Fundraising for the Good of the Whole Troop?
Posted 18 December 2014 - 09:00 AM
My Troop has traditionally sold popcorn and wreathes in the fall followed by an annual chili supper in February. However, I have heard of some Troops who do a full-court press on popcorn for six straight weeks. At the end of that period they have enough funding for the entire year's worth of adventures. This idea was recently echoed in the Scouting magazine (pgs 12-13):
With the recent backlash against individual Scout accounts, I like the idea of everyone pitching in to help fund the Troop as a whole. If no one has to worry about not being able to pay for a trip, lock-in, or other activity I think we'd be able to avoid most embarrassing incidents.
Posted 18 December 2014 - 10:00 AM
Posted 18 December 2014 - 11:36 AM
Posted 18 December 2014 - 03:29 PM
Posted 18 December 2014 - 03:45 PM
Posted 18 December 2014 - 03:57 PM
Unfortunately a lot of troops make room and often encourage such myopic efforts.
Stosh! Long time no see, buddy.
Could you clarify this statement? What myopic efforts are you referring to?
Posted 18 December 2014 - 05:12 PM
Posted 18 December 2014 - 06:21 PM
Posted 18 December 2014 - 08:13 PM
Posted 18 December 2014 - 09:02 PM
Anything that does not fit "A Scout is Thrifty - he pays his own way" is a violation of the Scout Law. If you have a Troop where each Scout is not pulling his own weight, you do not have a Boy Scout Troop. It is up to the Committee to ensure that each Scout who needs it has opportunities to fundraise or otherwise "pay his own way."
Here's the whole explanation from my trusty 9th Edition. The italics is mine:
A Scout is Thrifty. A Scout works to pay his own way and to help others. He saves for unforeseen needs. He protects and conserves natural resources. He carefully uses time and property.
Posted 18 December 2014 - 09:45 PM
Posted 19 December 2014 - 08:59 AM
Can't you see he's obviously the bolshevik Stosh as opposed to the bourgeoisie dcsimmons?!
LeCastor: As you can see how this works as referenced in our PM..... It's not an apples/oranges thing, it's a goose and gander thing.
Because you asked for clarification I will respond. The myopic view has to do with how troops help the boys focus on their own little world of self gain in the troop. They promote ISA's, advancement, and a certain sense of "looking out for oneself." These kinds of efforts of worrying about oneself, their finances, their advancement, their issues, one finds that there's not much room to worry about "helping other people at all times" part of the program. That would take a wider vision to see such things in the Scouting program. Because they use this approach, it makes leadership development that much more difficult if not impossible.
It has nothing to do with any Marxist attitudes as evidenced by myopic responses, it has to do with "taking care of someone besides yourself" kind of servant leadership ("Help other people at all times"). So if I were to assume a Marxist stance on this issue, the only leadership I would need to promote a form of dictatorial tyranny, and I have seen plenty of that from both adult and youth in the BSA program. Because I don't do this I totally avoid about 95% of the problems brought up on this forum caused by such an approach.
Then there's the issue of team-work in the troop. This, too, is not "bolshevik" in nature as has been suggested. Team-work is the process of two leaders working together each keeping watch over the other person's back. How can I as a leader take care of everyone else's back when no one is watching over mine??? The SPL has the SM backing him up, but the SM is not part of a boy-led program. It's Tenderfoot requirement #9 that is often taught incorrectly in the troops. The buddy system of leadership is nothing more than the first step in real team-work. The boys in my troop were discussing the need for an APL for the patrol/troop. The APL is assigned by the PL. Well he was having difficulty selecting someone. He asked me for help and so I asked what an APL did each boy gave their "definition". The boy that got the job answered with: "It's his job to take care of the PL." Who takes care of the PL while the PL is taking care of the patrol? Too often APL's just sit around waiting for the PL to not show up so he can "take over and run the show". Yep, there's the kind of boy I want running my patrol.
What's Marxist/bolshevik about any of this? Nothing! It's just a conclusion drawn by people who approach this whole issue with a rather myopic Communist/Marxist/socialist view of the situation.
Parents teach it when they say, "My boy raises money for his benefit only. Why should he pay for someone else?" Here's a parent that is into sabotaging their kid's leadership potential. Teaching that as leadership just isn't going to work in a servant leadership world and it is contrary to the empty words, their son repeats every meeting when he says, "Help other people at all times."
