Monday, July 30, 2007
Missed the Integrating Gender & Sexual Justice Across Movements plenary?
Now you can see it, at cost, at http://www.snakegirl.net
Saturday, July 28, 2007
The UnConvention
The UnConvention:
Prominent Minnesota Cultural Organizations Convene to Focus on Non-Partisan Creative Civic Engagement Around 2008 Republican National Convention
Minneapolis, MN—The UnConvention is a unique project that seeks to evolve the definition of civic engagement to include experimentation in art, education, and journalism, and to create a better-informed and more politically active citizenry. Over the next year and a half, organizations affiliated with the UnConvention will host lectures,workshops, classes and exhibitions based on the theme of participatory democracy.
The mission of the UnConvention is twofold:
1. To create and promote artistic and educational activities (exhibitions, lectures, performances, etc.) that will take place in the Twin Cities during the lead-up and staging of the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul/ Minnesota;
2. To be a resource for artists and the alternative media that will converge on the Twin Cities during the Republican National Convention.
The UnConvention is about participation and democracy, the public sphere, media, and creativity—not a critique of the Republican Party and its policies. A non-partisan collective of leaders from prominent cultural organizations and citizens have come together to create a forum in which to promote the free, democratic, and creative exchange of ideas on important issues. It exists as a counterpoint to the highly scripted and predetermined nature of the contemporary presidential nomination process and convention.
Current participating organizations include:
The Dept. of Media Studies, Carleton College (www.carleton.edu);
the Institute for New Media Studies, University of Minnesota (www.inms.umn.edu);
Intermedia Arts, including the Northern Lights program of Intermedia Arts (www.intermediaarts.org);
Minneapolis College of Art and Design (www.mcad.edu);
Popular Front (www.popularfront.com);
Sandbox Studios (www.sandboxstudios.net); and
Walker Art Center (www.walkerart.org).
“As we have seen throughout American history, political party conventions are places where creative action and participatory democracy are enacted. These caucuses generate large responses from across the political spectrum.” say John Schott, Daniel Gumnit, and Nora Paul, three the founders of the UnConvention.
The UnConvention website, www.theunconvention.com will serve as a central organizing space for these two goals. The site currently features information on the project, related activities, and a Blog and will include forums, a calendar of related activities, resources for journalists and visiting artists, and an archive of press and activities. To get more information or get involved email:
steeringcommittee@TheUnconvention.org.
Intermedia Arts is a catalyst that builds understanding among people through art.
www.intermediaarts.org
PHOTO / INTERVIEW OPPORTUNITIES:
Minnesota Cultural Organizations
UnConvention spokespeople
CONTACT:
Daniel Gumnit
Executive Director
Intermedia Arts
612.874.2810
daniel@intermediaarts.org
# # #
Prominent Minnesota Cultural Organizations Convene to Focus on Non-Partisan Creative Civic Engagement Around 2008 Republican National Convention
Minneapolis, MN—The UnConvention is a unique project that seeks to evolve the definition of civic engagement to include experimentation in art, education, and journalism, and to create a better-informed and more politically active citizenry. Over the next year and a half, organizations affiliated with the UnConvention will host lectures,workshops, classes and exhibitions based on the theme of participatory democracy.
The mission of the UnConvention is twofold:
1. To create and promote artistic and educational activities (exhibitions, lectures, performances, etc.) that will take place in the Twin Cities during the lead-up and staging of the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul/ Minnesota;
2. To be a resource for artists and the alternative media that will converge on the Twin Cities during the Republican National Convention.
The UnConvention is about participation and democracy, the public sphere, media, and creativity—not a critique of the Republican Party and its policies. A non-partisan collective of leaders from prominent cultural organizations and citizens have come together to create a forum in which to promote the free, democratic, and creative exchange of ideas on important issues. It exists as a counterpoint to the highly scripted and predetermined nature of the contemporary presidential nomination process and convention.
Current participating organizations include:
The Dept. of Media Studies, Carleton College (www.carleton.edu);
the Institute for New Media Studies, University of Minnesota (www.inms.umn.edu);
Intermedia Arts, including the Northern Lights program of Intermedia Arts (www.intermediaarts.org);
Minneapolis College of Art and Design (www.mcad.edu);
Popular Front (www.popularfront.com);
Sandbox Studios (www.sandboxstudios.net); and
Walker Art Center (www.walkerart.org).
“As we have seen throughout American history, political party conventions are places where creative action and participatory democracy are enacted. These caucuses generate large responses from across the political spectrum.” say John Schott, Daniel Gumnit, and Nora Paul, three the founders of the UnConvention.
The UnConvention website, www.theunconvention.com will serve as a central organizing space for these two goals. The site currently features information on the project, related activities, and a Blog and will include forums, a calendar of related activities, resources for journalists and visiting artists, and an archive of press and activities. To get more information or get involved email:
steeringcommittee@TheUnconvention.org.
Intermedia Arts is a catalyst that builds understanding among people through art.
www.intermediaarts.org
PHOTO / INTERVIEW OPPORTUNITIES:
Minnesota Cultural Organizations
UnConvention spokespeople
CONTACT:
Daniel Gumnit
Executive Director
Intermedia Arts
612.874.2810
daniel@intermediaarts.org
# # #
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Reflections on the 2007 U.S. Social Forum
By Laura Carlsen
Americas Program Commentary
July 23, 2007
Attending the U.S. Social Forum held in Atlanta, Georgia June 27-July 1 was an adventure. The first social forum for the United States, it was also one of the first in a series of regional events
aimed at decentralizing the mega-World Social Forum that started in Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Short on preparation and organization but long on enthusiasm, the event stirred the interest of activists all over the world. Many wondered what kind of grassroots energy could be mustered to seriously confront the many threats posed by Bush administration policies—including unilateral force, preventive strikes, climate change denial, homophobia, and rollback of women’s rights.
It was a strange sort of homecoming for me. After many years of living and working in Mexico, I was curious to see how movements for social change in the United States had evolved over the years. I had heard the sweeping generalizations: the egotism and materialism of the
eighties “me generation,” the identity politics and cultural expressions of the nineties, the horror and frustration of the war in the new Bush-dominated millennium.
During the years of living abroad, I had followed citizen efforts for social change but been far from the frontlines of organizing.
The 20-year hiatus proved an interesting lens with which to view the movements represented at the forum. Many of our movements in the past were based on solving problems in faraway places. The abuses wrought by our government overseas made them morally our issues. The
Central American solidarity movement during the dirty wars and the anti-apartheid movement helped us better understand the world and make connections albeit in a somewhat removed way.
Not so today. In many ways, globalization has domesticated the abuses long felt overseas. Although the war in Iraq continues to be the defining feature of the current administration, U.S. communities are now also under attack. Through climate change, the planet itself has shrunk to a single, ominously threatened ecosystem.
The slogan—”Another World is Possible. Another U.S. is Necessary”—captures this reality. The issues discussed at the first U.S. Social Forum did not revolve around utopian visions of a better society. Rather, they expressed the urgency of people fighting for survival—to survive as who
they are in the face of intolerance, to preserve communities threatened by hate, to maintain basic freedoms, and assure basic needs.
The forum proved a crash course in the state of U.S. organizing. I saw apparent advances and reverses. There was little explicitly feminist organizing. The critiques of power, patriarchy, and sexism that once seemed central to understanding social change have not been forgotten, but they have yet to gain a central place in our organizing and analysis. The response to major government offensives against reproductive rights, repeal of affirmative action programs, and attacks on Lesbian-Gay- Bisexual-Transgender-Transsexual people have been slow
and piecemeal. As women have devoted their energies to other causes, the profoundly transforming perspective of gender justice has sometimes taken on a secondary or
supplementary role in organizing work (and as a foreign policy analyst, I count myself as guilty).
Strong and vocal women were prominent at the forum. They brought with them an integrating vision—of heart and mind, of daily life and public policy, of family and community—to their struggles and imprint them with a feminism that may not say its name but makes its presence
felt.
Strength in Diversity
Far and above the greatest change and the greatest strength of U.S. movements today is their diversity. The forum demonstrated diversity in ages, sexuality, colors, nationalities, and politics.
The many cultural expressions also showed a welcome diversity in our way of “doing politics.” Gone are the days when political events were synonymous with men making speeches. In the esplanade of Atlanta’s Civic Center, the drums of Mexican danzantes competed with the drums of traditional Korean music—and both decry free trade. Hip-hop connected the desperation of life in Indian reservations and city ghettos with the joy of youth and a deep new current of resistance.
Workshops on storytelling drew hundreds of young people who know that it’s not enough to analyze oppression, that what’s happening today is found in a million real-life stories, that tears are an essential part of the dynamic, and that a fundamental task for organizers is to learn to
tell these stories artfully.
Stories abounded in the forum. A path of abandoned shoes with names pinned to the tongues led to a kiosk hung with the biographies of young and old Iraqis killed in the war. A young woman cried as the hope of living without the fear of deportation receded once again into the murky depths of Washington politics.
A plethora of issues compete for our attention but there is no question of the validity and need for work on all of them. Forum participants reflected a great respect for the efforts of everyone. As someone who works on Latin American issues, I was told by one participant almost
apologetically: “It’s so important what you do. When we get this damn war out of the way ...”
