The Meaning the Community Development

THE MEANING OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

BY FRED WALE AND CARMEN ISALES

INTERAMERICAN UNIVERSITY

THE MEANING OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

A Report from The Division of Community Education by Fred Wale and Carmen Isales

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO 1967

Introduction I n the year 1940 there began in Puerto Rico what the well-known American photographer-writer, Homer Page, has called “The Quiet Revolution”. The record of what has happened during the last twenty-six years on this small island in the Caribbean Sea is now no longer new, certainly not to the readers of C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t B u l l e t i n . 0 These pages will attempt to tell, not the story of those two decades, but rather a brief account of one detail in the broad canvas of human events of those years.

In contrast with the first four decades of tHe twentieth cen­ tury, the people of Puerto Rico, in their rural communities, their small towns and larger cities, became increasingly more and more involved in their own political, cultural and economic affairs as they travelled through the fifth decade, the years 1940-1950. Nev• This pamphlet is a reprint of an article which originally appeared in the June 1964 issue of the Community Development Bulletin of the University of London.

ertheless, there where clear signs before the ten years were over that these experiences would have to reach even deeper levels of participation and analysis if the people’s commitment to the democratic process was to become the foundation upon which to build the “good life”. With this in mind, the leadership, under the direction of the newly elected governor, Luis Muñoz Marín, presented a community development bill to the island legislature in January of 1949. This bill passed the legislature unanimously and was then signed by the Governor on May 14 of that year.

It created the Division of Community Education within Puerto Rico’s Department of Education. The preamble to the law reads as follows: The goal of community education is to impart basic teaching on the nature of man, his history, his life, his way of working and of self-governing in the world and in Puerto Rico.

Such teaching, addressed to the citizens meeting in rural and urban communities, will be imparted through motion pictures, radio, books, pamphlets, posters and group discussions.

The object is to provide the good hand of our popular culture with the tool of a basic education.

In practice this will mean giving to the community the wish, the tendency and the way of making use of its own aptitudes for the solution of many of its own problems of health, education, co­ operation, social life through the action of the community itself.

The community should not be civically unemployed.

The community can be constantly and usefully employed in its own service, in terms of pride and satisfaction for the members thereof.

From the start we understood that the law that created us gave us the opportunity to help the neighbors of the rural and urban communities of Puerto Rico in their analysis of what it means to think and behave democratically and how to make this the foundation upon which to “reconstruct” their lives as individ­ uals, as members of a family and as neighbors within their com­ munity. We believed that this was the way, the only way we knew, to establish and keep alive an equalitarian society.

Objectives We sat down in the early days of our coming together and wrote the following objectives. Since then we may have changed the words or the expressions but never the meaning.

(1 ) To help the families of a community to have faith in themselves and in their neighbors and to discover with them the ways to express this faith.

(2 ) To help the neighbors understand that it is their right and re­ sponsibility to know and to participate in all matters affecting their communal welfare and that knowing this they can find the way to create a dynamic community supported by their own efforts and contributions.

(3 ) To help the neighbors develop the process of group discussion in meetings where democratic participation is assured and where consensus, reached by agreement based on thorough analysis, takes the place of voting.

(4 ) To help them see that no planning and action by a community can be democratic in its nature unless it is based on scientific study.

(5 ) To help the neighbors examine the old patterns of cultural con­ trol, the patterns of influence and power in the society they know, in order that through this examination they may find the way to enjoy the freedoms guaranteed to them constitutionally.

(6 ) To help them learn through practical experience that freedom from dependence does not mean the substitution of an independ­ ence that rejects all outside contact; that, on the contrary, the opposite of the enslaved condition of dependence i$ one of inter­ dependence where all educational, technical and scientific help inside and outside the community is sought and shared.

(7 ) To help the people of a community (including their leaders) study, through a living experience, the purpose and role of de­ mocratic leadership (8 ) To help them come to action, to the solution of a problem, as the result of these concerns so that any physical expression of their labors shall be understood not as the end product but as a natural contribution in the democratic order of things.

(9 ) And when the day comes for celebrating the solution of a

problem, to help them see clearly that just as the planning and action was theirs, so the speech-making, the laughter and the praising must be theirs. For who can better dedicate a new road or a new school than those who with their heads, hands and hearts helped to build it? In this way, in the words of Walt Whitman, they will understand the nature of past struggle; “that it is provided in the essence of things that from any fruition of success, no matter what, shall come forth something to make a greater struggle necessary.”

Selection Just as the merits of a program of public school instruction must finally rest its case upon the relative strength of the teach­ er in the classroom, so a program of community development can be no better than its field worker, or “group organizer” as he is called in the Division. To give meaning to the above objectives it was clear that a man must be found who could encompass them, and this, indeed, was our first major task in the fall of 1949.

We began our hunt with the following questions and they still serve us today as the basis for the criteria we use in filling new positions.

(1 ) Was he a man of the people? A man whose aim is to build self-confidence in the individual, must first believe in that in­ dividual. We wanted a man of quiet dignity, who spoke of his neighbor as a man like himself. We did not want a man who thought in the “we-they” pattern. We preferred him to live in the country and if he did, to do so by choice rather than by chance. However, where he lived was not as important as how he felt about himself and his fellow man.

(2 ) Could he work in his own community? Contrary to what some might consider good personnel practice, we believed there were no advantages to be gained by uprooting a man from his environ­ ment and sending him to a strange community. If for some reason a worker possesses qualities which make it difficult for him to relate himself to his own neighborhood, they would undoubtedly be the same ones which would make it hard for him to work elsewhere. The man we hoped to find was one who enjoyed working with his own people and would be ac­ cepted by them.

(3 ) Was he a happy man at home? We foresaw that the demands of the job were so great that as far as his family went, the only man who could serve with security was one who, being a good husband and father, had the full support of his wife and children.

(4) What concerns had he shown for the problems of his com­ munity? We wanted a man who had seen himself related to the other members of his community and had been involved in programs of planning and action. However, we were most in­ terested in the way he had been active.

(5) What were his attitudes toward authoritarian behaviour?

Toward the “poor man’s” right to participate? Toward the con­ cept that more land, more education, and more influence are the accepted criteria for leadership? The candidate who showed disdain or lack of faith in the people’s ability and right to think for themselves could hardly be successful at the task of stimulating all people, regardless of their station, to work to­ gether for the common welfare.

(6 ) Was he a secure person? When challenged, did he rationalize, go on the defensive, or discuss the problem with intelligence and freedom? We needed a man of stability. The depth of our interviews, the walks we took with him and the observations we made as he entered new situations gave us some evalu­ ation of his security. However, we had to depend upon the three months of training to bring out a greater measure of this con­ cern.

(7) Did he have a set of moral values which he used on all situa­ tions and all people indiscriminately? Or was he a person ca­ pable of analyzing beyond the single act into the deeper motiva­ tions of human behaviour? We believed there was no place in our program for the superficial moralist.

(8 ) What was his attitude toward the opinions of others? Was he a man of intolerant partisan views in such areas as politics, labor or religion? If so he would not be our man, for we were looking for one who would permit self-expression in others; a man free to work with all.

(9) Was he a static personality or did he possess the capacity for growth? This was a basic concern. If he had this potential for growth and was not threatened by critical evaluation, he could reach high levels.

General Thoughts This then was the kind of man we searched for. After a se­ ries of intensive interviews ending in selection, the man was brought to “training” for three months. But before we go into a description of what happens during this period, we should like to touch briefly on one or two points.

