Applications are on line.
Most of us tend to play to the skills we have and use them to compensate for areas that aren't so developed. Leadership Anchorage helps people work on those often underdeveloped skills that we'd rather not use as well as the obvious talents.
I've known people in the program since it started. The mix in each year's group is amazing. There's an ethnic mix, a talent mix, and an age and experience mix. There are usually people few people know about and there are a few people in fairly high positions already. Here are some of the people who have gone through the program over the years:
- Janie Leask, First Alaskans Institute
- Nils Andreassen, Institute of the North
- Liz Posey Urban League of Young Professionals
- Bill Wielechowski, Alaska State Senate
- Guadalupe Marroquin, (she worked in the Clerk's Office and spared no effort to overcome my fax problems so I could vote in the Muni election from Thailand.)
- Macon Roberts, Anchorage School Board
- Angelina Estrada Burney, State of Alaska
- Erick Cordero Giorgana, Matsu School Board
I'm not giving you a lot of notice here - the deadline for the application is tomorrow. But I bet you could send in a partial application and get the rest in by Monday. (I'm not making the rules, so you better ask first.) And if you can't get your stuff together for this year, you might want to tuck it into your brain as something to prepare for for next year.
This is the 2009-2010 GroupI've posted on this before. It's not free, but it is a great opportunity. And there are some scholarships. There's a fair amount of work you have to do, but it is designed with busy people in mind. Everyone is in the same boat. Here's the schedule for the coming year from the website:
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fall 2009 - Spring 2010 Training Schedule | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
You can see you'll spend some intense time with the group, which means you'll develop some important bonds with Anchorage's future leaders.
The Director, Jim MacKenzie, was a student of mine and is really smart and really well organized, not to mention totally obsessed about making this the best experience the participants have ever had. He lived in Japan for nine years and when he returned to Anchorage he worked as a translator for the Japanese Consul in Anchorage. He's got lots of good stories. He's the guy in the front, right in the picture with the red tie.
It's one thing to publicize an amorphous 'leadership' conference, and quite another thing to find what these so-called, self-fashioned 'leaders' are espousing.
ReplyDeleteDo you support the feeding of the military industrial complex through the massive funding for failed policies such as Ronnie 'Raygun' Reagan's Star Wars missile defense project?
These so called 'leaders' throw their support behind furthering that fictional bamboozlement.
Are you a supporter of the Right to Life movement and all the attendant extremist 'values' issues the Right to Lifers back?
Some of these 'leaders' throw their support behind the extremists.
What do you know about what you're touting? Do you know that you're carrying water for people who promote the agenda of hard right extremism?
Leadership? Leading to what where, ....and to what end?
Anon, Hello? Do you know something about Leadership Anchorage (LA) that I don't know? If so, could you please share what you know?
ReplyDelete"It's one thing to publicize an amorphous 'leadership' conference, quite another thing to find what these so-called, self-fashioned 'leaders' are espousing."
"What do you know about what you're touting?"
Actually, I do know something about this. I know, for example, Barbara Brown who started this program and led it for many years. She is so far from the image of right wing extremists you raise that your accusations are laughable to anyone who actually knows something about Leadership Anchorage. Jim MacKenzie who runs it now is bright, thoughtful, rational, calm. Again far from your accusations.
I've met a number of the people in this program. I've mentored a participant. A group of participants, as their LA project, developed a video on diversity in Anchorage for another non-profit I volunteer with. I've listed a few of the graduates. Do you know any of them? Can you identify any on that list who contributes to the military industrial complex, works for Right to Life? Or any "hard right extremism" group? Do you know any other graduate who does?
And if some of the graduates did support right of center causes, so what? This is intended to promote leadership, not any specific ideology. This includes understanding and working effectively with people of different views. If the participants only have one ideological perspective, it's hard to learn how to bridge ideological gaps.
Are you confusing this program with some other program you know?
I don't promote a lot of programs here. I don't have advertisements. I sometimes alert people to events they might want to attend. I can't always be sure they will be good in advance. Even if I think a show or movie might be good, others might not. But I expect my readers to think on their own and take what I say as something to mull over, with other information, before they decide.
But a program like this, where people have to invest time and money, I would NEVER promote lightly, without some knowledge. In the case of Leadership Anchorage, I'm totally confident that this is a very good program. But, still, I expect my readers to do their own independent research before making any commitments.
Anon, perhaps this explanation will help you understand my perplexity at your comment. You offer nothing but generalities. This sounds like something liberals accuse Sarah Palin of doing - making wild accusations devoid of any factual basis.
So please let us know if you have any factual basis for your accusations. If you have nothing, maybe you might want to consider a retraction or even an apology.
On the other hand, if your blast here saved your spouse or child from a tirade, then we're happy to serve as your surrogate punching bag.
I would think that you'd perhaps do at least some small amount of research before making any number of the poorly conceived assumptions and facile accusations you try to pass along by way of justification for your not being very well informed about the dealings of some of the people involved in this 'program' you're promoting.
ReplyDeleteI'll start by taking a look at the mission of the leadership conference, and that is described unabashedly as 'introducing emerging leaders to the power brokers of Anchorage and Alaska', providing access to, and creating networks to assist in bonding with the 'mainstream movers and shakers' of Anchorage and Alaska.
Above all else, let's be sure ensure that any of these upstart emerging leaders understand just who comprises the power brokers and let's make doubly sure these emerging leaders understand just who are the real mainstream movers and shakers.
That initial and very proper introduction to your superiors and your overlords could not in any way be problematic, right?
Now let's just take one instance of the illustrious alumni these emerging leaders should bond with and network with.
Let's just pick the Institute of the North, for just one example.
