Worst Instincts: Cowardice, Conformity, and the ACLU

by Wendy Kaminer

When an organization committed to free speech succumbs to pressure to suppress internal criticism and disregard or "spin" the truth, it offers important lessons for other associations, corporations, and governments. Wendy Kaminer, a renowned advocate of civil liberties, calls on her experience as a dissident member of the American Civil Liberties Union national board to tell an inside story of dramatic ethical decline that has much to teach us about the land mines of groupthink.

Note from the Author

Ch. 2, The Problem with Partisanship, note 2.

This book is not a comprehensive expose of ACLU controversies, (which would be too tedious for me to write or you to read,) and the Beacon Press archive only documents this book; but my colleagues and I have been in the process of making a comprehensive record available in another publicly accessible archive.


From the Trade Paperback edition.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics

160 pages, Hardcover

First published May 1, 2009

Reviews

[Eric_W · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've had the pleasure (?) of serving on several non-profit boards, mostly related to libraries and library systems or college associations. As I have told my daughter several times when she complains about a board member, boards see the world differently than an employee, and boards have very different responsibilities than employees. The major role for the board is to hire and fire the executive director. When trust breaks down between the board and the executive director, a board has no choice but to hire a new one. In the case of Romero versus his board described in this book, Kaminer describes not only a break between several members of the board and their executive director, but a profound disagreement among board members themselves over basic principles of the organization.

"When a not-for-profit group idealizes itself , regarding its own rectitudes a fact, not a contingency, it presumes to embody an essential, altruistic, if not sacred, mission, and criticizing the group becomes the equivalent of criticizing or betraying its great cause. Then members, unwilling to leave the group will find ways to love it, rationalizing felonies as well as misdemeanors." (The Catholic church's unwillingness to face the implications of the priest pedophile scandal springs to mind.)

It has been my observation that organizations formed to promote idealistic principles have a cohesion that works very well until the need for a professional manager becomes inherent because of the increased work load of that organization. The choice of the new director is crucial because if the ED doesn't necessarily share those original ideals, or doesn't come from the ranks of the members, there tends to be a shift over time in the goals of that association. Now the focus is on keeping the organization going (gotta pay the ED's salary and infrastructure, after all) and raising money to fund the infrastructure (which, in order to increase the ED's power base, must necessarily grow.)

Increasing wealth for the ACLU became an issue as well during the Bush years. "I doubt that many members ever considered the relevance of widely publicized governance failures [Enron, Tyco, and WorldCom all occured around the time:] by corporate boards to their own roles as fiduciaries. The ACLU board would not, or could not, seriously entertain the notion that its leaders might be as likely to abuse power as the leaders of multi-billion dollar corporations, absent substantial checks on their behavior."

The problems began with an agreement signed by the new executive director accepting a grant from the Ford Foundation that included the general rider prohibiting any organization accepting a grant from promoting, or engaging in "violence, terrorism, bigotry or the destruction of any state." i.e. a restriction on political advocacy.. Now most people would not think much of that but those passionate in support of speech would not want to sign anything that could potentially restrict speech. Romero's mistake was that he didn't inform the board of this rider. Some colleges and universities opposed the rider and when it became know the ACLU had accepted it, the proverbial vigaro hit the mix-master. And, of course, the ACLU executive board wanted the money. Furthermore, Romero hid from the board his role in helping to formulate the statement. Tsk, tsk. Then, to make things worse, Romero signed an agreement to stay on the Combined Federal Campaign program, which netted $500,000 per year, but which required that the ACLU would agree not to hire anyone on a federal watch list. The vigaro had now morphed into shit.

It's hard to know what to make of this book. Kaminer presents what is undoubtedly a very biased view of events (note that I do not see bias as a negative, especially if the biased individual is correct.) Her attitude is that the other board members were sheep following a goat and she discusses Solomon Ashe's famous study of conformity to indicate how easy it is for people in a group to call "white, black," something they would never do as individuals, in order too go along with the group. But it's also true that there are people out there, professional gadflies, if you will, who delight in being the resident antagonist ad skeptic (disclaimer: it's a role I often enjoy myself.) The ACLU prides itself on being non-conformist with regard to the outside world, yet Kaminer suggests a substantial amount of comfort is acquired by conforming to an internal majority.

Kaminer does make a persuasive case for ideological impurity and myopia at the ACLU. It's just hard to tell to what degree she is right. On the other hand, the book provides some valuable insights into organizational behavior, and I recommend it highly for that reason if nothing else. There is, in organizations, an "expansive capacity for self-deception of people immersed in systems predicated on deceptive images of perfection that repel all suggestions of failure." Remember the Corvair and the o-rings of the Challenger?

This book should be required reading for prospective non-profit board members.

References: http://www.hereinstead.com/NYTIMES-ON...

http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/psycho...