“This damn war” was a dark presence in every corner of the Forum—not as a sign of our failure but a call to renewed action.
The U.S. Social Forum revealed the heroic acts of community defense and organizing that regularly occur throughout the country. Although still lacking the coherence to construct another world, the determination and values found in these movements offered much hope.
Laura Carlsen is the director of the Americas Program at www.americaspolicy.org in Mexico City, where she has been a writer and political analyst for more than two decades.
Katie Kohlstedt
Usually on long flights, I am the person snoring in the seat next to you. But on the trip from Mexico City to Atlanta for the U.S. Social Forum, my head was spinning not nodding off. Anticipation of going to my first social forum kept me wide awake as I reflected on what I would be seeing and hearing.
Psyched by inspiring tales from Brazilian friends about the world social forums, I was also concerned about the critiques I had heard about the loose structure and direction of the forums and their lack of concrete accomplishments.
Although I wasn’t able to attend all the sessions I had highlighted in my inch-thick program, I was impressed and inspired by encountering so many other like-minded individuals and organizations. I left Atlanta with more questions than I came with—the most pressing one
being: Although we certainly have more in common than we have differences, how will all these people work together?
Unity of Purpose or a Pageant of Issues?
On the forum’s last day, I was standing outside the hotel elevator, and out flooded a troop of young girls who were competing in a beauty pageant and were made up like future Miss Americas. After recovering from the haze of hairspray and shock of children aspiring to become a warped stereotype of modern women, I realized that I myself had been attending a type of pageant. I was about to head home after having attended an array of workshops, visited scores of tables and tents, collected a bundle of flyers and pins, and signed innumerable petitions.
Now, I’m sure how I’ll never have time to keep all the commitments and promises I made.
All the participants in the forum—with the exception of the “independents” who came to learn or to decide which issue is most pressing for them to take on—paraded “our issues.” We led workshops and participated with others in our “tracks”—the trade, labor, immigration, or
other track—or worked the corridors of the conference and set out displays on tables and handed out our flyers, articles, brochures, business cards, in hope of winning more people over.
We found a sympathetic but overburdened audience. And what do we really want them to do? To subscribe? To sign? To march? To vote?
Making alliances was one way sought to strengthen movements and reduce the frantic fragmentation we often feel. The plenary panels encouraged the various tracks to view themselves in a common framework, and thanks to organizers’ combining of workshop proposals participants found themselves on panels with people they had never sat next to before. One workshop brought together African-American groups and immigrants’ rights
organizations to discuss their common interest in fair immigration policies in their communities.
Was this proof that we could consolidate our pageant into a collective movement? At least they were steps in the right direction.
Targeting Transnationals --"Diet, Cherry and Vanilla, Coca Cola is a Killer”
This chant rang in the ears of hundreds of kids and their parents as they waited in line to be among the first to visit Atlanta’s new “World of Coke” museum. During the June 30 march, I joined protesters at the gates of Coca Cola’s world headquarters holding signs reading “Coke Kills” and “Unthinkable, Undrinkable.”
“We came here to offer this art to Coke’s new ‘fantasy museum’ because the reality of Coca Cola is women in India protesting the destruction of lives and livelihoods that Coke has produced in their communities,” announced Amit Srivastava, Director of Global Resistance.
Coca Cola didn’t acknowledge our protests, but in India popular anger at Coca Cola’s depletion and contamination of local water supplies has led to the closure of a plant in Kerala and movements to close the other 52 bottling plants throughout the country. Participating in a
direct action was refreshing after hours in sessions of talk, albeit very inspiring talk.
Bush, Cheney, and assorted conservative forces were regarded by all as roadblocks to our own social justice goals, and impeachment was mentioned more than once. However, a bigger elephant in our midst was present— Corporate America. Session after session, countless issues related corporate pressure and violations of everything from human and workers’ rights to the environment, the prison system, war-profiteering, and oil paid for by the blood of Americans in Iraq.
Corporations were named as profiteers of the skyrocketing budgets for prison construction, the dysfunctional health care system, mining damage and destruction, the insufficient minimum wage—the list goes on. The funding for militarization in Colombia and for border security
goes to Lockheed Martin and Boeing. Responsibility for manipulation of global food supplies and agricultural systems lies with Cargill, Monsanto, Nestle, and Tyson (the
targets of Via Campesina’s newest effort).
Sustaining our Resistance
As groups distributed glossy materials, free books and DVDs, buttons, t-shirts, and stickers, I wondered about the sustainability of this large-scale event. Efforts were clearly made—water was distributed in large barrels and bottled water discouraged—but food came in styrofoam
packaging and disposable everything. A challenge for any gathering of nearly 12,000 people, keeping the impact to a minimum was a weak point of a forum largely held in overly air-conditioned hotel conference rooms. Although the “presence” given to the meetings by formal settings can have advantages, we could have managed with more modest facilities, as I understand they have done at the World Social Forum.
“Stop Runaway Consumerism,” “No More Drug War,” and all the other buttons and stickers I plastered myself with were incomplete descriptions of the problems we face. There were socialists, the environmentalists, the anti-free-traders, along with a slew of new listservs I subscribed to, but not one would help me decide how to prioritize my own efforts to help make another world possible.
Inspired, but also overwhelmed by options, many young attendees like myself seemed a little less certain of exactly what to do than when we landed in Atlanta. But we left knowing better the urgency of our various struggles, the multitude of incredible individuals dedicating
themselves to making the United States a place that represents us, and I hope, the need to work together.
Time will tell, but USSF 2007 certainly helped me see more clearly the identity of the elephant—corporations that are trampling us all.
Katie Kohlstedt is Program Associate at the Americas Program in Mexico City. Comments about this or any Americas Program article can be directed to americas@ciponline.org.
All photos by Katie Kohlstedt.
Published by the Americas Program, Copyright © 2007. All rights reserved.
The Americas Program
“A New World of Citizen Action, Analysis, and Policy Options”
Recommended citation:
Laura Carlsen and Katie Kohlstedt, "Reflections on the 2007 U.S. Social Forum," Americas Program Commentary (Washington, DC: Center for International Policy, July 23,
2007).
Web location:
http://americas.irc-online.org/am/4411
Production Information:
Writers: Laura Carlsen and Katie Kohlstedt
Editor: Laura Carlsen
Layout: Chellee Chase-Saiz
By Laura Carlsen
Americas Program Commentary
July 23, 2007
Attending the U.S. Social Forum held in Atlanta, Georgia June 27-July 1 was an adventure. The first social forum for the United States, it was also one of the first in a series of regional events
aimed at decentralizing the mega-World Social Forum that started in Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Short on preparation and organization but long on enthusiasm, the event stirred the interest of activists all over the world. Many wondered what kind of grassroots energy could be mustered to seriously confront the many threats posed by Bush administration policies—including unilateral force, preventive strikes, climate change denial, homophobia, and rollback of women’s rights.
It was a strange sort of homecoming for me. After many years of living and working in Mexico, I was curious to see how movements for social change in the United States had evolved over the years. I had heard the sweeping generalizations: the egotism and materialism of the
eighties “me generation,” the identity politics and cultural expressions of the nineties, the horror and frustration of the war in the new Bush-dominated millennium.
During the years of living abroad, I had followed citizen efforts for social change but been far from the frontlines of organizing.
The 20-year hiatus proved an interesting lens with which to view the movements represented at the forum. Many of our movements in the past were based on solving problems in faraway places. The abuses wrought by our government overseas made them morally our issues. The
Central American solidarity movement during the dirty wars and the anti-apartheid movement helped us better understand the world and make connections albeit in a somewhat removed way.
Not so today. In many ways, globalization has domesticated the abuses long felt overseas. Although the war in Iraq continues to be the defining feature of the current administration, U.S. communities are now also under attack. Through climate change, the planet itself has shrunk to a single, ominously threatened ecosystem.
The slogan—”Another World is Possible. Another U.S. is Necessary”—captures this reality. The issues discussed at the first U.S. Social Forum did not revolve around utopian visions of a better society. Rather, they expressed the urgency of people fighting for survival—to survive as who
they are in the face of intolerance, to preserve communities threatened by hate, to maintain basic freedoms, and assure basic needs.
The forum proved a crash course in the state of U.S. organizing. I saw apparent advances and reverses. There was little explicitly feminist organizing. The critiques of power, patriarchy, and sexism that once seemed central to understanding social change have not been forgotten, but they have yet to gain a central place in our organizing and analysis. The response to major government offensives against reproductive rights, repeal of affirmative action programs, and attacks on Lesbian-Gay- Bisexual-Transgender-Transsexual people have been slow
and piecemeal. As women have devoted their energies to other causes, the profoundly transforming perspective of gender justice has sometimes taken on a secondary or
supplementary role in organizing work (and as a foreign policy analyst, I count myself as guilty).
Strong and vocal women were prominent at the forum. They brought with them an integrating vision—of heart and mind, of daily life and public policy, of family and community—to their struggles and imprint them with a feminism that may not say its name but makes its presence
felt.