With us, training is an interrelated part of a program which puts as much importance on selection and supervision as on training. The same district supervisor and central office staff member who began the initial hunt for the man and who sat in the selection interviews, will later be present at the training ses­ sion and then continue with supervision in the field.

The initial training period brings together a group of men whom we believe capable of meeting the heavy demands that will be made upon them. We believe they come endowed with the fundamental qualities of character, intelligence and maturity necessary for the job. Training will sharpen these qualities but will not, at any moment, if he was wrongly selected, help the candidate become what he fundamentally is not. If a man has the basic personal equipment for the job, he will find that each moment of stress is a door to new understanding bringing great satisfaction and joy. If he does not have this, he will not be able to meet the challenge, and he and we must find the agreement in a friendly way that will lead to the decision that his happiness lies elsewhere. The “training vignette” that follows makes these facts somewhat clearer.

Training Objectives Once the group is in training, the leader is guided by the following objectives. They are landmarks that show the way as we develop our thinking together during the weeks that lie ahead.

(1) To help the individual come to a clear understanding and acceptance of the principles of democratic life in a commun­ ity. This is the paramount objective and becomes the guiding star around which other aims revolve. He will get this understanding by study and through personal experience, not by being told.

(2) To examine at depth in the Puerto Rican society the cultural patterns of behaviour that have a direct relationship to democratic community life. We will help him dig into the roots of the attitudes of the people. He must come to an analytical, balanced approach to the people and their culture, at the same time keeping the warmth and understanding which make him one of them.

(3) To look into himself and his own conduct with enough free­ dom and flexibility to be able to put a mirror to his actions, reflecting for his scrutiny everything from the way he talks to his children to the way he shares finances with his wife; to the way he- approaches a farm laborer as compared with the way he presents himself at the home of the land owner. Only to the degree that he is able to do this can he be objective in looking at others and thus get to a deeper sense of democratic principles —principles which otherwise would remain at an entirely theo­ retical level.

(4) To create in him, as a result of continuous self-examina­ tion, a positive desire for personal growth based on an honest understanding of himself, his convictions and his motivations in relation to the aims of his work.

(5) To help him, through his own reasoning, to understand his role as an educator. There are intensive discussions of what it means to help a person come to his own conclusions rather than to be led to conclusions pre-determined for him. The de­ tails of the process of reasoning and the process used in help­ ing a person come to his own conclusions are thoroughly discus­ sed. Extensive use is made of role playing. At this stage, how­ ever, we put much more emphasis on the validity of the educa­ tional process than on the methods and techniques of the ed­ ucator. These he will discover as he begins to work in the com­ munity and during later in-service training. It is better that the discovery of techniques and methods is postponed, for then he will be free to examine them and accept or reject them in the light of his experience. A firm foundation of beliefs is essential to prevent a man from falling into formulas.

(6) To help the group organizer understand the structure of leadership within a democratic framework— learning to re­ cognize the elements present in his culture which can contribute

positively to the development of sound leadership and to iden­ tify the forces at work against it.

Because of the nature of his past experiences in a culture where the roots of leadership are authoritarian, the trainee will need not only this initial orientation period, but years of practice and many in-service training periods before he can come at full grips with this problem. A few weeks of training with a demo­ cratic group discussion leader could easily be put aside as theo­ retical when confronted with the stress of on-the-job decisions.

A considerable amount of role playing is undertaken, with the aim of helping him evaluate his own concepts. In this healthy learning device, he gets many new slants on himself.

He may discover, for example, that he is so irritated at hav­ ing sinned as a do-all in his own community, that he acts now toward such a leader by ignoring him or by pounding on him hard. He may find he is so deeply moved by his new awareness of the evils of dependency that he wants to choke this know­ ledge down the throats of neighbors who do not seem to care.

(7) To help the trainee understand the meaning of group dis­ cussion. Of all the subjects brought to training, this is perhaps the only one where all the members of the group become in­ volved in a totally new endeavor. Previous experience in this area has not provided them with a background upon which to make sound conclusions.

The analysis of this subject is left purposely for the end of training. By then the group has achieved some measure of co­ hesion, and each man is convinced of the value of good group discussion techniques from the struggle each has experienced rather than from text-book theories. The trainees are then able to analyze the behaviour patterns they will gradually shed.

They look back with new awareness at the man who has blocked the progress of the group by forcing acceptance of his ideas without discussion; at the man who, appearing to listen, is really waiting for a pause to plunge in himself; at the man who hears the truth but argues against it because it is more comfortable emotionally to misunderstand. And in these men each sees himself. He can now laugh at his earlier compulsion to spotlight himself by a beautiful but meaningless speech. And he is amused when he remembers how angry he became when the group rejected one of his brilliant ideas.

In fact, it often happens, that by the end of training, both supervisor and group organizer have become so sensitive to

democratic procedures in group discussion that, during the initial field experience, his fear of acting undemocratically pro­ duces passivity when he could and should be more dynamic.

But we think it better to take this risk, for it is easier to develop conscious techniques with a man who begins with this kind of sensitivity than with one who ignores the implications of auto­ cratic action.

(8) To help the field worker organize a program of work, keep adequate records, and have a positive attitude toward su­ pervision. Being critical of our earlier professional experience where undue emphasis was given to keeping records and filling out and mailing in reports, we resolved in the Division to dev­ elop this important function in the same spirit with which we approached the problem of methods and techniques. As a sub­ ject for discussion, it is not introduced until the end of training and is presented then in such a way as to leave the worker free to contribute to its formation. When a plan of work is finally developed it is the result of group thinking. The records the group organizer agrees to keep are those which he and his fel-

low workers decide are essential to the task. The supervisory relationship is evolved from many periods of discussion in which he contributes his share of the thinking. In this way, the or­ ganization of his job comes about, not arbitrarily, but in a spirit of analysis and study. The careful planning by the group or­ ganizer of each day’s activity; his weekly schedule based on a three months’ program of work; his well-kept, functional re­ cords, many of them reading like diaries; the high level of su­ pervision that prevails throughout the program, all attest to the fact that this approach is the most successful one.

An Experience in Training Let us now describe a training “vignette” in an attempt to give you some idea of how it begins and how it is developed.

One morning, at the appointed hour, a dozen newly selected group organizers arrive at our central office in San Juan, coming from different parts of the island, their suitcases in their hands.

We then go together to the place where we will live for the next twelve weeks. It is a camp—Camp Yukiyii—located in a quiet, rural setting in the eastern hills. The district supervisors and cen­ tral office s*taff members who will later work with the trainees, join the group for as much time as their heavy schedules permit.

When the trainees gather for the first session they are asked to introduced themselves to each other. Each is asked to tell a little about his life. Then they are asked to state in their own words their idea of the aims of the program. One can see imme­ diately a predominant assumption made by all, without exception.

Each has now become a “student”. Each is hoping to perform well so that he can “pass”. His fellow trainee is a source of anxiety, lest he prove to be a better man. Each is striving to establish a direct relationship with the “teacher”.

However, they cannot quite harmonize this goal with the situation in which they find themselves. For example, the chairs are placed in a circle, with no prominent place for the “teacher”.

The group is addressed in a friendly, relaxed way, and members are asked to come to an agreement as to what they think are the aims of the program. As each speaks, he is not able to determine

whether he has said something that will “place him at the top of the class or flunk him.” Furthermore, as the days go by, they come to realize that it is a one-sided sort of an affair. They are only asked about what they think. They have not been able to hear what the training officer thinks or to have her tell them what they ought to be thinking.

