Did the HIV Leaders' Meeting With Hillary Clinton Shortchange Young People and Movement-Building?
For months, HIV/AIDS advocates tried to meet with the Democratic candidates for president. Efforts kicked into high gear in March after Hillary Clinton made a huge gaffe by claiming that Ronald and Nancy Reagan kickstarted the national conversation on HIV/AIDS when in reality they ignored the epidemic while tens of thousands died in the U.S. alone.
HIV advocates from around the country sprang into action in response to Clinton's gaffe, with the intention of meeting with all the candidates to present a plan to end the AIDS epidemic in the U.S. by lowering new HIV infections to 12,000 in 2025.
As a member of ACT UP New York, I was involved in planning discussions before and after the meeting. And, regrettably, I saw a unique opportunity to refocus HIV/AIDS activism squandered. Those most in danger of contracting the disease -- young gay and trans people -- were not visible as equal partners in the process, which seemed to prioritize insider advocacy work rather than the dynamic, open organizing and social media use favored by today's social change movements.
Last Thursday, advocates held a meeting with Clinton in Brooklyn, N.Y., after which Sanders scheduled his own meeting with them for May 25. In the lead-up to the Clinton meeting, one of the bigger questions was who would attend, since the campaign had limited them to 20 attendees. A few veteran AIDS advocates took the lead in deciding on and inviting representatives from an array of non-profits from around the country.
Advertisement
In the end, there were representatives from groups ranging from local and regional organizations, such as AIDS Alabama and AIDS Foundation of Chicago, to the national LGBT lobbying group Human Rights Campaign. But with only 20 groups represented, we remained concerned about wider community engagement and transparency.
We proposed remedies, such as livestreaming (or broadcasting) the meeting on the web or inviting the press, but were told to temper our expectations for wider participation and transparency. In the end, selected press was invited to the first few minutes of the meeting to report on a general, prepared statement by Clinton consisting of a "we can do better" message.
If older AIDS advocates think that they will inspire the younger generation to join the movement with scripted meetings, then they don't understand that young people are not interested in glossing over politicians' past mistakes and, in this case, letting Hillary Clinton evolve yet again on another issue. Immediately after the meeting, AIDS activist Jason Rosenberg took to social media to express his frustration with the archaic meeting format. He used Twitter, an outlet that the organizers seemingly forgot about or chose to disregard completely"
http://www.thebody.com/content/77608/did-the-hiv-leaders-meeting-with-hillary-clinton-s.html#sthash.NDwcN8q1.dpuf
I thought that this was an interesting article that highlights the struggle going on within many organizations. Old vs new.
Also why only 20 invites?