Strength in Diversity
Far and above the greatest change and the greatest strength of U.S. movements today is their diversity. The forum demonstrated diversity in ages, sexuality, colors, nationalities, and politics.
The many cultural expressions also showed a welcome diversity in our way of “doing politics.” Gone are the days when political events were synonymous with men making speeches. In the esplanade of Atlanta’s Civic Center, the drums of Mexican danzantes competed with the drums of traditional Korean music—and both decry free trade. Hip-hop connected the desperation of life in Indian reservations and city ghettos with the joy of youth and a deep new current of resistance.
Workshops on storytelling drew hundreds of young people who know that it’s not enough to analyze oppression, that what’s happening today is found in a million real-life stories, that tears are an essential part of the dynamic, and that a fundamental task for organizers is to learn to
tell these stories artfully.
Stories abounded in the forum. A path of abandoned shoes with names pinned to the tongues led to a kiosk hung with the biographies of young and old Iraqis killed in the war. A young woman cried as the hope of living without the fear of deportation receded once again into the murky depths of Washington politics.
A plethora of issues compete for our attention but there is no question of the validity and need for work on all of them. Forum participants reflected a great respect for the efforts of everyone. As someone who works on Latin American issues, I was told by one participant almost
apologetically: “It’s so important what you do. When we get this damn war out of the way ...”
“This damn war” was a dark presence in every corner of the Forum—not as a sign of our failure but a call to renewed action.
The U.S. Social Forum revealed the heroic acts of community defense and organizing that regularly occur throughout the country. Although still lacking the coherence to construct another world, the determination and values found in these movements offered much hope.
Laura Carlsen is the director of the Americas Program at www.americaspolicy.org in Mexico City, where she has been a writer and political analyst for more than two decades.
Katie Kohlstedt
Usually on long flights, I am the person snoring in the seat next to you. But on the trip from Mexico City to Atlanta for the U.S. Social Forum, my head was spinning not nodding off. Anticipation of going to my first social forum kept me wide awake as I reflected on what I would be seeing and hearing.
Psyched by inspiring tales from Brazilian friends about the world social forums, I was also concerned about the critiques I had heard about the loose structure and direction of the forums and their lack of concrete accomplishments.
Although I wasn’t able to attend all the sessions I had highlighted in my inch-thick program, I was impressed and inspired by encountering so many other like-minded individuals and organizations. I left Atlanta with more questions than I came with—the most pressing one
being: Although we certainly have more in common than we have differences, how will all these people work together?
Unity of Purpose or a Pageant of Issues?
On the forum’s last day, I was standing outside the hotel elevator, and out flooded a troop of young girls who were competing in a beauty pageant and were made up like future Miss Americas. After recovering from the haze of hairspray and shock of children aspiring to become a warped stereotype of modern women, I realized that I myself had been attending a type of pageant. I was about to head home after having attended an array of workshops, visited scores of tables and tents, collected a bundle of flyers and pins, and signed innumerable petitions.
Now, I’m sure how I’ll never have time to keep all the commitments and promises I made.
All the participants in the forum—with the exception of the “independents” who came to learn or to decide which issue is most pressing for them to take on—paraded “our issues.” We led workshops and participated with others in our “tracks”—the trade, labor, immigration, or
other track—or worked the corridors of the conference and set out displays on tables and handed out our flyers, articles, brochures, business cards, in hope of winning more people over.
We found a sympathetic but overburdened audience. And what do we really want them to do? To subscribe? To sign? To march? To vote?
Making alliances was one way sought to strengthen movements and reduce the frantic fragmentation we often feel. The plenary panels encouraged the various tracks to view themselves in a common framework, and thanks to organizers’ combining of workshop proposals participants found themselves on panels with people they had never sat next to before. One workshop brought together African-American groups and immigrants’ rights
organizations to discuss their common interest in fair immigration policies in their communities.
Was this proof that we could consolidate our pageant into a collective movement? At least they were steps in the right direction.
Targeting Transnationals --"Diet, Cherry and Vanilla, Coca Cola is a Killer”
This chant rang in the ears of hundreds of kids and their parents as they waited in line to be among the first to visit Atlanta’s new “World of Coke” museum. During the June 30 march, I joined protesters at the gates of Coca Cola’s world headquarters holding signs reading “Coke Kills” and “Unthinkable, Undrinkable.”
“We came here to offer this art to Coke’s new ‘fantasy museum’ because the reality of Coca Cola is women in India protesting the destruction of lives and livelihoods that Coke has produced in their communities,” announced Amit Srivastava, Director of Global Resistance.
Coca Cola didn’t acknowledge our protests, but in India popular anger at Coca Cola’s depletion and contamination of local water supplies has led to the closure of a plant in Kerala and movements to close the other 52 bottling plants throughout the country. Participating in a
direct action was refreshing after hours in sessions of talk, albeit very inspiring talk.
Bush, Cheney, and assorted conservative forces were regarded by all as roadblocks to our own social justice goals, and impeachment was mentioned more than once. However, a bigger elephant in our midst was present— Corporate America. Session after session, countless issues related corporate pressure and violations of everything from human and workers’ rights to the environment, the prison system, war-profiteering, and oil paid for by the blood of Americans in Iraq.
Corporations were named as profiteers of the skyrocketing budgets for prison construction, the dysfunctional health care system, mining damage and destruction, the insufficient minimum wage—the list goes on. The funding for militarization in Colombia and for border security
goes to Lockheed Martin and Boeing. Responsibility for manipulation of global food supplies and agricultural systems lies with Cargill, Monsanto, Nestle, and Tyson (the
targets of Via Campesina’s newest effort).
Sustaining our Resistance
As groups distributed glossy materials, free books and DVDs, buttons, t-shirts, and stickers, I wondered about the sustainability of this large-scale event. Efforts were clearly made—water was distributed in large barrels and bottled water discouraged—but food came in styrofoam
packaging and disposable everything. A challenge for any gathering of nearly 12,000 people, keeping the impact to a minimum was a weak point of a forum largely held in overly air-conditioned hotel conference rooms. Although the “presence” given to the meetings by formal settings can have advantages, we could have managed with more modest facilities, as I understand they have done at the World Social Forum.
“Stop Runaway Consumerism,” “No More Drug War,” and all the other buttons and stickers I plastered myself with were incomplete descriptions of the problems we face. There were socialists, the environmentalists, the anti-free-traders, along with a slew of new listservs I subscribed to, but not one would help me decide how to prioritize my own efforts to help make another world possible.
Inspired, but also overwhelmed by options, many young attendees like myself seemed a little less certain of exactly what to do than when we landed in Atlanta. But we left knowing better the urgency of our various struggles, the multitude of incredible individuals dedicating
themselves to making the United States a place that represents us, and I hope, the need to work together.
Time will tell, but USSF 2007 certainly helped me see more clearly the identity of the elephant—corporations that are trampling us all.
Katie Kohlstedt is Program Associate at the Americas Program in Mexico City. Comments about this or any Americas Program article can be directed to americas@ciponline.org.
All photos by Katie Kohlstedt.
Published by the Americas Program, Copyright © 2007. All rights reserved.
The Americas Program
“A New World of Citizen Action, Analysis, and Policy Options”
Recommended citation:
Laura Carlsen and Katie Kohlstedt, "Reflections on the 2007 U.S. Social Forum," Americas Program Commentary (Washington, DC: Center for International Policy, July 23,
2007).
Web location:
http://americas.irc-online.org/am/4411
Production Information:
Writers: Laura Carlsen and Katie Kohlstedt
Editor: Laura Carlsen
Layout: Chellee Chase-Saiz
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Updates on Actions from Last Saturday's meeting
Hey all,
Just wanted to let you know that I went to the CIP BOR meeting today (Children of Incarcerated Partents/Bill of Rights). It will be a couple of months (maybe around September) when we will be able to bring youth to the table about this. I already made a phone call to Josh Lang, organizer for HAH (Homeless against Homelessness). Now I'm off to e-mail Amalia! Thanks, Farheen.
Just wanted to let you know that I went to the CIP BOR meeting today (Children of Incarcerated Partents/Bill of Rights). It will be a couple of months (maybe around September) when we will be able to bring youth to the table about this. I already made a phone call to Josh Lang, organizer for HAH (Homeless against Homelessness). Now I'm off to e-mail Amalia! Thanks, Farheen.
Rose Brewer on Race & Wealth
As a reminder, "Converation on Race and Wealth with Professor Rose Brewer"will be held Wednesday, July 25 at 6:30 at the Hallie Q. Brown - MLK Center,270 Kent Street, St. Paul.
This event is free and open to the public. However, RSVP is required to attend. Please contact Unny Nambudiripad atu nny@metrostability.org or 612-332-4471 to RSVP.
Come and listen to Professor Brewer address the intersection of race andwealth and how public policies create and maintain the racial wealth divide.
This event is free and open to the public. However, RSVP is required to attend. Please contact Unny Nambudiripad atu nny@metrostability.org or 612-332-4471 to RSVP.
Come and listen to Professor Brewer address the intersection of race andwealth and how public policies create and maintain the racial wealth divide.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Minutes from 7.21.07 mtg.