Some feel irritated, others desolate and others confident that the training officer will finally come through. Others decide to wait. But, as time passes and no answer seems forthcoming, there arrives a moment when the group feels at such a loss that they show their irritation openly. At this point, no matter what hour of the day, a break is called. It is the first moment in their short time of living together that they feel like a group, with a common cause: the ineffectuality of the “teacher”. They talk about it together and when they return, a spokesman raises the point formally and ask: What is your definition? You are the only one who knows”. But the training officer answers that she has no definition, none that she can pass on to them; that the important thing is for them to come to an agreement satisfactory to all. In some training groups this has been accepted (sometimes with the inner conviction that they have an incompetent “teacher”, but one who must be appeased) and they have continued to struggle.

A Crisis

Not every group accepts, however, and on one occasion the turn of events became more dramatic. The group was small, only six, but up to this point all had shown a greater than usual anxiety to get the right answer from the “teacher”. They had allowed only two members of the group to answer most of the questions.

One of these was a bright young man who kept boasting of his high academic preparation. He had become exceedingly patro­ nizing toward the others, especially toward one man who had only a few years of schooling. This second man was older. He had been successful in his community as a political leader and he resented the younger man’s effort as a valedictorian. They strug-

gled continuously to be the first to answer a question. But, as the discussions progressed, both were confused that neither was pro­ claimed the better man.

When the inevitable moment came, the moment described in the paragraph above, it was the older man who had been cho­ sen to confront the training officer with the petition that they be told whether they were on the right path or not. He went into high praise of the learned teacher and said how much they appre­ ciated her wisdom and judgment, but said the group was restless to hear the truth from her.

The trainees then joined in and talked about their resent­ ments and frustration. Finally the training officer asked them, “Why do you think you have been allowed to suffer so?” The bright young man answered, “Because you wanted to get to know us better. You wanted to find out if we could really do this job.”

The training officer then replied, “Well, if that is so, this condition has gone on long enough. I will therefore end your suffering by giving you the definition.” The two “leaders” jumped up from their chairs and shook hands in congratulation. They exclaimed that this was what they had told the group—to relax and answer questions in a way that would help the teacher see that they were intelligent and then wait for the moment when the teaching would really start.

Now they all sat, alert and expectant, notebooks in hand, ready to copy “the definition” from the blackboard. The training officer rose, took up a piece of chalk and wrote the following: “The aim of this program is to orient communities in projects where political leaders are helped to get the masses of the people to work hard physically. The ultimate aim is to strengthen the good leaders, to identify those neighbors who do not cooperate, and thus assure the continuation forever of the present govern­ ment.”

Most faces fell as they read and reread what had been writ­ ten. One quality we had clearly recognized in the selection of all these men was their non-sectarian view of life. Now they

felt really trapped. The older man was the first to react. Did the “teacher” mean to write “masses”? Was she using the word “political” advisedly? It only took an aggrieved look to make him feel apologetic. When another man asked if by “government” the teacher meant, “political party”, he was sternly asked, “Are you suggesting I might be wrong? This definition is very clear. More than that, it comes from me.” All hastened to assure the training officer that they understood the definition perfectly. “Well then,” she said, “I hope you will all memorize it. We will continue our discussions tomorrow.”

On the following morning it was obvious they had spent hours together the previous evening trying to come to terms with the paragraph. The session started by asking them if they had learned it by heart. The one member who had kept most silent from the beginning burst out at this point with the remark that he could learn nothing he did not understand. And then, as though the dam were broken, they all talked at once. They said it was not so much the meaning of the words, but the implications, that disturbed them. Finally the older man said quietly, “If I had known this was the aim of the program, I would never have join­ ed it.” The room was silent. “Neither would I join a program with such aims”, the training officer said, just as quietly. Sudden­ ly, the place was a bedlam. What did she mean? Had she not stated clearly that these were the aims? How could she now cri­ ticize them? Was she perhaps playing games with them? When the room had quieted down and they were able to hear again, she said, “As long as you continue to accept the opinion of an­ other without using your own heads; as long as you consider the act of thinking to be a suffering, then anyone can play games with you.”

They were struck dumb for a minute, and then they under­ stood. The rest of the morning was spent in a slow recounting ol every step, from the first day up to that very moment. They were able to examine their actions, and remorselessly they held the mirror to their motivations. They had moments of hilarity as they

reviewed their empty struggles as “good” students in competition with each other, but they had many more times of serious probing into the way they had behaved. At the end, one of them stated, “I thought I had wasted three days in getting nowhere. I have never spent my time better, even if at the moment I did not know it.” The group agreed to try to reach a definition of its own. And then the discussion took on the pattern that usually takes shape in the group—the one which is now described below.

Defining Aims

At the beginning the trainees describe their aims in the fu­ ture work in terms of a dream; a dream in which they see rural people someday enjoying the advantages of modern life through aided self-help programs. They talk of roads, aqueducts, schools, adult evening classes, and they talk of their function as one to help the people put their backs to the task. During such a discus­ sion they keep looking at the face of the training officer for a satisfied smile or a nod, but they find only an interested, noncommital expression. They assume they are on the right path for they do not hear her disagree. The definition is then written on the blackboard: “The aim of the program is to help a community solve problems such as roads and aqueducts by working together and making the best use of the help they can get from their gov­ ernment”. They are then asked, “Are you satisfied with this de­ finition?” They nod in agreement, and at this stage they do not doubt that this is the “true definition”. They have worked it out together. However, there is always one in the group who does not feel satisfied. He raises his hand and says timidly, “I thought our work was different.” But he is blasted into silence by the irritation of the others. They feel he is slowing the progress of the discussion. He dares not pursue the point, for neither he nor his companions have yet learned what it means to be good participants in a discussion. The training officer’s quiet probing into what he meant, leaves him at a point of panic lest he show himself dumber than the rest. He almost 'wishes he had not spoken in the first place.

The group then moves confidently to the next point; to illustrate how this aim would be accomplished by working it out through role playing. Before the role playing begins they are asked to agree on the stage setting. A simple map of a community is drawn on the blackboard. A few lines sketch in the jeep trail, X-marks are used to indicate homes along the trail. “How would you begin your work here on the first day you visit the com­ munity?” Somebody suggests to contact the leaders and the in­ fluential people since they are ones who can get the others to co­ operate. Another suggests meeting with those leaders after visit­ ing each in their homes. Most agree and proceed to enumerate those they would consider important enough to visit and to bring together. The only disagreements come over such details as when they would call the meeting. By now they are eager to act out the home visits and the meeting and they take their roles willingly.

As before, there is always the nonconformist who bursts out in protest at what he thinks is wrong. Other neighbors should be visited in the community, he says. But again he is told by the others to relax, that those people will have their turn later when the group organizer and the leader know what work they will be assigned. And since only a few days of training have gone by, such a man will only look at the training officer and, finding no appa­ rent support in her expression, he will prefer to keep quiet. The drama starts, with a trainee playing the role of the group organizer and the training officer playing the role of the leader being visited.

As she plays her role, the training officer shows that she has no faith in people. Her responses reveal a high degree of authoritarianism and her manner is subtly condescending. How­ ever, she is in favor of the new venture, and promises full co­ operation. Needless to say, the tramplings upon the rights of peo­ ple go unheard, for the trainee who is acting as the group organi­ zer is mainly concerned with how well he is playing his own role.

