Progressives in the 'Hood

I recall how elated I was 10 years ago when Harold Washington won the close 1983 mayoral election in Chicago. I can recall, too, my anger as Mayor Washington struggled to exercise the authority of the position he attained. Then my sadness and rage when he died suddenly while in office. I hesitantly approached Pierre Clavel's and Wim Wiewel's Harold Washington and the Neighborhoods with a mixture of emotions and defenses in place.

What I found was a satisfying array of "insider" recollections that seemed particularly timely given a relatively new presidential administration. No, Bill Clinton is not an outspoken progressive, as was Harold Washington. But their administrations raise the same question: Can an entrenched bureaucratic mode of functioning be recrafted and transformed into a human-centered, participatory mode of government operation valuing concrete achievements? A timely question indeed.

Harold Washington campaigned in the midst of Chicago's socioeconomic decline. Between 1967 and 1982, Chicago lost 45 percent of its manufacturing jobs. At the same time, public dollars earmarked for infrastructure repair were being used for private economic development. Blue-ribbon reports supported targeting greater investment to the "cream of the crop."

Resentment grew. Ordinary people began to realize their common struggle in fending off gentrification attempts. This rising dissatisfaction combined with Washington's commitment to substantive and progressive change to mark an exciting electoral campaign. As one author in this collection writes, Washington as a candidate represented "liberation, strength of convictions, achievement against the odds, and substance. He was seen as a giant intellect who possessed the humility and common sense to stay in close contact with his constituency."

Urban planners Wiewel and Clavel offer nine "insider" essays by persons connected with the Washington campaign and/or administration. Additional chapters offer perspectives from neighborhood activists. Clavel and Wiewel present their own analysis in less than scintillating introductory and concluding chapters. All the writers agree that Mayor Washington won because of the massive mobilization and unprecedented solidarity of the black community along with the loose alliance of progressive Latinos, community activists, and reform-minded institutional elites.

The complexion of the city was changing: Whites, 60 percent of the population in 1970, were 47 percent 10 years later. A fight-back shift occurred from protest politics to that of power politics. Differences between authors emerge as they shift to discussion of the Washington administration years. Particular angles of vision highlight nuanced differences and contradictions.

CREATIVE TENSION clearly was viewed positively by Washington. One of his staff, however, described the reality as an "ideological crazy quilt." Washington did not try to be a coalition builder but provided the space where differing perspectives could be aired: One author notes, "Harold was promoting a vision of a grass-roots democracy in the midst of an era of worship of the private sector values of the bottom line, the big build, and making it without government help."

But was the vision operationalized? The progressive candidate advocated democratic social and political reconstruction, but faced constraints on most every approach due to constitutional and real-world racist and political realities.

Advocates accepted positions in the Washington administration vowing not to become bureaucrats, but instead to help people by creating an inclusive, living laboratory of democracy. Some note the naiveté of their beliefs that the mayor had the authority to command attention and progressive action. Repeatedly we are told how much more complex is the structure of local power than had been had realized.

One community leader, while remembering Mayor Washington as one of the "finest, most committed public officials," concludes that "not much of lasting value was accomplished in terms of community involvement in planning and development." The abruptness of the end of the administration, he notes, cannot obscure Washington's greater ability as a grassroots political leader than as a mayor.

The prophetic voice of community groups was muffled in order not to embarrass the mayor as the media continued to hold Mayor Washington to a different standard of scrutiny than previous mayors. The mobilizing base from community organizations was lost as the movement for change unraveled.

This book reflects on "melding old with new" in successfully promoting change. Still "perhaps the hardest lesson learned was that it is extremely difficult to change public opinion on social issues regardless of the facts. Human service issues, more so than any other area, are clouded with emotion. It is very difficult to change that emotion."

Do read Harold Washington and the Neighborhoods. We can garner insight about de facto and plural realities, about what "the power elite" means beyond abstractions, and possible strategies for concrete change. Some advice: Jump right into the first-person accounts. While Wiewel and Clavel do not do justice in their summative chapters to the nuanced arguments that are presented, they are to be commended for offering this quite timely, multitextured collection of "behind-the-scenes" articles.

Loretta J. Williams was an activist sociologist in Boston and a consultant to the Women's Theological Center, Church Women United, and other non-profits when this review appeared.

Harold Washington and the Neighborhoods: Progressive City Government in Chicago. 1983-1987. By Pierre Clavel and Wim Wiewel. Rutgers University Press, 1991. $16 (paper).