Twin Cities Post-USSF Meeting Minutes
Saturday, July 21, 2007 (3:30-6:30 pm, Plymouth Congregational Church)
Present: Susan Raffo, Lena Jones, Josie Winship, Emmett Ramstad, Shannon Gibney, Farheen Hakeem, Lisa Albrecht, Charlotte Albrecht, Jenifer Fennell, Rose Brewer, Sara Olson, Rebecca Trotzky Sirr, Ryan Li Dahlstrom, Harry Greenberg, Patrick Leet, Eleanor Savage, Mary Anne Quiroz, Sergio Quiroz, Liz Arnold, Fernando, Laura Wilson, Becca Reilly
AGENDA
· We started with a short discussion of the agenda and how it was created (by Lena, Susan and Jennifer). There was a focus on building relationships, which came from the last meeting at powderhorn park, but also from the sense that we cannot build a movement in the Twin Cities without first building relationships with each other.
· There was concern that creating a Twin Cities movement map (which was on the agenda) would be premature at this meeting (at this point there were only a handful of people in the room). There was some general agreement with this statement and also some explanation that the map was meant to be something that we built upon at each gathering. The map is also meant to help us identify who is in the room and who is not in the room but should be.
· Susan, Lena, and Jennifer offered up the agenda to the room – that it was not something we needed to follow, but only some suggestions for where to start.
· At this point we decided to go around the room and introduce ourselves.
INTRODUCTIONS
· Everyone introduced themselves and briefly talked about what brought them to the meeting today. More and more people entered the meeting as time went on, so introductions were interspersed throughout the meeting.
DISCUSSION
· The main discussion of the meeting centered on a question that Shannon put out to the group. Upon noting that there have been numerous “movement building moments” to occur previously in the Twin Cities, that have had great potential and energy but go nowhere, Shannon asked, why do these movement building moments dissolve?
· Farheen noted that from experience in Chicago, many people want to be martyrs. Any challenge to their way of doings things or difference in opinion is seen as a sort of “suffering” that encounter in the movement; people get very defensive and it becomes about their egos.
Histories of race, power, and struggle in the twin cities
· Lisa spoke of the difficulty working across racial and class lines in the Twin Cities. There is little trust from communities of color towards white folks because of the dominance of white people in organizing and the tendency of whites to “screw it up”. In the south, there is a history of leaders of color; Lisa says that when white folks screw up there, they are held accountable and then people move on proceed with organizing. Here the mess that white folks make halts the work that was being done.
· Farheen spoke to the experience of often being one of few people of color in the room at meetings and being constantly discredited after speaking up; Farheen knows to expect this kind of exploitation.
· Shannon said that the most negative experiences in organizing here have come from white women. The history here is that white men get the cushy jobs and white women get the non-profit jobs and there is a certain amount of power that comes with that. Shannon called for white people to learn how to be allies to people of color, rather than saying “we’ll support you as long as you do what we say”.
· Rose called for us to learn the histories of struggle here and referenced the Minnesota timeline that was handed out. The small numbers of people of color matter in this history, not just because it has made it harder for communities of color to organize, but also because individual people of color, particularly African-Americans, have acted as “brokers” for the rest of the community. Rose is very excited by the energy of the south: they have a significant political history and we’re talking about building one, so we have to know where we enter.
Personal struggles as community struggles
· Rebecca thinks that a personal vs. community conflict is one reason why energy dissipates at the end of a campaign or a period of intense struggle, such as being in a relationship or being a young mom that one’s political community won’t support. Rebecca would like to see those individual or personal struggles be seen as community struggles.
Accountability
· Susan has been thinking a lot about accountability, and wants it to move beyond just being called out for saying something inappropriate, but also into every aspect of organizing and support. Susan sees this as three generations of work. The statement that there is no history of organizing here resonates with Susan. Susan talked about growing up in Cleveland during civil rights struggles when organizing happened in every day life by people just walking to their neighbors’ doors. Susan would like to see that kind of organizing happen here but is not sure what it would look like.
· Lisa clarified that there is a history of struggle here in communities of color, particularly in Native American communities. Rose agreed but said that there has not been a history of struggle across communities of color and that’s what we’re speaking about. In the Twin Cities, historically and currently, people work in silos. Rose wants us also to be clear that this separation of communities has been intentional à people are intentionally kept apart to prevent organizing.
Organizing models: long term vs. short term
· Farheen also thinks its important for each of us to be clear about why we are here. Is it for personal benefit? To make us feel better about ourselves? We need to be clear on what we want to accomplish and who will benefit from it.
· Ryan Li suggested that prevalent organizing models do not demand that people think about long-term vision or commitment that includes building relationships and intentional coalitions. Rather, folks come to meetings and its like they are reading off their resumes.
· Shannon thought this is indicative of a product versus process conflict. Dominant models of organizing focus on short term gain, but we should be more focused on long-term, behind-the-scenes strategy.
Cross-generation work, gatekeeping, and leadership
· Lisa also brought up a generational piece in this conversation. Lisa’s generation is still not honoring the work of young people and some youth are not paying attention to earlier experiences: there is not enough cross-generation work. On that note, Shannon felt like some people (not just older folks) are not stepping down from the work to let others take leadership. Shannon sees this as more of a spiritual question, rather than one of age or generation and Rose said it is also a power thing.
· Farheen said that this is a problem of gatekeeping. Farheen has even noticed being crafted by others as a gatekeeper for Muslim women, but notes that we need legacy building so that when we are gone there are 15 others coming after each of us, knowing our individual legacies but also their own capacities for leadership.
· There was some clarification needed at this point on how we were talking about older organizers: Lisa asserted that she will be organizing until death but wants to do that along side of younger people; Shannon agreed but clarified that we will all die someday and that spiritual and physical fact should be integrated into our strategies.
· Shannon felt that younger generations have a bit of privilege of not having to embrace identity politics growing up. Shannon knows great organizers of color who are not organizing around identity but rather a shared political vision. Farheen noted that there are many younger activists whose organizing is doing solidarity work on multiple issues rather than on a single struggle.
· Sara thinks that the flip side of tokenization in one sense is that there is hesitation to invite new people in. Especially for young people, its like you have to have a resume to be welcomed into the meeting.
· Susan kept hearing at the USSF about the erosion of non-profits, but that is not necessarily the case in the Twin Cities. Susan is sympathetic in the sense that people want to hold on to their jobs, but there is a fierce protection of institutions here.
· Emmett noted the frequent use of the word “community” in our conversation and asked for people to clarify more specifically what they mean when the word is used.
Republican National Convention (RNC), Midwest Social Forum
· Rebecca thinks we often operate on the notion of a scarcity of resources and that this leads to people hording power. Rebecca is thinking of the Republican National Convention that will be here in a year and thinks it is a unique opportunity for us to reframe is the work we do because the spotlight will be on the Twin Cities.
· Lisa noted that at the Midwest meeting at the USSF, there was talk of doing something in the Midwest region by 2009 (because the next USSF is set for 2010). There is an opportunity for the Twin Cities to take leadership in organizing that if we want that, knowing that the last Midwest Social Forum was not organized at a grassroots level.
· Shannon feels that both 2008 (when the RNC happens) and 2009 are very close, considering the lessons from the Northwest social forum report. We do not have the infrastructure here and if we try make something happen by then, it will likely replicate the white liberal dominance of the last Midwest social forum. Rose said that there have been efforts to change this, but that you need different/more people in the room in order to do that. Shannon thinks there are enough conferences and activities planned as it is and is not interested in putting energy into another conference or large gathering because it will not address the problems we’re talking about.
· Laura gets frustrated when we start talking about planning events. Laura wants to see targeted action and strategy at those who have power. Susan experiences the opposite, where there are actions for action’s sake with no follow-up. Susan does not yet know what we’re doing but wants to support the process and will stay with it as long as we keep pushing toward something that is different than what has happened in the past.
· Shannon said that we still need to have people at the table who aren’t here. We are talking about people who are not here to talk for themselves.
· Farheen attended the first RNC meeting and saw that it was the “usual suspects” and largely white, so Farheen decided not to give energy to that. Instead, Farheen started having “POC versus RNC” meetings to organize people of color and figure out ways of resisting that did not bring people in such close contact with the police state that will be present. Farheen would like to see a “decentralization forum” at the same time to capitalize on the thousands of people who will be here at that time. Rebecca has been interested in that idea too and thinks that other people are and that this would also be a good time for cross-generational dialogue.
· Shannon, however, felt that this is still a reaction to something and not creating a vision of our own. If another world is possible, then what does it look like? Shannon noted again that the RNC is too soon and would like to see something more intentional happen.
· Susan suggested that we not think of any of these events as the “it” but as opportunities that we can use to have conversations on building a multi-issue movement with connections to working towards something bigger.
· Patrick spoke of a model to use the RNC and DNC in Denver as a way to invite people and organizations around the country to come and do their own workshops on particular issues. From those workshops at both sites, a model of issues to organize around could be drafted.
· Lisa’s is not interested in organizing around the RNC or the DNC but in how we build a collective vision. At this table we don’t even know what our visions are. Lisa is not sure where to go next without a collective vision and also noted that relationships are built by doing this work together. Shannon is thinking about the people in her life that she trusts who have more privilege. They have consistently come out in support of Shannon and that is how this trust was built. We keep trying to plan more events but we’re still not listening to the people who are most effected by these problems.