Meanwhile, the rest of the group is watching and nodding with approval at the expert way he is handling the leader—smooth praises to soften her up, easy acquiescence to avoid her wrath,

bright maneuvering to get her to co-operate. Finally, the two agree on the problem they think is the most urgent, but they are careful to emphasize that this is only tentative. They must consult others.

The group feels satisfied with results thus far and suggests that the role playing move on to the next step. The leader and the group organizer now join hands to visit a number of carefully selected persons of influence. Next comes the meeting of these selected neighbors. After a few speeches full of praise for each other, they get down to business and enumerate the problems of the community. A decision is taken as to the most urgent of these.

A plan is made to solve it. Soon it is clear that these men of influence have been chosen well by the leader and the group organizer. There is among them the man who has land to give; the man who can knock on any agency door; the one who can get the mayor to lend the bulldozer and, of course, those who have money and can be persuaded to donate some of it. All, of course, have their own constellation of followers and thus all can contri­ bute one thing in common: the hands of the people for the work that must be done.

The next step is the “community meeting” where the people are told what the project will be and the work that they will do.

They are efficiently organized and then dismissed until word goes out that calls them to their duty. At this point in the drama most members of the training group feel certain the project will be a success. They cannot see how such “scientific planning can fail.

And they smile happily at the training officer, who at this point calmly calls for a break in the discussions. She feels the need of coffee, hot and black, but they assume it is for the well deserved rest they have earned. They cannot guess that the more placid the training officer looks the more she is bursting with the challenge of helping them bring vision to eyes that see not and hearing to ears that hear not.

After the coffee break, the group is asked to move into another aspect of the situation. A question is asked with great

care to make it sound casual and relaxed. Would it not be worth while now, to take a more detailed look at all the people who live in the blackboard drawn community? The group returns to the map. Each trainee is asked to think hard and to answer with sin­ cerity some simple questions. Who are the people who live along these mountain trails? Is Juanito, the barefoot illiterate living on that remote hilltop, a human being? Does he have a head of his own? Can he think? Would it be biologically possible for Juanito to think with the head of Don José, the leader. . . or vice versa?

Is Juanito part of the community? Has his barefootedness any­ thing to do with his capacity to reason? Does he have a right to express himself? Is he a “peón”, good only for fixing the road or should he participate in the thinking and planning? How does it happen that this chance has been denied him thus far?

The same questions are asked about the people whom no­ body takes seriously; the young man who helps his father farm, the widow with six children and the squatter without land enough for a garden. Slowly, sometimes painfully, the group moves to­ ward a positive answer for each question. It is necessary, in some groups, to dwell longer on an analysis of the difference between the capacity to think and the opportunity some have had to ac­ quire knowledge through academic preparation. This is particu­ larly true if there is in the group a person whose security comes from collecting credits the way squirrels do nuts; someone for whom an additional year of schooling places him just one step further above those he considers unworthy.

In the end, however, the process of reasoning provides the answers for the group. And an interesting observation is that although every trainee has been absorbed in the discussion, no one has yet seen any direct connection with the previous roleplaying. Finally, the training officer announces she has a toughquestion for the group. She goes to the blackboard and writes the following: “If you admit that Juanito, Doña María, Pedro and the others have a head of their own, if you agree that they too have a right to be included, how in the name of progress, have you shown such lack of respect for these neighbors that you have

ignored them completely in your little drama and fixed everything with the leaders alone?”

In some groups, at this point, you can hear a pin drop. In other groups, the place explodes in protest. But whatever the reaction, a halt is called, a good long one, for each man needs to find a quiet corner where he can curl up, lick his wounds and ruminate.

The Democratic Process

By the following day, it is time to come together again—to relive the roleplaying and try to understand where and why they have gone off the track. After much analysis, they are at last able to face the basic question squarely. Is it possible to think of a program that would have as its goal the development of a faith and respect so deep in each person in the community that the natural conclusion would be that every citizen would consider it his right and responsibility to safeguard with his neighbor all matters concerning the common welfare? And in the minds and hearts of people, could it be that they would consider the uphold­ ing of this faith a goal as important as the solution of any physi­ cal problem? And could that be considered the true aim of com­ munity development even if no work projects were underway?

This is the time for clear thinking. The days pass and gra­ dually the response reaches a level of sober agreement. Little by little each trainee begins to examine his earlier years. His analysis, shared aloud with the others, helps him look into those patterns within the culture which influenced him to act the way he did.

He tells of how he served the people using methods which un­ consciously denied them the right to think and speak. He sees that he was so concerned with material progress that he often sacrificed the beginnings of democratic growth. When this selfstudy is over, he is asked another landmark question: Does he feel that the basic principles and objectives of the program are so important that he can leave the old ways and dedicate himself to this work for ever?

And, at this point, no one can answer for him. He must speak for himself. If his case is serious, almost he alone can find the solution. If he comes out of it at peace with himself there is little doubt that he will ever return to old ways of thinking and acting. But if he holds back and cannot accept a world in which the Juanitos are equal participants in the democratic process; if he shares with Don José the belief that humanity will be saved through the intervention of the “natural" leaders, then he will prefer to think of these other concerns as “naive." Sometimes when this happens, and he cannot be honest with himself, the doubting trainee squashes down his disagreement and thus post­ pones the inevitable day. Finally, however, he cannot stand the demands made upon him and he decides to leave, seeking satis­ faction in other ventures where he is free to think first of himself and his personal success.

Training, or a better word, “learning", never stops for any­ one at any level. In fact when the initial weeks are over and he goes to the field, the group organizer may well feel that he is just beginning. He brings his concerns to supervisory conferences, to monthly district meetings and to frequent periods of in-service training. In an atmosphere of mutual give and take, he is helped to grow into a man conscious of everything that is happening around him, alert to analyze all of it and to deal with it as a part of his learning. Instead of turning to ready-made formulas, he draws upon his own experience and the experience of his fellow workers, submitting every thought, word and deed to a careful examination under the spotlight of his basic principles. In this way he finds the strength to meet, not only the great physical task that lies ahead of him, but also the intellectual, emotional and spiritual demands which will be even greater.

Supervision Earlier in this paper, we said that selection, training and supervision of the field personnel of the Division are interrelated

functions. We have talked at some length about the first two.

Let us now turn to the latter.

A program which aims to help people develop their ca­ pacity for thought and expression, should reflect within its internal structure the sincerity of this purpose. Supervision is one of the sensitive areas to test in this respect. It has to be as carefully thought through in terms of its basic philosophy and functioning as the case of selection and training.

We tried to make clear in our description of training how, from the very beginning of our relationship with the field work­ er, we aim to provide an atmosphere, in both theory and practice, where an opportunity is given to examine the sources and areas of autocratic behavior. Supervision in its conservative approach needs careful examination. Many things happen during the train­ ing months that succeed in challenging the traditional concepts of supervision based on hierarchy. This is a start.

The subject of supervision enters the discussion as a formal part of the agenda toward the end of the training period. By then, the group is able, almost unguided, to define democratic supervision by summing up their own experiences. Their conclu­ sions coincide with the way in which they have all functioned as a group from the beginning.

