Why do you ask for contact information on your petitions?

What kind of organizing are you doing?

​What the heck is a "progressive," anyway?

How do you choose your issues?

What if folks want more information about an issue?

​

Why do you ask for contact information on your petitions?

This is SUCH an important question. I'm so glad you asked.

​

It's annoying when petitions ask you for your email and phone number, and the temptation is to skip it (which encourages others to do the same), write in something fake, or write really illegibly. But here's the deal:
​​

A petition with contact information shows our political targets that we can follow-up. Without it, our petition has no power. With it, it shows local officials that you, the signers, mean business - that you’re willing to get emails, or, if necessary, even phone calls, to follow through. With it, we are growing a multi-issue progressive movement locally. Without it, we are engaging in what Saul Alinsky would call a "terminal tactic."

​

Petitions that do not gather contact information are basically impotent, cannot contribute to movement-building, and are essentially a waste of everyone's time.

​

​A savvy politician will see right away that a petition lacking contact info means that the group behind it is unable to follow-up with their supporters and hold the politician accountable (through further contact or escalation like rallies, marches, or accountability sessions). This indicates a lack of sophistication by the group, which tells the politician that they are likely not much of a threat. Knowing this, why should they bother with said group's requests/demands?

​

This is why, at least online, my petition forms require contact information. At this point, if someone doesn't want to provide their contact info, then I don't want their signature. I want folks who mean business, not scads of low-quality signatures by people who casually support the cause or happened to be walking by a petition table. This is about movement-building, not filling up pages with names.

​

When you’re asked for your contact info on an MCPAN petition, it's because I'm actually trying to build a movement, which means a time and energy commitment to manage that contact information. If you support that, then please include your contact info, and do so LEGIBLY. I mean business, which means someone (usually me) has to database all those signatures and contact info. I'm a volunteer. Each handwritten signature takes probably 1 minute to input (which is why I encourage folks to sign online and I include QR codes on hard-copy petitions for folks to easily access the online form). If your address is illegible, it may take me 3-5 minutes. If I get it wrong and your email bounces, then it can take me 5-10 minutes per email to figure out if I can fix it and re-import it into MailChimp.

​

So, if you're as serious about this work as I am, please respect my time and energy by clearly including your contact info on any MCPAN petition you sign. Thank you for YOUR commitment to progressive values in Fort Bragg and on the Mendocino Coast!

​

What kind of organizing are you doing?

This is "direct action organizing" as defined by the Midwest Academy's activist manual, Organizing for Social Change. "Direct action" doesn't just mean people take physical action (like hold rallies or engage in direct service to address a need), it means taking action that "alters the relations of power." If you've never heard of the Midwest Academy, definitely check them out (www.midwestacademy.com). They are a leading national training institute, and Organzing for Social Change is an excellent resource. (I was trained in OSC in 2004. It changed my life, and is why I'm still doing this now, 18 years later.) Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals was complementary reading for that 2004 training. Rules resonated deeply with me, and I recommend getting a copy (check Indiebound, NOT AMAZON!). For me, Organizing for Social Change is the nuts-and-bolts techniques (with some philosophy) while Rules for Radicals is the philosophy (with a little technique). They complement each other very well.

​

What the heck is a "progressive," anyway?

Check this blog post for my answer to this question: What does it mean to be a "Progressive"?

​How do you choose your issues?
I choose issues that are timely, intersectional (i.e., take into consideration racial/social justice), and align with what we consider trusted progressive platforms, like the CA Progressive Alliance (of which I am a Steering Committee member) and the Indigenous-led Red Nation. As often as possible we work with single-issue organizations that have expertise on the issue at hand. They can be local, regional, or national single-issue organizations.

    

I look towards organizations that are either trusted and established, or are showing a track record of bringing lots of diverse entities together around a cause, whether or not their analysis is perfect or not (it never will be). Looking at the list of entities that are supporting a particular cause, we will go with the position of the largest, most diverse, most environmental, and most progressive group. Generally, because mega-corporate entities behave in ways that make folks like us inherently distrustful of their actions, they will never be given the benefit of the doubt.

​

And, because all our issues are put forth in the form of petitions, it is ultimately people-power that chooses how much to support any particular issue.

What if folks want more information about an issue?
If folks want more actual information on the issue, it is best to contact the single-issue organization that MCPAN is collaborating with (if one exists). MCPAN is about local organizing. While I (Scott Menzies) do have a lot of knowledge and education on a range of issues, I do not purport to be expert on any one issue (except possibly Ranked Choice Voting). My goal is multi-issue organizing, so the "expert testimony", if you will, should come from the single-issue organizations focusing on these issues.    

​

At the end of the day, this is about thinking more in terms of building overall progressive power and electing progressives who will make hundreds of choices during their terms in office, as opposed to having the perfect position or analysis on a given issue. It will never be perfect, and trying for "perfect" results in a paralysis progressives and this planet cannot afford.