· Laura thinks that we should keep in mind the fact that people are organizing every day and this still be going on during all these other events.
Collective vision, next steps
· Rose said that one big lesson from the US social forum is that the core of organizing must be made up of those who are most affected and we haven’t yet done this work here in the Twin Cities. Organizations that are led by people of color showed up en masse at the social forum because hard work was done to make that happen, so we won’t get the results without the work.
· Farheen thinks that those of us in the room who have connections to the people who need to be here but aren’t should reach out to them. Farheen is specifically thinking about those who are homeless. Rose echoed this statement and thinks we should connected with those who are organizing.
· Lena thinks that we are developing a vision, that it has just been articulated: that those who are the most affected by these issues should be at the core of leadership and organizing. Lena wants to think practically, that after the meeting she’ll be having conversations with people to get them here and needs to think about what people will get from getting involved. Part of what people get is more support for the work that they’re already doing.
· Ryan Li thinks the conversations we have should be about building power and leadership in the Twin Cities from the ground up, about shifting the power. On that note, Susan mentioned an organizing experience from living in England, where the leadership circle of the group was made up 75% people who were directly effected and 25% people who had more privilege. As an unexpected but natural result, those who were not in the leadership circle who were doing support work started thinking and educating each other about their privilege. With that said, some of us at the table will need to step back and not be in the core. Rose also commented that all of us, no matter our privilege or position, need and are lacking political education.
· Laura felt that the conversations we have with people who are organizing are not necessarily about bringing people into this space, but about learning more about what is already being done and what is needed. Sara stressed that we should think about the styles of our meeting and communication to appeal to youth. Shannon added that there is not one way to organize, that different people have different things to contribute. Eleanor wants this to be a space to make visible the organizing that is being done and to figure out ways to support that organizing. Eleanor mentioned the organization Alternate Roots that seemed have a beginning process that was similar to our. Shannon will put information about Alternate Roots on the blog.
· Rose would like to see an assessment of how these relationships we’re talking about are brought to fruition. Rose suggested that we identify those organizations we want to lift up that people in the room have connections to. On that note, and with 30 minutes left, the meeting shifted to this task.
LIST OF ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVUDUAL CONTACTS
The people below agreed to contact the individuals or organizations next to their names and start a conversation by August 15. Those conversations would not be to tell folks that we are starting/doing something in particular, but rather that we want to know what they are engaged in and what their needs as organizers/ations are. The message is that we want to build a base in the Twin Cities toward movement building that looks something like what we saw at the Social Forum. Shannon agreed to post the reportbacks on the blog and send out bi-weekly email reminders of this information.
Lisa: Indigenous People’s Task Force, Jermain Tony of Organizing Apprenticeship Project (OAP), BIHA in Action (Alice Lynch), Ricardo
Lena: Restorative Justice, Gloria who started group for those with incarcerated family members, Kayla Yang, Common Roots
Liz: Women Against Military Madness (WAMM)
Ryan Li: Women’s Prison Book Project, Shades of Yellow, Alliance for Metropolitan Stability, OAP
Sergio & Mary Anne: ISAIAH, Immigrant Freedom Network, Resource Center of the Americas, Aztec dance troupe
Shannon: EJAM, Somali Action Alliance, MICAH, Ananya Dance Theater
Rose: Alondra & Silvia of IFN, Cheryl Morgan Spencer
Farheen: Homeless Against Homelessness, Children of Incarcerated Parents, Welfare Rights Committee, Amalia of Main Street Project
Laura: Move Leadership Organization
Patrick: MIRAC
Susan: Two Spirit Media Project, Breaking Free, Ricardo
Eleanor: HOTB, Intermedia Arts, Ananya Dance Theater
Ernesto: Centro Campesino
Liz agreed to do a phone tree.
Eleanor will look into getting Intermedia Arts for our next meeting, after August 22.
Laura suggested we commit to having some individual conversations with a couple of other people in the room to get to know each other and our visions for movement building.
FEEDBACK ON THE MEETING
· A number of people were quiet during the meeting, so those who talk a lot should be aware of that and make space for others to talk.
· We still want to hear more about people’s individual experiences at the US Social Forum.
· Thanks to those who got the space, got the word out to people about the meeting, etc.
· Next time we should have some time to break into small groups.Next time we should make sure and set ground rules at the beginning (this was in the agenda, but since it was such a small group when the meeting started, we didn’t stick to the original plan).
Saturday, July 21, 2007 (3:30-6:30 pm, Plymouth Congregational Church)
Present: Susan Raffo, Lena Jones, Josie Winship, Emmett Ramstad, Shannon Gibney, Farheen Hakeem, Lisa Albrecht, Charlotte Albrecht, Jenifer Fennell, Rose Brewer, Sara Olson, Rebecca Trotzky Sirr, Ryan Li Dahlstrom, Harry Greenberg, Patrick Leet, Eleanor Savage, Mary Anne Quiroz, Sergio Quiroz, Liz Arnold, Fernando, Laura Wilson, Becca Reilly
AGENDA
· We started with a short discussion of the agenda and how it was created (by Lena, Susan and Jennifer). There was a focus on building relationships, which came from the last meeting at powderhorn park, but also from the sense that we cannot build a movement in the Twin Cities without first building relationships with each other.
· There was concern that creating a Twin Cities movement map (which was on the agenda) would be premature at this meeting (at this point there were only a handful of people in the room). There was some general agreement with this statement and also some explanation that the map was meant to be something that we built upon at each gathering. The map is also meant to help us identify who is in the room and who is not in the room but should be.
· Susan, Lena, and Jennifer offered up the agenda to the room – that it was not something we needed to follow, but only some suggestions for where to start.
· At this point we decided to go around the room and introduce ourselves.
INTRODUCTIONS
· Everyone introduced themselves and briefly talked about what brought them to the meeting today. More and more people entered the meeting as time went on, so introductions were interspersed throughout the meeting.
DISCUSSION
· The main discussion of the meeting centered on a question that Shannon put out to the group. Upon noting that there have been numerous “movement building moments” to occur previously in the Twin Cities, that have had great potential and energy but go nowhere, Shannon asked, why do these movement building moments dissolve?
· Farheen noted that from experience in Chicago, many people want to be martyrs. Any challenge to their way of doings things or difference in opinion is seen as a sort of “suffering” that encounter in the movement; people get very defensive and it becomes about their egos.
Histories of race, power, and struggle in the twin cities
· Lisa spoke of the difficulty working across racial and class lines in the Twin Cities. There is little trust from communities of color towards white folks because of the dominance of white people in organizing and the tendency of whites to “screw it up”. In the south, there is a history of leaders of color; Lisa says that when white folks screw up there, they are held accountable and then people move on proceed with organizing. Here the mess that white folks make halts the work that was being done.
· Farheen spoke to the experience of often being one of few people of color in the room at meetings and being constantly discredited after speaking up; Farheen knows to expect this kind of exploitation.
· Shannon said that the most negative experiences in organizing here have come from white women. The history here is that white men get the cushy jobs and white women get the non-profit jobs and there is a certain amount of power that comes with that. Shannon called for white people to learn how to be allies to people of color, rather than saying “we’ll support you as long as you do what we say”.
· Rose called for us to learn the histories of struggle here and referenced the Minnesota timeline that was handed out. The small numbers of people of color matter in this history, not just because it has made it harder for communities of color to organize, but also because individual people of color, particularly African-Americans, have acted as “brokers” for the rest of the community. Rose is very excited by the energy of the south: they have a significant political history and we’re talking about building one, so we have to know where we enter.
Personal struggles as community struggles
· Rebecca thinks that a personal vs. community conflict is one reason why energy dissipates at the end of a campaign or a period of intense struggle, such as being in a relationship or being a young mom that one’s political community won’t support. Rebecca would like to see those individual or personal struggles be seen as community struggles.
Accountability
· Susan has been thinking a lot about accountability, and wants it to move beyond just being called out for saying something inappropriate, but also into every aspect of organizing and support. Susan sees this as three generations of work. The statement that there is no history of organizing here resonates with Susan. Susan talked about growing up in Cleveland during civil rights struggles when organizing happened in every day life by people just walking to their neighbors’ doors. Susan would like to see that kind of organizing happen here but is not sure what it would look like.
· Lisa clarified that there is a history of struggle here in communities of color, particularly in Native American communities. Rose agreed but said that there has not been a history of struggle across communities of color and that’s what we’re speaking about. In the Twin Cities, historically and currently, people work in silos. Rose wants us also to be clear that this separation of communities has been intentional à people are intentionally kept apart to prevent organizing.
Organizing models: long term vs. short term
· Farheen also thinks its important for each of us to be clear about why we are here. Is it for personal benefit? To make us feel better about ourselves? We need to be clear on what we want to accomplish and who will benefit from it.
· Ryan Li suggested that prevalent organizing models do not demand that people think about long-term vision or commitment that includes building relationships and intentional coalitions. Rather, folks come to meetings and its like they are reading off their resumes.
· Shannon thought this is indicative of a product versus process conflict. Dominant models of organizing focus on short term gain, but we should be more focused on long-term, behind-the-scenes strategy.