Unavoidably, in an analysis of this subject, one has to begin by denying the very term itself, at least in its present, accepted concept. Traditional, hierarchical concepts of supervision seem absurd. In a democratic structure there is no room for the as­ sumption that in order for personnel to perform on the job, and specially in a task designed to serve people, they need some­ body at their elbow who is endowed with superior vision and understanding —a power which enables them to tell others what to do.

We believe that the man who is working directly with the people is doing the most basic job. He has to stand on his own two feet in the sense that he must be independent of someone making decisions for him, in the constant need he has to deter-

mine what to do in the varied situations that arise and which test the clarity of his convictions. However, the more that he does so, the greater the need he has for company. The rest of us, geared with him to the axle of common objectives and beliefs, work with him through a continuous circle of communi­ cation where every member has the same concern: how to serve the community in the best possible way. Each one’s function is different, but all are equally important to the fulfillment of the job. Supervisors are selected and trained as carefully as field workers.

For every five or six field men there is a district supervi­ sor, with headquarters centrally located to the area he super­ vises. He visits the field man in his home for regular conferences and is with him as much as possible in his communities. Every six weeks the district meets as a group for the sharing of com­ mon concerns. For every three supervisory districts there is an area supervisor who acts as an assistant to the chief of the sec­ tion. This assistant visits each district supervisor regularly, meets with him individually and with his group of workers, and is constantly visiting the communities with the supervisor and the field man. For each four areas there is an assistant in the cen­ tral office whose function it is to be aware of the four areas assigned to him and together with the rest of the central office personnel maintain an effective coordination of the total work of the field program.

Every week the chief and the assistants meet to share their work, and every six weeks, or oftener if necessary, the district supervisors and the central office staff hold a joint con­ ference. Whenever a subject comes up that needs direct con­ sultation with the field men themselves, the entire staff meets.

Twice a year the total staff meets for a two weeks’ seminar in Camp Yuquiyu, a rural retreat, away from telephones and other interrupting inventions of modern life. Here the work is evaluated.

Programs of supervision and in-service training are care­ fully made so that they fit the commitments of the men working

in the field. In this way, the regularity with which they visit the communities is seldom affected, except in the case of the semi­ nar sessions. Even then, field people are notified one or two months ahead.

To assure the fulfillment of the aims of the program, at­ tention must be given to the field man as a personality. His whole life is a subject that comes often into discussion during supervisory conferences. Help is given to the problems of his family, his health, economics and any other subject that needs the attention and concern of the members of the circle. The wife and children of all members of the field section know each other well and participate together in various educational and recreational activities.

One of the most fruitful of these activities is the cycle of conferences held periodically with the “Institute del Hogar”.

This is a private, non-profit agency with a competent, profes­ sional staff doing a most effective job in the field of family rela­ tions. In each of the area groupings of the field program, the supervisors and field workers together with their wives, meet together once a year for at least four conferences lasting a full day. The subjects discussed include relationships between hus­ band and wife, the problems of raising children, household fi­ nances.

These conferences have helped the wives understand at greater depth the job their husbands perform and it has helped the men to understand better the effect of their work on the home. What once started as a device to share the work with the wives, has now developed into an activity of great benefit for all.

The close companionship in all areas becomes a source of constant joy for all members of the section. As they walk together up and down the countryside where doors and hearts are opened to their coming, or as they sit across from each other in a meet­ ing, there is silent knowledge between the workers that they share the same reactions and concerns for all that is happening.

The efforts of all are centered in keeping alive, within their hearts, the principles that they believe maintain a healthy, de-

mocratic “ambiente” and that can only be done through constant evaluation and continued dedication.

Educational Materials Up to this point, we have discussed the aims of our pro­ gram, the strategic position of the field worker, his selection, initial training and the importance of the supervisors who will stand beside him. We now enter the phase of our narration where the field man returns home to the communities where he will work. However, before we describe the way in which the field man works in the community we should discuss the educational material produced by the program. This material constitutes one of the central columns of the total effort.

The law gave the Division the right to produce materials of various kinds. We elected to write books, to make films and to use the graphic arts as fully as possible. We decided to use these three media to complement each other around a common theme.

Each theme is carried by a book, one or more films, a poster and a mural paper, Nuestro Mundo, which is actually a preview of the book. At least four themes a year are brought to each rural community. It takes about twelve weeks for the community to see and discuss the films and to read out loud and discuss, first the Nuestro Mundo and then the book. There is a copy of the book for each family. The subjects we present in book, film and graphic arts are chosen through discussions between the field program and the central staff writers.

The intention of the audio-visual materials used by the Division is in harmony with the basic objectives of the program.

If a community is to develop democratically, its citizens must be informed. As stated in the law that created the Division, a citizen must have knowledge “about the nature of man, his history, his way of working and governing himself in the world and in Puerto Rico.”

But in addition, in order to incorporate himself more ful­ ly into the exercise of his rights and duties as a member of his

community, he needs to examine continuously his attitudes and ways of thinking in the light of the democratic process. There are many opportunities for such examination, but of them all, one of the most important is the chance to absorb the rich amount of material presented in book, movie and graphic arts. The themes reflect the basic objectives of the Division. For example: (1 ) Subject— the rights of man. The book, L os D erechos d el Hombre, deals with man’s struggle for his rights. It is a treatise on civil liberties and the way in which we must guard them. The films El d e los C abos Blancos (The One with the Four White Hoofs) and Yo, Juan Ponce d e Leon, complement the main theme in another key.

(2 ) Subject— timidity. The community is full of men and women with dignity and courage who paradoxically have remained silent on many matters having to do with their communal living, simply because they have never faced the fact that as free citizens they have the right and the responsibility to know and to participate in all matters concerning the common good. The book, L os Casos d e Ignacio y Santiago, tells two stories, one of Ignacio who ac­ cepted what life brought him and the other of Santiago who learned that he was “more man than mouse”. The film Ignacio is a combination of the two characters.

(3 ) Subject— the old-fashioned leader. He is essentially a “good” man but often he does things for people with motivations other than the purest. He has his ways and sometimes they add up to personal gain. The book El hom bre d e la Sonrisa Triste (The Man with the Sad Smile) is a true story of one such leader who came to know himself and the people. In the film El C acique (the old Indian word for “leader”), the people were not so for­ tunate. Their leader remained a “cacique”.

(4 ) Subject— intolerance. People who live with security, can dwell in close physical relationship and still be tolerant of each other’s differences. Self-respect and love of one’s neighbor dispel the doubts and darkness upon which fear, jealousy and envy breed.

The film, with the title, Intolerancia, tells the story of a small rural community where these forces are at work. The book, Las Ideas, los otros y yo, is an historical approach to man’s victory over himself.

There are many more. In fact, we are currently writing the book and making the film for our fortieth subject. We have written that same number of books and we are filming our seven­ tieth documentary. In addition we are now producing a quarterly, Nosotros, which presents the historic roots of our rich, cultural past. Our graphic artists, creating together in a workshop at­ mosphere, have produced thousands of illustrations, engravings, silk-screen posters, mural papers. The creative work of our writers, artists and film makers is recognized at home and abroad. They win prizes here and in such exhibition centers as Venice, Edin­ burgh and Melbourne but all such honors only succeed in sending them back to the people with humbleness of spirit to rededicate themselves to the challenging task of reproducing with pen, ca­ mera and engraving tool the fine lines of truth and beauty.