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wendy Kaminer was a member of the board of the ACLU of Massachusetts from the early 1990s to 2009. She was a national board member of the ACLU from 1999 to 2006. In this book she "focuses on the story, or cautionary tale, of what I regard a a dramatic ethical decline at the ACLU, involving the institutionalization of deceit and abandonment of core civil-liberties principles by staff and leadership--enabled by the use of social pressure to silence dissent."

Kaminer shows how the ACLU has changed from an organization whose primary mission was defending civil rights to one that promotes a political agenda. Kaminer laments what happens when "loyalty to the institution prevails over loyalty to the institution's ideals."

In well-documented detail Kaminer shows how the ACLU, to raise funding and promote its political goals, accepted money under the same circumstances that it criticized others for doing so, instituted gag rules on its own members, disseminated misinformation and lies, and tried to discredit those who disagreed with leadership. Kaminer also examines cases in which the ACLU defended liberals but did not defend conservatives even though the basic principles at stake were the same. (Note that Kaminer is NOT a conservative and the book is published by a liberal press.)

Using her experiences with ACLU as an example, Kaminer shows how all social organizations or groups face the conflict of supporting its leaders even when those leaders take them down wrong paths. While reading this book, it is easy to apply these lessons to other groups (political and social) who circle the wagons in the face of criticism, forget or ignore basic principles of honesty and respect, engage in ad hominem attacks, and justify any means because its goals are deemed so critical. This is an excellent book.

[Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is something of a dilemma; do I rate this based on whether I personally found this to be of interest (a “good read” generally) or do I evaluate this as a disgruntled-but-seemingly-fair dissertation on some very specific, very recent issues within one organization by an ex-member of high standing? Typically I choose the former (which in this case might be 2 stars) instead on the latter (4), but for this one I’ll say a average 3 as, really, hardly anyone will read my “review” and perhaps four people will ever see my rating. I might as well segue into a discussion of just how awful the Jimmy Fallon Show is or, even more pressing, why every small pothole repair now requires two Boston police officers.

In case anyone actually reads this (um…Hi Mom, How’s retirement thus far?) I’ll add my typically useless two cents about this book. If I go on the basis of my personal take, I felt this quite brief book read as something of an activist pamphlet with an appended quasi-psychological profile of the perils of groupthink conformity as it may eventually crush independent, rational opinion. The subsequent inclusion of issues revolving around the First Amendment on private campuses was more palatable as this relates to Kaminer’s narrative about internal strife within the ACLU over the last eight years. This incremental fracturing – according to her thesis – is already negatively influencing the way the organization operates in the public realm.

Whereas I certainly don’t consider her concerns “nitpicking,” I also don’t know that this is ready-for-Primetime in popular book form (that is, something my dismal local libraries would actually own a copy of). With all the other crap we’re bombarded with day-to-day, these, no doubt, troubling issues seem a bit tame. Obviously her reasoning is that these issues have been increasing exponentially and the whole infrastructure of the ACLU is at stake, therefore there’s no time like the present to get this information out there. I can respect that, but as a general reader I felt less than engaged through most of it. Perhaps my cynicism leads me to suspect that the ACLU – like other such large organizations – already had far worse, and certainly more numerous, bones in the proverbial closet. Despite Romero’s roguish leadership, I blithely assumed money laundering, political blackmail, and the like might have already been defining characteristics…since like 1922! I don’t watch CSI:Reno or whatever and I don’t think I’ve even seen more than one Michael Moore movie, but it seems to me that anytime an organization exceeds six people and seven-figure funding, a Denver prostitution ring supplying the money for Taliban Bazookas can’t be far off. Am I wrong? Does a bear sh*t in the woods?

Anyway, if I put aside what my wife says is my distorted world-view (one that’s rarely contradicted), I might read this as the story of a recently displaced, passionate ACLUer bravely exposing wrongdoings in the face of internal ridicule. Kaminer’s agenda is nothing more than reforming the recently maligned organization so it can pursue civil liberty protections unhampered as it once did. That’s great and I certainly wouldn’t deny this is her intent. I suppose I would say that I’m less shocked by the story than shocked that others may find the story shocking.

[Jon]

A hard-hitting, more-in-sorrow-than-anger look at how the ACLU sold out after 9/11. Only one objection: I wish Kaminer had included more material about the group's history, including other times it failed to live up to its mission. Since this book is very short, an extra 20-30 pages or so of background would not have gone amiss.

[Kevin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Wendy Kaminar is a great writer. Although I disagree with her about half the time, I love reading her columns because she is a truly consistent libertarian. Her fearlessness and intellectual integrity remind me of Hitchens, which is high praise. This book was all about the internal divisions within the ACLU during the 2001-2006 period after Anthony Romero took over as executive director.