Cross-generation work, gatekeeping, and leadership
· Lisa also brought up a generational piece in this conversation. Lisa’s generation is still not honoring the work of young people and some youth are not paying attention to earlier experiences: there is not enough cross-generation work. On that note, Shannon felt like some people (not just older folks) are not stepping down from the work to let others take leadership. Shannon sees this as more of a spiritual question, rather than one of age or generation and Rose said it is also a power thing.
· Farheen said that this is a problem of gatekeeping. Farheen has even noticed being crafted by others as a gatekeeper for Muslim women, but notes that we need legacy building so that when we are gone there are 15 others coming after each of us, knowing our individual legacies but also their own capacities for leadership.
· There was some clarification needed at this point on how we were talking about older organizers: Lisa asserted that she will be organizing until death but wants to do that along side of younger people; Shannon agreed but clarified that we will all die someday and that spiritual and physical fact should be integrated into our strategies.
· Shannon felt that younger generations have a bit of privilege of not having to embrace identity politics growing up. Shannon knows great organizers of color who are not organizing around identity but rather a shared political vision. Farheen noted that there are many younger activists whose organizing is doing solidarity work on multiple issues rather than on a single struggle.
· Sara thinks that the flip side of tokenization in one sense is that there is hesitation to invite new people in. Especially for young people, its like you have to have a resume to be welcomed into the meeting.
· Susan kept hearing at the USSF about the erosion of non-profits, but that is not necessarily the case in the Twin Cities. Susan is sympathetic in the sense that people want to hold on to their jobs, but there is a fierce protection of institutions here.
· Emmett noted the frequent use of the word “community” in our conversation and asked for people to clarify more specifically what they mean when the word is used.
Republican National Convention (RNC), Midwest Social Forum
· Rebecca thinks we often operate on the notion of a scarcity of resources and that this leads to people hording power. Rebecca is thinking of the Republican National Convention that will be here in a year and thinks it is a unique opportunity for us to reframe is the work we do because the spotlight will be on the Twin Cities.
· Lisa noted that at the Midwest meeting at the USSF, there was talk of doing something in the Midwest region by 2009 (because the next USSF is set for 2010). There is an opportunity for the Twin Cities to take leadership in organizing that if we want that, knowing that the last Midwest Social Forum was not organized at a grassroots level.
· Shannon feels that both 2008 (when the RNC happens) and 2009 are very close, considering the lessons from the Northwest social forum report. We do not have the infrastructure here and if we try make something happen by then, it will likely replicate the white liberal dominance of the last Midwest social forum. Rose said that there have been efforts to change this, but that you need different/more people in the room in order to do that. Shannon thinks there are enough conferences and activities planned as it is and is not interested in putting energy into another conference or large gathering because it will not address the problems we’re talking about.
· Laura gets frustrated when we start talking about planning events. Laura wants to see targeted action and strategy at those who have power. Susan experiences the opposite, where there are actions for action’s sake with no follow-up. Susan does not yet know what we’re doing but wants to support the process and will stay with it as long as we keep pushing toward something that is different than what has happened in the past.
· Shannon said that we still need to have people at the table who aren’t here. We are talking about people who are not here to talk for themselves.
· Farheen attended the first RNC meeting and saw that it was the “usual suspects” and largely white, so Farheen decided not to give energy to that. Instead, Farheen started having “POC versus RNC” meetings to organize people of color and figure out ways of resisting that did not bring people in such close contact with the police state that will be present. Farheen would like to see a “decentralization forum” at the same time to capitalize on the thousands of people who will be here at that time. Rebecca has been interested in that idea too and thinks that other people are and that this would also be a good time for cross-generational dialogue.
· Shannon, however, felt that this is still a reaction to something and not creating a vision of our own. If another world is possible, then what does it look like? Shannon noted again that the RNC is too soon and would like to see something more intentional happen.
· Susan suggested that we not think of any of these events as the “it” but as opportunities that we can use to have conversations on building a multi-issue movement with connections to working towards something bigger.
· Patrick spoke of a model to use the RNC and DNC in Denver as a way to invite people and organizations around the country to come and do their own workshops on particular issues. From those workshops at both sites, a model of issues to organize around could be drafted.
· Lisa’s is not interested in organizing around the RNC or the DNC but in how we build a collective vision. At this table we don’t even know what our visions are. Lisa is not sure where to go next without a collective vision and also noted that relationships are built by doing this work together. Shannon is thinking about the people in her life that she trusts who have more privilege. They have consistently come out in support of Shannon and that is how this trust was built. We keep trying to plan more events but we’re still not listening to the people who are most effected by these problems.
· Laura thinks that we should keep in mind the fact that people are organizing every day and this still be going on during all these other events.
Collective vision, next steps
· Rose said that one big lesson from the US social forum is that the core of organizing must be made up of those who are most affected and we haven’t yet done this work here in the Twin Cities. Organizations that are led by people of color showed up en masse at the social forum because hard work was done to make that happen, so we won’t get the results without the work.
· Farheen thinks that those of us in the room who have connections to the people who need to be here but aren’t should reach out to them. Farheen is specifically thinking about those who are homeless. Rose echoed this statement and thinks we should connected with those who are organizing.
· Lena thinks that we are developing a vision, that it has just been articulated: that those who are the most affected by these issues should be at the core of leadership and organizing. Lena wants to think practically, that after the meeting she’ll be having conversations with people to get them here and needs to think about what people will get from getting involved. Part of what people get is more support for the work that they’re already doing.
· Ryan Li thinks the conversations we have should be about building power and leadership in the Twin Cities from the ground up, about shifting the power. On that note, Susan mentioned an organizing experience from living in England, where the leadership circle of the group was made up 75% people who were directly effected and 25% people who had more privilege. As an unexpected but natural result, those who were not in the leadership circle who were doing support work started thinking and educating each other about their privilege. With that said, some of us at the table will need to step back and not be in the core. Rose also commented that all of us, no matter our privilege or position, need and are lacking political education.
· Laura felt that the conversations we have with people who are organizing are not necessarily about bringing people into this space, but about learning more about what is already being done and what is needed. Sara stressed that we should think about the styles of our meeting and communication to appeal to youth. Shannon added that there is not one way to organize, that different people have different things to contribute. Eleanor wants this to be a space to make visible the organizing that is being done and to figure out ways to support that organizing. Eleanor mentioned the organization Alternate Roots that seemed have a beginning process that was similar to our. Shannon will put information about Alternate Roots on the blog.
· Rose would like to see an assessment of how these relationships we’re talking about are brought to fruition. Rose suggested that we identify those organizations we want to lift up that people in the room have connections to. On that note, and with 30 minutes left, the meeting shifted to this task.
LIST OF ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVUDUAL CONTACTS
The people below agreed to contact the individuals or organizations next to their names and start a conversation by August 15. Those conversations would not be to tell folks that we are starting/doing something in particular, but rather that we want to know what they are engaged in and what their needs as organizers/ations are. The message is that we want to build a base in the Twin Cities toward movement building that looks something like what we saw at the Social Forum. Shannon agreed to post the reportbacks on the blog and send out bi-weekly email reminders of this information.
Lisa: Indigenous People’s Task Force, Jermain Tony of Organizing Apprenticeship Project (OAP), BIHA in Action (Alice Lynch), Ricardo
Lena: Restorative Justice, Gloria who started group for those with incarcerated family members, Kayla Yang, Common Roots
Liz: Women Against Military Madness (WAMM)
Ryan Li: Women’s Prison Book Project, Shades of Yellow, Alliance for Metropolitan Stability, OAP
Sergio & Mary Anne: ISAIAH, Immigrant Freedom Network, Resource Center of the Americas, Aztec dance troupe
Shannon: EJAM, Somali Action Alliance, MICAH, Ananya Dance Theater
Rose: Alondra & Silvia of IFN, Cheryl Morgan Spencer
Farheen: Homeless Against Homelessness, Children of Incarcerated Parents, Welfare Rights Committee, Amalia of Main Street Project
Laura: Move Leadership Organization
Patrick: MIRAC
Susan: Two Spirit Media Project, Breaking Free, Ricardo
Eleanor: HOTB, Intermedia Arts, Ananya Dance Theater
Ernesto: Centro Campesino
Liz agreed to do a phone tree.
Eleanor will look into getting Intermedia Arts for our next meeting, after August 22.
Laura suggested we commit to having some individual conversations with a couple of other people in the room to get to know each other and our visions for movement building.
FEEDBACK ON THE MEETING
· A number of people were quiet during the meeting, so those who talk a lot should be aware of that and make space for others to talk.
· We still want to hear more about people’s individual experiences at the US Social Forum.
· Thanks to those who got the space, got the word out to people about the meeting, etc.
· Next time we should have some time to break into small groups.Next time we should make sure and set ground rules at the beginning (this was in the agenda, but since it was such a small group when the meeting started, we didn’t stick to the original plan).
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Resources list
Shannon: I don't have any control over layout of the blog. Would you mind creating a space for posting resources? I have a bunch of great articles from the Movement Strategy Center that I would love to make available. I've been looking for and reading lots of nuts and bolts how do we do this kind of stuff for this and for my other gig with Queers for Economic Justice.