The Field Worker Begins His Task It was in 1950 that the first group of field men began walk­ ing through the rural communities of Puerto Rico. They were there because they and their government believed in the people and in the people’s desire to build a better community and thus a better world—a world based firmly on the democratic principle that every man, woman and child has the right and the respon­ sibility as a free citizen to know, to share and to participate in all matters affecting the community.

Today this continues to be true. When the field worker fin­ ishes his initial training, he goes back to the people to walk with them, to learn of them, to learn from them and to respond to them with sincerity and sensitivity. The home to home visits he makes give him an opportunity to ask the first questions. Would they be interested in the educational material? Should they as neigh­ bors meet together? Do they believe they can? How, when and where?

And the marvel of it is, that though today there are more than one hundred men working in more than 1,000 communities, many in the remotest parts of our country, others in the dense

quarters of our cities and towns, there has never been a com­ munity that failed to respond to this challenge. For the people are hungry; hungry to think out loud, to share their common interest and to build a better life together. And this they do in their evening meetings, held now with customary continuity, at least once every two weeks.

Beginning with the first meetings, two things of funda­ mental importance take place; — first, the manner in which the meetings are held. Their form is a radical departure from that which is traditional. Neighbors come of their own free will to a place and at a time which is of their own choosing. And second­ ly, they come, to sit in a circle, as members equal to one another.

The field worker does not at any moment assume the role of the “leader” who makes and takes decisions. He is the discussion leader, but each point he brings to the community is in the form of a question. It is the community that will think about and decide every issue. The neighbors, meeting with frequent continuity become accustomed to the idea of giving their own opinions, of using their own heads and of listening to one another with equal respect for all. Thus the habit of democratic dialog in­ cubates.

But in addition, books are read and films are discussed in each meeting, giving depth to new horizons of understanding.

Neighbors begin to think and ponder on matters of which they were formerly unaware.

So it is not surprising that eventually the day arrives when seeing themselves already as a united community, they wish to speak not only of the books and movies (though they con­ tinue to be important) but also of the problems of the com­ munity. They talk of the lack of potable water, of the need of a road, of a meeting place to protect themselves from the cold and rain. Physical problems retard their progress but the neigh­ bors also discuss many things that block their intellectual, cul­ tural and spiritual progress; their wish to be literate, their need of a library, the neighbor who needs economic help, the widow

with a large family who lives alone in a tumbled-down house.

They begin to feel as one family with the responsibility to watch over all things that effect them mutually.

And they are concerned too about the good traditions of their culture. They celebrate Christmas festivals in the spirit of former times and they organize recreational programs in which there is no need to offend others with an undue use of liquor.

The field worker never knows how many things the people will want to discuss when they become concerned with their own situations. He does know that his orientation will be directed to help them understand that in a democracy it is the com­ munity itself that takes its own decision after a scientific study of the problem and that it is the community itself that must take the action after full consensus and careful planning.

As soon as the community becomes aware of itself, the people discover the challenging truth that collectively they, as neighbors, can shape their personal and communal develop­ ment and that the matter of development is a many-sided thing, not simply the solution of a physical problem. They learn that democracy means including people, not planning for people or allowing the planning to be done for you; that all working together is better than one going it alone.

They agree that there is a better way than waiting with folded arms or of rushing forward without comprehension. They want to see results, but they want these results to be deeper than the cement supports under the new building or the trench that hides their water pipe. They come to see that the greatest guar­ antee of success, spiritual and physical, is when all forces work together; local, municipal and commonwealth, in free, full and open participation based on a scientific study of all the elements — human and technical.

The day arrives when the neighbors have reached a deci­ sion. This particular problem they believe, rather than some other, is the most urgent. All strive to find the solution, and, in striving, pledge themselves in their community meeting, to safe­ guard the process by which the ends are achieved; for now they

are beginning to see that what they are able to accomplish will be the direct result of the process they use.

The people have reached this decision by consensus, not through a vote. They have learned that voting may take less time but that as the expression of an unexamined prejudice it may leave behind minority feelings of defeat and deeper problems than it resolves. At this point in the meetings, the discussion is usually animated. Almost every suggestion tests a principle, a belief, a value expressed by someone and believed in by many.

If the field worker s ear is tuned to catch these notes of sharps and flats delivered in a minor or major key, then he knows how to help the community examine its more lasting develop­ ment as it goes about the business of building a project.

We were present one night not long ago at a community meeting when this very thing happened. A committee of four young people reported that they had not yet succeeded in visit­ ing the ex-treasurer so that she might settle her accounts with

them. One of them, the new treasurer, suggested that they make the visit while the meeting was in session and then report back to the group. All agreed and they had just reached the door when an old man spoke up quickly to stop them. He said he did not think they should go alone. He said he thought that the field worker should accompany them. The young people stopped to see what would happen and waited half-an-hour while “the wise old heads” deliberated on a theme of dependency; “Most country folk can’t do things for themselves half as well as an outsider can do for them and especially if he happens to be a government man.” The young people said nothing but their faces mirrored their break with the past. Finally, the meeting agreed that they should go alone though the old man, still not convinced, moved his head back and forth partly in disagree­ ment and partly in wonder at the new ways. The important thing that happened that night was not that the young people returned with more than five hundred dollars in cash rolled up in a paper bag, but that the community had taken the time to question an accepted way of thinking. A little bit of the ossifica­ tion had been chipped from the traditional pattern.

The Communities Seek Technical Assistance During the past years, all communities oriented by the Division have moved forward, although at different speeds. Among them, at this moment of writing, are 327 that have found the solution to a physical problem. How is this accomplished? The following is a step by step account of the process by which this happens.

At some point in the meetings the neighbors of these com­ munities have decided what problems they needed to tackle first. In the case in point, with 144 it was water; with 122 it was a road; and 61 were buildings.

In their meetings the neighbors agree that the first step is to exercise their right to find out from their government if there are any plans to solve the problem. A commission of neigh-

bors, volunteers from the community meeting, drive in to town to talk with the mayor. In every case, they go to learn whether the municipal government has plans or has no plans to solve the problem, and they also want to be sure that their mayor under­ stands the efforts of the people. They bring back to the com­ munity meeting a report of this conservation. In the case of the 327 communities mentioned above, there were no plans in the municipality for solving the problem.

After further discussion in the meeting, a commission of neighbors then visits the offices of the agency involved and learns in each case if plans are underway at the central level.

They then ask for technical help, for an engineer to visit the community and to study the problem with them. (If there is a plan to solve the problem within the regular program of the

government, the commission reports this back to their commu­ nity and the neighbors turn their communal efforts towards another problem.)

The majority of the problems thus far tackled by the com­ munities fall either within the Water Authority or the Department of Public Works. Since these two agencies prepare themselves to receive the commissions, their engineers are able to respond to each community’s call for technical assistance. The promise is given for the first visit of the engineer to the community.

The commission reports back to the next community meet­ ing and a group -of neighbors choose themselves to meet the engineer on the appointed day, to walk around the community with him and bring him to the meeting that night. There then begin a series of visits necessary for a study of the problem.

In the case of a new road, a brigade comes to live with the neighbors and is helped by them in tracing the route. Tentative plans are drawn up on location and completed in the central office.

The engineers are respected for their technical knowledge, their skill and their desire to be of service. In turn they respect the people for their natural sagacity, their keen sense of observa­ tion, their hunger to learn and most of all, for the faith they have in the democratic process. The technicians bring all their concerns into the community meeting which they attend with all possible regularity during the periods of study, design, and execution.

By the time the budget estimates are ready, there are few families that have not become deeply involved in the project.