An intrinsic part of the mission of the Institute of the North is their 'Defense and Security' program, wherein you will find unabashed boosterism and support for Star Wars missile defense. In essence, the 'program' boils down to them actively lobbying government on behalf of the weapons manufacturing multinationals.
If supporting Bush's arbitrary rejection of the ABM missile treaty is your idea of alumni who merit promotion as being worthy of providing 'leadership mentoring' which deserves unquestionable promotion, then I perceive some conflict of purpose.
I'll not bother to take the time to school everyone on any number of other illustrious mainstream movers and shakers these future leaders are being introduced to and who these so-called ermerging leaders are being urged to bond with, the many current and past power brokers who will take every opportunity to divert and co-opt others to serve and maintain their well established interests.
I will, however, stand by my statement that many political and religious extremists and neocon wingnuts headline the illustrious alumni and the list of those these emerging leaders are expected to bond with.
Take a moment to review the list of alumni and contacts, you'll find a veritable who's who of examples which bear out my cautionary admonitions.
Suffice it to say, this little confab has more to do with putting emerging community leaders in their place and maintaining a comfortable status quo for the entrenched oligarchs, than it has to do with providing any illumination into how transformative change may be achieved or abetted.
The powers that be know full well that the best way to ensure the survival of their influence is the early co-opting and indoctrination of any who might possibly pose a future threat to their pre-eminent supremacy.
Do I have a desire or do I have need to retract anything or apologize in any way?
That would be an utter absurdity.
What could I possibly know, eh?
freeper
OK Freeper, this time you’ve given me something to work with.
ReplyDelete1. Because some of Leadership Anchorage's alumni work in organizations you dislike, you conclude that they groom right wing extremists.
All schools have the problem of not knowing what their students will do with the skills they teach them. Even if the program includes a good ethics component, adult students come to programs with their moral compasses pretty much set.
Some programs run by organizations with a firm ideological purpose carefully train their participants to be soldiers in their ideological fight.
But Leadership Anchorage is part of the Alaska Humanities Forum which, if I’m correct, was established by Congress. It has to be open to people of a variety of ideological stances.
Having such a mix working closely together means that they get a chance to know each other as human beings, not simply as ideological stereotypes. The Kennedy funeral this morning demonstrated this leads to getting things done. That said, I’m pretty sure, based on the groups I’ve seen, LA tends to have far more left leaning than right leaning members.
I’m certain those alumni you have problems with didn’t get turned 'bad' by LA. There’s even a chance that LA’s strong emphasis on the Humanities may have softened those particular participants. (from their website)
"A distinguishing feature of Leadership Anchorage is its roots in the humanities, the study of society and the "human condition" as it spans the cultural, political, and civic landscape of our world. Leadership Anchorage includes varied readings in the humanities, such as Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "The Drum Major Instinct," Franz Kafka's "Fellowship," and John Steinbeck's "Grapes of Wrath.""
And they may even have a fondness for some of their non-ideologically matched classmates which makes them think less rigidly than had they not been in the program. I can’t prove that, but it’s a good possibility.
2. You also raise the point about 'introducing emerging leaders to the power brokers of Anchorage and Alaska', providing access to, and creating networks to assist in bonding with the 'mainstream movers and shakers' of Anchorage and Alaska.
I think this is a legitimate issue. On the one hand, if someone is going to get things done, it helps to understand the power structure in place and to know some of the players. On the other hand, being coopted by that power structure is always a danger.
But not knowing the key players may be more of a problem than knowing them. And they aren't all evil either.
I agree that the word "mainstream" connected with "movers and shakers" is unfortunate and probably should be removed.
We know you are against the missile defense program. I tend to agree with that. You are opposed to right wing extremists. I have no argument with that. What are you for? Why did you comment?
1. Simply to say that I shouldn’t have offered them free advertising?
2. You want Leadership Anchorage to shut down? Make changes in what they do?
The specific purpose of your post isn't clear to me.
Finally, your second comment has reminded me to better practice what I profess here: to respond with respect. I acknowledge that I didn't do that as well as I might have in the first response. I appreciate your returning to clarify your position. I'm sure the comments about working with the establishment will make Jim think. I wouldn't be surprised if he makes this discussion part of some class assignment.
The purpose of my post was simply to raise the import of the question of 'what do you know' and raise the possibility that what you think you know isn't all there may be that should be known.
ReplyDeleteI'm content that perhaps you'll look a bit deeper next time.
As to what someone else may take away from the comments, I'm hoping at the minimum prospective attendees involved in the project may learn to be more guarded in their approach to who and what they're introduced to.
If you'll take the time to review what I wrote, I didn't condemn everyone involved with the project, nor did I condemn the project or the mission per se. I wasn't using wide generalities, I spoke of specifics within a larger context. I said 'some' in the project should be scrutinized and I said some parts of the mission statement and process are problematic.
It's said that the optimist thinks things can't get any better,
the cynic is merely one who is afraid that may be true and accepted.
Wider perspectives make for better solutions.
A little healthy cynicism directed your way isn't anything to get defensive about. I appreciate that you may have at least somewhat realized your response was over done as well as uncalled for. I wasn't put off and won't hesitate in the future to give you the opportunity to respond the same way again if you so choose. The dialogue survived your attempt to demean it and detract from it, and that dialogue is what can be said to have endured.
What am I for, and why did I comment? Not to be oblique, but I'd much rather be thought of as obstruse rather than to be thought of as obtuse, and I commented because I could. I want people to enter into any endeavor with their eyes wide open. Leadership Anchorage included.
You preface your blog with the question of 'what do you know'?
I'm only guessing, but maybe you know a little more than if I had not commented.
freeper