It might also be nice to have a links sections so that we can attach to the organizations that we each belong to and whatever else makes sense. Maybe a Twin Cities links, Minnesota links, Other links?
See you in half an hour,
Susan
It might also be nice to have a links sections so that we can attach to the organizations that we each belong to and whatever else makes sense. Maybe a Twin Cities links, Minnesota links, Other links?
See you in half an hour,
Susan
Friday, July 20, 2007
Various Analyses and Critiques of the first USSF
VARIOUS ANALYSES AND CRITIQUES OF THE FIRST US SOCIAL FORUM
JUNE 27-JULY 1, 2007
ATLANTA, GEORGIA
http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/5564/
http://www.monthlyreview.org/mrzine/sherman040707p.html
http://allafrica.com/stories/printable/200707060849.html
http://us.oneworld.net/article/view/150989/1/
http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1075/1/
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=1&ItemID=13271
http://blog.aflcio.org/2007/07/09/national-alliance-of-domestic-workers-formed-at-social-forum/
http://savannahnow.com/node/317099/print
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20070716&s=berger
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sally-kohn/reflections-on-the-us-s_b_56779.html
JUNE 27-JULY 1, 2007
ATLANTA, GEORGIA
http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/5564/
http://www.monthlyreview.org/mrzine/sherman040707p.html
http://allafrica.com/stories/printable/200707060849.html
http://us.oneworld.net/article/view/150989/1/
http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1075/1/
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=1&ItemID=13271
http://blog.aflcio.org/2007/07/09/national-alliance-of-domestic-workers-formed-at-social-forum/
http://savannahnow.com/node/317099/print
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20070716&s=berger
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sally-kohn/reflections-on-the-us-s_b_56779.html
Another U.S. Is Starting to Happen
http://rabble.ca/news_full_story.shtml?x=60722
Another U.S. is starting to happen
The slogan of the USSF was 'Another world is possible, another U.S. is necessary.' It was interpreted both as another U.S. and another 'us,' meaning the left has to reinvent itself.
by Judy Rebick July 9, 2007
After spending five weeks in Bolivia this summer, I was convinced that the new paths out of this destructive, hateful morass we call neo-liberalism would come from those most marginalized by its greed and violence. Little did I imagine that one of the strongest signs of this direction would come from the belly of the beast itself.
Ten thousand people, overwhelmingly poor and working class, the majority people of colour, at least half women, and a massive number of youth gathered in Atlanta, Ga. at the end of June for the U.S. Social Forum (USSF) signaling what could be the birth of the most powerful social movement the U.S. has ever seen.
“Never in my wildest imagination, did I think I would ever see something like this in the United States,” Carlos Torres, a Chilean refugee now living in Canada, told me halfway through the forum. The sentiment was repeated again and again by Latin American visitors who were there as emissaries from the World Social Forum (WSF). It was radical, it was militant, it was feminist, it was anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist, it was queer, it was loud and lively and it was brimming with love, kindness and a deep sense of solidarity.
The slogan of the USSF was “Another world is possible, another U.S. is necessary.” It was interpreted both as another U.S. and another “us,” meaning the left has to reinvent itself.
And it was a major step forward for the World Social Forum movement. The idea of a U.S. social forum came from a couple of people who went to the 2001 WSF in Brazil and then brought a few more with them in 2002. They formed a group called Grassroots Global Justice and began the process of organizing a U.S. social forum, firmly in the WSF spirit.
One of them, Fred Azcarate, then with Jobs with Justice, now with the AFL-CIO, explained to the opening plenary that “it took this long because we wanted to do it right by building the necessary relationships among the grassroots organizations and ensuring the right outcomes.”
And the right outcomes were to create the conditions to unite the disparate grassroots people’s movements around the U.S. across race, age, sector and region.
They got the idea from the WSF but they took it beyond where anyone else has managed to go, except perhaps in Mumbai. In Nairobi, poor people demanded a significant place in the WSF planning process and in Atlanta, they had one. The national planning committee represented what they call national and regional “base-building” groups, whose base is mostly poor and working class people. It seemed to this observer that the forum shifted the balance of power on the American left to the poor and oppressed from the middle class. Time will tell what impact this will have.
Every plenary focused on building alliances among the myriad of grassroots movement across the United States. Most emphasis was on a “black-brown” alliance to combat the racism that divides African Americans from their Latino and immigrant brothers and sisters. But there was also a lot of focus on student/labour alliances and environmental issues were completely linked to social justice issues. Support for gays, lesbians and transgendered people who have been major targets of the Bush administration seemed universal.
The forum ended in a People’s Movements Assembly, where various regional and issue caucuses presented their resolutions. Several new national networks were formed and the bonds of solidarity were deeply forged among those who are usually divided. People left with the commitment to organize social forums in their regions, cities and neighbourhoods. Over the course of the week, the social forum became a synonym for creating a movement of movements everywhere.
“People are asking me when Atlanta has ever seen something like this,” Jerome Scott of Project South and veteran Atlanta activist speaking of the opening march. “I’ve been reflecting on that and my answer is Atlanta has never seen anything like this. The Civil Rights movement was mostly African American and last year’s May 1st (immigration rights) demo was mostly Latinos but this march was the most multi-national action I have ever seen. It was beautiful.”
Almost every one of the 900 workshops over four days was filled to the brim with activists who were sharing strategies in everything from food security to community/labour alliances to a new taking back our cities movement against gentrification. The plenary speakers were majority women, people of colour, and young people. There was not a single left-wing star among them. In a culture obsessed with celebrity, the organizing committee decided they didn’t need any, even the good ones.
None of the big NGOs in the United States were on the planning committee. The idea that foundation-funded, majority white, centrist and Washington dominated NGOs and think tanks have hijacked the left was present throughout the forum. These groups were welcome to participate, but not in a leadership capacity.
Another extraordinary feature of the forum was the role of indigenous people who led the opening march and participated on several panels as well as had their own plenary.
Much of the vision came from them. After talking about the melting of the glaciers, Faith Gemmill from the REDOIL (Resisting Environmental Destruction on Indigenous Land) in Alaska said, “Our people have a prophesy that there will come a time in the history of humanity when people are in danger of destroying ourselves. When that time comes, a voice will arise from the North to warn us. That time is now. I was sent here to give you part of our burden to speak up now against the greed.”
And Tom Goldtooth who represents the Indigenous Environmental Network on the national planning committee said, “We must talk from the heart and shake hands with one another. A prayer has taken place that this spirit is going to grow. No matter who we are we must demand not reform of a broken system but transformation. We need to organize from the grassroots.”
And many did speak from the heart.
The plenary on Katrina was stunning to me. While I certainly followed the immediate aftermath, I had no idea of the continuing efforts to whitewash New Orleans. Dr. Beverley Wright speaking from the floor said, “Our parents and our grandparents fought to buy a house to pass on to their family and they are trying to take that away from us when they talk about turning the place we lived in East New Orleans into a green space. They’re not talking about turning the place rich white folks live into green space.”
Another community leader said, “Katrina is both a reality and a symbol. If you work in justice, if you work in health care, if your work in housing, you are in Katrina.”
One of the most powerful speeches was from Javier Gallardo from the New Orleans Workers Center. A guest worker from Peru, he explained that when African Americans were displaced, hundreds of workers like him had been brought in from Latin America for Gulf Coast reconstruction and their employers names are on their passports.
Their ability to stay in the U.S. is dependent on the employer. Gallardo said that there is now a practice that when the employer is finished with the workers, he sells them to another employer for $2,000 each. “What is that?,” he asked.
“We call it modern day slavery. They want to divide us but the old slaves and the new slaves can join together and together we can defeat them,” he continued to thunderous applause. The old slaves/new slaves metaphor wove its way through the rest of the forum in the powerful idea of a black-brown alliance, that veteran activists said would transform left-wing politics in the United States and especially in the South where the vast majority of the working class is now black and brown.
Another impressive feature of the forum was the handling of conflict. When the Palestinian contingent objected that they were the only group not permitted to speak for themselves in the anti-war plenary, the organizers read their letter of protest to the next plenary. When the report of the indigenous caucus was stopped at the end of their allotted time by the moderator of the People's Movement Assembly by removing their microphone, they took grave offense and felt silenced.
Within 10 minutes, most of the indigenous people in the room were on the stage with the consent of the organizers. What could have been an explosive divisive moment with a lot of anger and hurt was handled with incredible skill by both permitting the protest and making sure it was interpreted in a way that created unity rather than division. I had the feeling that a new culture of solidarity was being born, one we tried for in the feminist movement but never quite accomplished.
Of course there were weaknesses in the forum. While strongly rooted in the traditions of the civil rights movement by the symbolic location in Atlanta and the presence of veteran civil rights activists, there was less discussion of working class or even feminist history.
Yet the impact of those movements were strongly felt in the powerful female leadership present everywhere and the strong emphasis on workers' issues and organizing. None of the big environmental groups was present. While the issue of the war and U.S. imperialism had pride of place, the mainstream anti-war movement had little presence. The forum organizers bent the stick quite far towards poor, working class, indigenous, queer and people of colour groups and perhaps this was necessary to create the kind of movement really capable of making change in the United States.