There is a copy of the budget for each family. It is read aloud, discussed and deliberated over in the community meeting until everyone understands every part of it. The engineer is present and he uses the blackboard to amplify the meaning.

Few budgets can be studied fully in one session. It takes several meetings for all to share and be in agreement with that part which the community agrees to give. There are at least six areas of contribution in which the community collaborates:

(1 ) All unskilled labor given freely as the right, privilege and the responsibility of every citizen. This is a guarantee made by every community to the Fund for Economic Aid of the Department of Public Works.

(2 ) As much of the skilled labor as possible. If the necessary skilled labor exists in the community, usually 50 per cent is donated.

(3 ) All possible tools and trucks for transportation contributed with­ out charge.

(4 ) All land donated without cost: right of way for roads and water pipes and the site of all community centers and other public buildings.

(5 ) Materials: sand, gravel, stone.

(6 ) Cash: often small but always some.

When these points have been explored in each case, a commission of neighbors returns to the mayor. They lay before him a summary of every step they have taken since they first talk­ ed with him and they ask him for his understanding and help.

At one such meeting a neighbor said, “We come to you with two sacks—one has all that we can put in. The other is yours.

We know that you will put in all that you can, but of one thing you must be sure. Whether you are able to put in much, little or nothing, we will continue to have the same regard for you as our mayor and for your efforts to help all the people of this municipality.” The mayor answered that he appreciated the words of the neighbor and would want to make only one change. There where not two sacks, he said; there was in reality only one, for he and the community were united.

The Communities Look for Economic Help to Match their own Efforts When the commission reports back to the community the result of its conversation with the mayor, the neighbors have a serious problem before them. Their own resources and the help from the mayor will, on the average, construct about half the project. ( This was true in every one of the projects listed above.)

During their discussion they have heard of a Fund within the Department of Public Works that might be able to help them.

A few have read that the legislature of Puerto Rico appropriated to the Secretary of Public Works the sum of $300,000 each year for the four years, 1959-60 to 1962-63, had doubled the amount for 1963-64 and had approved $1,000,000 for each of the past three years, 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67. They learn that this money is to be used as grants-in-aid to help just such projects as theirs, where the physical construction comes as a reflection of a continuous educational orientation. They make further inquiries and learn that they must present a formal application to the Fund for Economic Aid and that favorable action will be taken if the community can meet the requirements.

To administer the Fund, the Secretary of Public Works ap­ pointed a committee in July, 1958, made up of engineers and edu­ cators. It was to be chairmanned by the Undersecretary of the Department. The committee has met on an average of once every two months since 1958 to study the petitions submitted by the communities. Up to June 30, 1966, it has approved a total of 327 grants and expects to approve 75 more during 1966-67. The aver­ age amount contributed locally to each project during this period was $9,236. The average size of the grants made from the Fund to the communities was a little more, $10,329. Thus the average total cost of each project was $19,565.

During this five-year period the total construction costs of these 327 community-projects, involving 27,712 families, was $6,397,959. Of this total, 51 per cent came from the Fund for Economic Aid. The Communities Begin to Build Imagine the excitement in the meeting the night the secre­ tary of the community announces that he has received a tele­ gram from the Fund for Economic Aid granting their request.

Now, after the Planning Board has given its approval, they can begin to build, the telegram says. And though the people are

eager to start, they do not resent this additional hurdle. They have come to understand the function of central planning and they see it as added security rather than government interference.

When the neighbors begin to put their spades into the earth, their “machetes” to the clearing, the need to meet has not ended. In each community meeting they plan the long-range goals—the coming of the bull-dozer; the delivery of the mater­ ials; the arrival of the deep-well digger. And they also plan the between-meetings, short-term jobs: how many men will be needed to go before and behind the bulldozer; to lay the ce­ ment floor; to dig the pipeline ditches.

The women listen and many feel compelled to volunteer for some of the hard manual tasks. But there is no wanting of hands when it comes to preparing meals and coffee for those who will work under the broiling sun.

However, every step of the way is not always smooth, as the following story illustrates. One Sunday afternoon we went to a community meeting where the neighbors were planning how to share the work-turns in building a road. Six men in the group sat together quietly listening. They were all wage-hands

on the farm of the biggest landowner, the ‘leader” of the com­ munity, who as yet had not arrived. Several men had spoken, telling what days during the week they would be free to work and the women had said they would prepare coffee and lunches for everyone.

A few glanced inquiringly at the six men. Finally, one of the oldest, a man with a strong face, stood up. He said that he spoke for himself; that everyone knew him and knew that he worked hard five days a week on the farm of Don Pedro, but that his Saturdays and Sundays he devoted to his own little piece of land to make life easier for his large family. However, he continued, he had decided to work on the road every weekend until it was finished.

When he sat down, each of the other five men nodded his head in agreement. The meeting continued and a short time later Don Pedro entered. He greeted everyone, shaking hands with a few and sat down in a seat that he moved slightly apart from the circle. Then he began to talk in a loud voice with his neigh­ bor, commenting on the latest gossip of the barrio. The leader of the discussion accepted the interruption realizing that the people, partly out of deference and partly out of curiosity, had their ears cocked to hear the opinions of Don Pedro. He in turn, embarrassed at not knowing what had been said thus far in the meeting and being a bit skittish about it anyway, was delighted to be the center of attention. The drama played on for a few minutes and then the discussion leader asked Don Pedro if he would like to hear a summary of the meeting thus far. With a wave of the hand, Don Pedro indicated that he didn’t care much, but the discussion leader continued anyway. However, he had gotten only as far as saying that the neighbors were talk­ ing about how they would plan their work in the building of the road, when Don Pedro interrupted him.

He got up. “That is fine,” he said, “that is fine. I am glad to hear that you people are willing to work. But it is going to take a lot of manpower to build that road. Like I was saying to the representative the other day. I‘m afraid you people have

grabbed at a lot but you’ll end up with only a little. However, I am with you, so I’ll tell you what I ’m going to do. I ’m going to give the community some manpower. You all know I’ve got six peons working on my land. I’m going to give the commu­ nity two days a week of each of these peons to work on the road.

That makes twelve man days a week and what’s more, I am going to pay them. That’s a lot of money, but I am willing to do my share,’’ and he sat down with a satisfied look on his face.

He folded his hands across his stomach and waited. But there was silence in the group. No one said a word. No one said “Thank you, Don Pedro.” No one clapped.

The look on Don Pedro’s face changed. He was puzzled.

What was wrong? And then he saw that almost everyone was looking at the six men who worked for him. He had not been looking at them himself and now he realized that the people were waiting for one of them to speak. The seconds passed and Don Pedro began to grow impatient. Finally, the older man who had spoken before rose again and stood before his employer with his white straw hat flat against his chest, turning it nerv­ ously round and round. He looked at Don Pedro, but he ad­ dressed his neighbors.

“My friends,” he said, “Don Pedro was not with us a few moments ago when I stood before you and promised to give every week-end to my community in the construction of the road.” Turning to look at the men beside him, he continued, “He did not hear the agreement of my fellow workers. There­ fore you must not misunderstand the gift of Don Pedro. He did not know that we had already made our commitment to you as free men giving our free time, unpaid. That we were able to do this, it seems to me, is the meaning of the unity that we have begun to discover as neighbors, in these meeting every Sunday afternoon, sharing equally together. We six obreros do not wish to be paid to work on the road while others of you give your labor freely. In a community like ours, each must look to himself and reach his own decision. It must be his own. Don Pedro is a good employer and a generous man, but with humility

we stand before him and say that the contribution he makes to the building of the road must be his own. He must not pay us to make it for him. ’ And then the old man sat down.

