in the office…Stockbrokers work unbelievably long hours.”
The Boston College PULSE Program for Service Learning decided its students should not work with ESWA. Director Dave McMenamin explained that a few students volunteered during the 2004-05 school year, but discontinued their relationship with ESWA the following year.
“I [initially] imposed a condition,” said McMenamin. “If we were going to offer them as a service site, I demanded that [students] would not be pressured for time beyond the time required by our program. I did not want our students canvassing in neighborhoods that weren’t theirs either. They wanted to push the students to canvass. They were asked continually to participate more. They experienced pressure.”
McMenamin mentioned one of his students, who was a local resident, had the sense ESWA did little to benefit the community. “There was just enough to make me wary,” he says. “I didn’t feel like I could trust them.”
Former full-time volunteer Fahlberg says she is still dealing with the effects of NATLFED. Until recently, she had repressed all memories of her time with the group and it took work with a therapist to move on and speak about it. “When I left, even though I knew intellectually that no one would come after me, I still looked over my shoulder,” she says. “The words ‘Communist Party Provisional’ would put me into a physical panic attack.”
Those who oppose NATLFED claim the positives do not outweigh the toll it takes on its volunteers. “Unfortunately it results in burning out people,” says Fahlberg. “They get sucked into a black hole and then they don’t participate in activism even if they get out.”
“I think it’s a real tragedy,” says Whitnack. “The people that join are some of the best humanity has. When you look at all the people and all the years, it does a great harm to the progressive movement and takes away a lot of potential strength.”
“There is a lot to be commended in what they are doing,” says Bob. “But it comes at a cost to the personalities of the volunteers. They need to be crushed to keep the continuance and structure of the organization. I really couldn’t stand it. I just hated my existence and left.”
Chip Berlet, who works for Political Research Associates in Somerville and studies authoritarian movements in the states, also agrees with this analysis: “I continue to feel that the negative aspects [of NATLFED] outweigh the positive aspects. This is a group which continues to misrepresent its history and effectiveness. They never seem to do anything other than parallel the work of existing service organizations, and they have never been able to show seriously that they can provide anything that is different or better. What’s the point? People can be a part of existing effective groups. They are a tiny group with almost no impact and a long history of spending a lot of energy in a relatively nonproductive way. The only point is to continue the existence of a group founded by a charlatan.”
No doubt, ESWA does assist the underprivileged in Boston. You can see it and they will tell you all about it, but there is much more they won’t say.
Author’s note: This piece was written more than a year ago, though never published due to various reasons. While ESWA may have changed its ways since, it is highly doubtful when considering the history of the group. I recently witnessed some of its members outside the J.P. Harvest Co-op spewing their same-old shtick.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