SM's pick up on this when they drive home the point of ISA and self achievement of advancement over the welfare of the troop. Oh, a SM would never do that. Well not 100% of the time, but what percentage is acceptable? 1%? It's okay to "help other people 99% of the time."
Anyone who can't see any of this suffers from varying degrees of myopia when it comes to working with youth.
If "Helping other people at all times" is what communism/Marxism/socialism is all about, I guess I have to plead guilty. If that statement doesn't seem to make sense, then it's time to refocus one's view of the world or get some glasses.
Posted 19 December 2014 - 09:34 AM
Posted 19 December 2014 - 09:56 AM
Posted 19 December 2014 - 11:12 AM
Hey, lighten up a little....we're just having some fun...not making a movie about you or anything....
This is often the the justification reaction of a cyberbully. "We're just having some fun...." and it's usually at someone else's expense. LeCastor asked for clarification and I addressed it in the context of the comments made. Nothing more, nothing less.
LeCastor posted this thread as a serious thread. Had he wanted it open to a free-for-all discussion he would have put it under the Issues & Politics section. I happen to agree with him, it's a serious problem for a lot of troops and needs a serious discussion to address it.
The SC troop made Scouting magazine with their efforts. I happen to run a troop exactly the same way. Why would this policy, so reflective of the Scout Oath be lifted up in the publication as something special when it should be in fact the normal for BSA troops?
Posted 19 December 2014 - 11:30 AM
Posted 19 December 2014 - 11:40 AM
Can't you see he's obviously the bolshevik Stosh as opposed to the bourgeoisie dcsimmons?!
Not sure why you are calling me the name of a beef pasta dish though. Odd.
Posted 19 December 2014 - 11:53 AM
Edit: Oops, almost forgot. While I don't necessarily agree with the 'every boy for himself' approach to fundraisers, I'm not sure why that approach would be considered 'myopic', unless the term has another meaning of which I am unaware.
Posted 19 December 2014 - 12:36 PM
Stosh, I love your dedication to servant leadership. That said, there is a line that exists between servant leadership and servitude. It's a very elastic line and different for everybody. Honestly the BSA suffers from pushing this line all the time. That's probably a discussion for another thread though.
I don't know as if there really is a real "line" between servant leadership and servitude. Yes, there are those who can take advantage of others and thus take advantage of another person's leadership, but as pointed out here, one doesn't have to lead others if they choose not to. I can lead another and they can continue taking advantage of that and never learn, but when I pull myself out of their equation, they are virtually helpless. They have relied on others to the point where they cannot function. Imagine for a moment the 40 year old "kid" living in his parent's basement.... The parents are 100% at fault with this process because they enabled this person to be totally ineffective in life. Is that really taking care of another with real servant leadership? I don't think so, and thus I don't think there is a line, just an abuse of ill-defined servant leadership. Part of servant leadership is to enable the "follower" to become all that they can potentially be. I serve them by helping them grow while keeping them safe. I let them fail and learn as they go. I work at helping them with problem solving, creative thinking, confidence, self-reliance and a number of other issues that go along with "growing up." "Enabling" often times looks like servant leadership when it really isn't.
If the person I'm serving doesn't benefit from my servant leadership, then I move on to others. Maybe someone else will be able to get the dynamics of growing up across to them better than I can. But I won't continue to enable them in their self-destructive behavior.
My wife and I just went through a tough 3 years of this. Her brother (prison for 15 years for a sexual assault charge) upon release had no place to go and so he moved in with us. It was a difficult 2 years and we accomplished little if anything. We finally had to "cut him loose". He stayed in the area, found a really nice, caring girl who got him out of the bottle, off drugs and into a job. Is he taking advantage of her or is her style of servant leadership something he has become receptive to? There is no one definition of what servant leadership is. It's different for everyone. That's one of the tough parts of teaching it as SM. Every boy is different and needs to define it for himself. I draw it out of him, not put it in with some "lessons". It's kinda like "I don't know what it is for you, but you'll recognize it when it comes along." It's like the fire alarm. When it goes off, you know what it is.
Is caring and nurturing servant leadership? Yep!
Is tough love servant leadership? Yep!
Is there a "line" between the two? Nope!
I hope this helps.
Oh, and by the way, can any of this leadership happen if I'm only concerned about myself and my issues, and my welfare?
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users