The Communities inaugurate what they Build And when the last day of work comes and it is time to dedicate what they have built, the neighbors discover that just as the planning and the construction was theirs, so the inaugura­ tion must also be theirs.

On that last day of labor, when the speech-making, the singing, the laughter and the praise take the place of the hoe, the pick and the shovel, the people understand that this was not an end of something but a beginning; a re-dedication of the democratic principles that lie at the roots of their community.

A Last Look at the Field Worker And what of the field worker? What is happening to him as the communities are moving forward? Where does he stand?

Like the communities he is helping, how strong is he in the face of self-analysis? Ten kilometres down a muddy road, heading for home in the pouring rain, supperless, tired, his jeep suddenly has a blow-out. Does he remember the warm smile of the farmer who called to him as he left the barrio, “May you go with God, Guillo, but be careful. We have oxen in case your jeep will not go out by itself?”

Or does he remember only, and in remembering resent, the man who came to the meeting drunk, or the leader who laughed at community agreements, or the troublesome one, who unable to speak out, was always whispering suggestions in his ear?

Does he fall into the narrow and bitter arguments of tra­ ditional thinking? If so, he will be caught by such reasoning as the following: (1 ) A countryman without land, shoes or pretty words cannot do much to affect the welfare of the community in which he lives.

(2 ) The man who knows more and can help the most is the man of influence.

(3 ) An illiterate cannot think as deeply and as clearly as an edu­ cated man. Thus his contribution to his community is limited.

(4 ) Schooling will save my children from the hardness of my own life. They will be spared my suffering if they can become pro­ fessionals.

(5 ) The best way to deal with a personal problem is to have the leader write a letter that you can carry to the person who will solve it for you. No sense going if you do not have the letter.

(6 ) Leaders in politics are elected by the people, but leaders in re­ ligion are chosen by God. (7 ) A leader is one who solves the problems for his people.

(9 ) A farm laborer does not mind being referred to as a peon. He even calls himself that.

(9 ) A man must dominate his woman; a father, his child. Woman has her place in the community but it is secondary to the place of man.

(10) Lucky is the community that has a leader of such influence that he can plead for his people in the highest circles.

(11) The more formal a group discussion the more effective it will be. One who knows the rules of parliamentary procedure will be able to guarantee a successful meeting.

(12) A group cannot function properly without a president, officers, a board of directors and standing committees.

(13) The best way for a field agent to work is to learn early in the game the system of line and staff, the administrative proce­ dures of his agency and how he can “work through channels”.

(14) No field man can ever expect to know as much about what he is doing as the director of his program—otherwise he would be the director.

(15) Circular letters containing directives and blueprints for action guarantee that the best thinking in an agency reaches the field.

They also provide a sense of security to each worker.

Cliches and false reasoning test the field man at every turn. He has, however, a source of nourishment to turn to.

Through his close relationship with his fellow workers and his supervisor, he is able to grow in stature and become an educator of strength and humility. Nevertheless, in certain instances, in order to be at peace with himself, he must be helped to reach the decision to leave the program.

The task is such that not all who wish to do so can actually undertake it. For not every man is free, in spite of his desire to be so. And only a free man can work in such a program. Free in the sense that he can withstand economic strain and not resent the fact that the quality and quantity of his work is not measured in monetary terms. Free in the sense that if his family complains of neglect, he will know how to draw them into the spirit of his work.

Free of ambition because to serve the people is the highest goal he can set for himself. Free in the knowledge that the job he is doing is greater than any other and worthy of every sacrifice.

And Finally And finally, a word about community development, post­ poned for many pages, but now, at last arrived at. To present a definition would certainly be an anticlimax at this point, but per­ haps we might be allowed an expression of two different points of view, two emphases in the field of community development, which though not necessarily at war with each other, do, in the long run, tend to negate each other.

First, there are those who say that community development is a program designed to help the less-favored countries reduce the economic gulf that lies between them and the more favored countries. They believe that programs must be planned, executed, and evaluated at the central government level and brought to the people for their cooperation and benefit.

Many who feel this way, look upon community development as a problem-solving device. The important thing, they say, is to

send to the communities men trained as adequately as possible in such fields as agriculture, engineering, and health; that any method or process that involves the people and thus brings about the solution of the problem is a good one.

They believe that “the sands are running out”; that “there isn’t much time anymore”; that tangible results are what we should worry about because they can be seen and measured.

Many community development “experts” agree that some­ one must take the initiative, do the thinking and make the decisions for the people. It may be the agent, the political leader, the mayor or a committee. Rarely is it the people themselves. When the peo­ ple do come together it is because they are called, either to “en­ dorse” what has been decided or to promise or even to be told what their work fulfillment shall be. Such “experts” would find nothing wrong with the fact that the methodology of many com­ munity development programs could be paraphrased to read, “With our brains as technicians, with the necessary cash from the central government level and with the arms of the people, projects can be built that would otherwise never come under construction”.

The task as conceived by such leadership is to find the way ( the quickest and most direct possible) to organize the community.

Organization means to win the neighbors over to an agreement to contribute all they can, especially free labor, in the building of projects. This enhances the economic development of the coun­ try. Community organization for econom ic developm ent—a. defi­ nition of community development in five words.

First, there are those who believe these things and then, sec­ ondly, there are others who see it differently. They believe that community development is fundamentally a program of concepts, analysis and a living expression; concepts of human dignity, analy­ sis of each individual’s rights and responsibilities and a living ex­ pression of democratic thinking and behavior.

They believe that a program of community development that works for the communities of South America or the villages of India and Pakistan must also work for the Winnetkas of Illinois, U.S.A. They believe that there are no “experts” from the West

who can appear in the East bearing community development gifts: that in the search for truth no nation is more favored than another.

They believe that the physical solution of a problem is part of the growth but only when it comes as a result of the total in­ volvement in the process; otherwise they would be fearful that the method used by the community and its leadership might be more defeating than developing.

They believe that the process is everything; that without it you have no security that the hands, heads and hearts of men are not being used to push them into greater dependency, deeper enslavement. And finally, they believe that the argument of “the need to go fast" may easily become a rationale for short-cutting the democratic process.

They believe that “community development” is an educa­ tional process. That it is this, first, last and all the time. That all else is secondary to it and must take its place as a reflection, not as the end result. “Community development”, they say, “is not better roads, better beehives, pure water nor sanitary privies. It is something of the spirit not something material. It must reach into the deep, cultural patterns of people, examining them and testing them as principles of faith. It is not a temporary, physical construction. It is a building within the hearts and minds of men, not a recreation center in the middle of a playfield. It is these things because without them it matters relatively little whether the road is paved or not, whether you go to the woods or to the sanitary privy, whether economically you and your community are materially blessed. It is these things because with them, all physical solutions follow and in their proper order.

Thus there are these two positions, not exactly poles apart, but certainly not congruent. They are set down here in the terms we have learned to identify them over the past decade. The Di­ vision of Community Education is in agreement with one of them, the second, of course, and it has been our privilege in these pages to recount in some detail why we are such strong advocates of this position.

Impreso en Puerto Rico por lAUERES GRAilCOS INTERAMERICANOS. INC