Thirty years ago, tall and charitable Phillips Brooks House volunteers carried Thanksgiving bastkets to the poor under a combined philosophy of doing good and noblesse oblige. Today, many PBH volunteers still labor under a deluding self-righteousness. They often forget they are not effectively changing social conditions. But the PBH man is beginning to think.

The new trend in PBH is one of self-evaluation which could lead to radical changes in its philosophy and in its relationship to the more radical campus organizations. Should PBH volunteers continue reading with a Roxbury student if the entire ghetto school system demands basic structural change? And if institutional change is the goal, can PBH offer any more than a subtle introduction to the frustrations of the system before these volunteers leave or turn to organizations such as Afro and SDS?

Administrators of the PBH programs are moving from charity to more socially and politically active positions. Two weeks ago, the PBH program working at the Cambridge Community Center delivered an ultimatum to the Center's Administrative Board. Robert A. Goodin '68, co-chairman of the cultural enrichment program, threatened to pull out of the Center unless its administration was taken over by the residents of the neighborhood in which it operates. He said there was no justification for a non-indigenous group to be there unless it was directly responsive to the needs and wants of the neighborhood. Residents had complained there was a need for radical change in the Center. He supported their action by his threat of withdrawal.

Power Tactic

This is a power tactic which might be used more and more, according to Benjamin A. Barnes '68, president of PBH. He said, "The number of hours in the field are good-will in the bank, and legitimate a student's activist role in a community ushing for change."

Mark R. Dyen '70, a co-chairman of SDS, supported Goodin's action, but doubted if most PBH projects had equal power to force change. He said, "PBH does not have a power base outside of the established institutions and no organization can accomplish serious change working within the system." Jeffrey P. Howard '69, president of Afro, took the same position as Dyen.

This illustrates the basic philosophical difference between PBH and Afro and SDS. Even with the changing image of PBH, a prophecy for joint action with Afro or SDS seems tenuous. PBH is concerned with particular institutions that have faltered in the present society, a society in which faith is retained; Afro and SDS are interested in changing the overall structure of America. PBH generally has immediate pragmatic change as its end; Afro and SDS use change in the present as a means toward a future end almost Chekhovian in its expanse.

Certain PBH committees, however, faced with an inability to act effectively under the limitations of the institution in which they work, are seeking to act outside of that institution. Neilther the Lyman Reform School Committee nor the Prisons Committee have the power to push for basic structural changes. Their programs can continue only so long as they remain within the regulations set by the administration of the reform school or prison. But both of these programs are working outside of their institutions to establish "halfway houses," where students released from reform school and prisoners on parole can live for about six months.

Volunteers

Wesley E. Profit '69, co-chairman of the Lyman program, is also hoping to organize volunteers to work in communities in Boston. They are trying to get the parents of the reform school boys as well as lawyers and other professionals to form action groups which could more effectively push for change in the basic structure of the reform school, perhaps through political channels.

The trend towards political action is still very small in PBH. The executive board did suggest to the committee chairmen at the time of the Vietnam Referendum that they consider allowing volunteers to canvass for votes instead of fulfilling their PBH responsibilities. They also had PBH cars available to students going down to the peace march in Washington.

Can PBH be effective if it does not become politically active? The PBH volunteer through personal communication certainly does achieve positive results for the individual. Mark Petri '69, a member of the PBH executive board, said "The political ideal should take precedence over the social-philanthropic ideal -- while we are helping the individual kid, we're not changing the society in which he lives." He added, "I think PBH has a potential power base within the system which could be used effectively in political terms."

Dyen said, "PBH is finding out that it is impossible to make a big dent in social problems without working politically in some way." And Howard said, "Even the traditionally blandest political group must start swaying to the left." The political and power orientation of SDS and Afro may stifle smaller but positive aims.

But is there time for a "hundred visions and revisions"? Is there time for one to concentrate only on alleviating individual suffering, when American crises as great as the War or the racial situation exist? Perhaps the time has come when the liberal must recognize his inability to overcome the system's basic inertia and to effect real change without becoming a radical? For Afro and SDS, that time has come.

Many PBH projects are moving away from the self-perpetuating service ideal toward a goal of eventually phasing out the non-indigenous volunteer. The Cambridge Friends School program is trying to mobilize interested local individuals and institutions to replace the PBH community service project in North Cambridge. At present, ten neighborhood mothers have been recruited to work with PBH volunteers in an after-school program.