In her famous speech at the 2002 World Social Forum in Brazil, Arundhati Roy famously said, “Remember this: We be many and they be few. They need us more than we need them. Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing.”
It wasn’t a quiet day in Atlanta but I could hear her shouting there, “What do we want? Justice. How will we get it? People Power.”
Judy Rebick holds the Sam Gindin Chair in Social Justice and Democracy at Ryerson University in Toronto. She is a founder and former publisher of rabble.ca. Her most recent book is Ten Thousand Roses: The Making of a Feminist Revolution.
Another U.S. is starting to happen
The slogan of the USSF was 'Another world is possible, another U.S. is necessary.' It was interpreted both as another U.S. and another 'us,' meaning the left has to reinvent itself.
by Judy Rebick July 9, 2007
After spending five weeks in Bolivia this summer, I was convinced that the new paths out of this destructive, hateful morass we call neo-liberalism would come from those most marginalized by its greed and violence. Little did I imagine that one of the strongest signs of this direction would come from the belly of the beast itself.
Ten thousand people, overwhelmingly poor and working class, the majority people of colour, at least half women, and a massive number of youth gathered in Atlanta, Ga. at the end of June for the U.S. Social Forum (USSF) signaling what could be the birth of the most powerful social movement the U.S. has ever seen.
“Never in my wildest imagination, did I think I would ever see something like this in the United States,” Carlos Torres, a Chilean refugee now living in Canada, told me halfway through the forum. The sentiment was repeated again and again by Latin American visitors who were there as emissaries from the World Social Forum (WSF). It was radical, it was militant, it was feminist, it was anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist, it was queer, it was loud and lively and it was brimming with love, kindness and a deep sense of solidarity.
The slogan of the USSF was “Another world is possible, another U.S. is necessary.” It was interpreted both as another U.S. and another “us,” meaning the left has to reinvent itself.
And it was a major step forward for the World Social Forum movement. The idea of a U.S. social forum came from a couple of people who went to the 2001 WSF in Brazil and then brought a few more with them in 2002. They formed a group called Grassroots Global Justice and began the process of organizing a U.S. social forum, firmly in the WSF spirit.
One of them, Fred Azcarate, then with Jobs with Justice, now with the AFL-CIO, explained to the opening plenary that “it took this long because we wanted to do it right by building the necessary relationships among the grassroots organizations and ensuring the right outcomes.”
And the right outcomes were to create the conditions to unite the disparate grassroots people’s movements around the U.S. across race, age, sector and region.
They got the idea from the WSF but they took it beyond where anyone else has managed to go, except perhaps in Mumbai. In Nairobi, poor people demanded a significant place in the WSF planning process and in Atlanta, they had one. The national planning committee represented what they call national and regional “base-building” groups, whose base is mostly poor and working class people. It seemed to this observer that the forum shifted the balance of power on the American left to the poor and oppressed from the middle class. Time will tell what impact this will have.
Every plenary focused on building alliances among the myriad of grassroots movement across the United States. Most emphasis was on a “black-brown” alliance to combat the racism that divides African Americans from their Latino and immigrant brothers and sisters. But there was also a lot of focus on student/labour alliances and environmental issues were completely linked to social justice issues. Support for gays, lesbians and transgendered people who have been major targets of the Bush administration seemed universal.
The forum ended in a People’s Movements Assembly, where various regional and issue caucuses presented their resolutions. Several new national networks were formed and the bonds of solidarity were deeply forged among those who are usually divided. People left with the commitment to organize social forums in their regions, cities and neighbourhoods. Over the course of the week, the social forum became a synonym for creating a movement of movements everywhere.
“People are asking me when Atlanta has ever seen something like this,” Jerome Scott of Project South and veteran Atlanta activist speaking of the opening march. “I’ve been reflecting on that and my answer is Atlanta has never seen anything like this. The Civil Rights movement was mostly African American and last year’s May 1st (immigration rights) demo was mostly Latinos but this march was the most multi-national action I have ever seen. It was beautiful.”
Almost every one of the 900 workshops over four days was filled to the brim with activists who were sharing strategies in everything from food security to community/labour alliances to a new taking back our cities movement against gentrification. The plenary speakers were majority women, people of colour, and young people. There was not a single left-wing star among them. In a culture obsessed with celebrity, the organizing committee decided they didn’t need any, even the good ones.
None of the big NGOs in the United States were on the planning committee. The idea that foundation-funded, majority white, centrist and Washington dominated NGOs and think tanks have hijacked the left was present throughout the forum. These groups were welcome to participate, but not in a leadership capacity.
Another extraordinary feature of the forum was the role of indigenous people who led the opening march and participated on several panels as well as had their own plenary.
Much of the vision came from them. After talking about the melting of the glaciers, Faith Gemmill from the REDOIL (Resisting Environmental Destruction on Indigenous Land) in Alaska said, “Our people have a prophesy that there will come a time in the history of humanity when people are in danger of destroying ourselves. When that time comes, a voice will arise from the North to warn us. That time is now. I was sent here to give you part of our burden to speak up now against the greed.”
And Tom Goldtooth who represents the Indigenous Environmental Network on the national planning committee said, “We must talk from the heart and shake hands with one another. A prayer has taken place that this spirit is going to grow. No matter who we are we must demand not reform of a broken system but transformation. We need to organize from the grassroots.”
And many did speak from the heart.
The plenary on Katrina was stunning to me. While I certainly followed the immediate aftermath, I had no idea of the continuing efforts to whitewash New Orleans. Dr. Beverley Wright speaking from the floor said, “Our parents and our grandparents fought to buy a house to pass on to their family and they are trying to take that away from us when they talk about turning the place we lived in East New Orleans into a green space. They’re not talking about turning the place rich white folks live into green space.”
Another community leader said, “Katrina is both a reality and a symbol. If you work in justice, if you work in health care, if your work in housing, you are in Katrina.”
One of the most powerful speeches was from Javier Gallardo from the New Orleans Workers Center. A guest worker from Peru, he explained that when African Americans were displaced, hundreds of workers like him had been brought in from Latin America for Gulf Coast reconstruction and their employers names are on their passports.
Their ability to stay in the U.S. is dependent on the employer. Gallardo said that there is now a practice that when the employer is finished with the workers, he sells them to another employer for $2,000 each. “What is that?,” he asked.
“We call it modern day slavery. They want to divide us but the old slaves and the new slaves can join together and together we can defeat them,” he continued to thunderous applause. The old slaves/new slaves metaphor wove its way through the rest of the forum in the powerful idea of a black-brown alliance, that veteran activists said would transform left-wing politics in the United States and especially in the South where the vast majority of the working class is now black and brown.
Another impressive feature of the forum was the handling of conflict. When the Palestinian contingent objected that they were the only group not permitted to speak for themselves in the anti-war plenary, the organizers read their letter of protest to the next plenary. When the report of the indigenous caucus was stopped at the end of their allotted time by the moderator of the People's Movement Assembly by removing their microphone, they took grave offense and felt silenced.
Within 10 minutes, most of the indigenous people in the room were on the stage with the consent of the organizers. What could have been an explosive divisive moment with a lot of anger and hurt was handled with incredible skill by both permitting the protest and making sure it was interpreted in a way that created unity rather than division. I had the feeling that a new culture of solidarity was being born, one we tried for in the feminist movement but never quite accomplished.
Of course there were weaknesses in the forum. While strongly rooted in the traditions of the civil rights movement by the symbolic location in Atlanta and the presence of veteran civil rights activists, there was less discussion of working class or even feminist history.
Yet the impact of those movements were strongly felt in the powerful female leadership present everywhere and the strong emphasis on workers' issues and organizing. None of the big environmental groups was present. While the issue of the war and U.S. imperialism had pride of place, the mainstream anti-war movement had little presence. The forum organizers bent the stick quite far towards poor, working class, indigenous, queer and people of colour groups and perhaps this was necessary to create the kind of movement really capable of making change in the United States.
In her famous speech at the 2002 World Social Forum in Brazil, Arundhati Roy famously said, “Remember this: We be many and they be few. They need us more than we need them. Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing.”
It wasn’t a quiet day in Atlanta but I could hear her shouting there, “What do we want? Justice. How will we get it? People Power.”
Judy Rebick holds the Sam Gindin Chair in Social Justice and Democracy at Ryerson University in Toronto. She is a founder and former publisher of rabble.ca. Her most recent book is Ten Thousand Roses: The Making of a Feminist Revolution.
Check-out Women's Working Group's Reproductive Justice Briefing Book
http://www.sistersong.net/documents/RJBriefingBook.pdf
A new, expanded version will be coming out soon.
A new, expanded version will be coming out soon.
U.S. Social Forum Forges Common Ground
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=38397
POLITICS:U.S. Social Forum Forges Common Ground
By Matthew Cardinale
ATLANTA, Jul 2 (IPS) - In all, the crowds were huge, the workshops passionate and inspiring, and participants made ideological, relational and personal gains, both large and small.
The U.S. Social Forum wrapped up Sunday in the southern city of Atlanta with a People's Assembly, where civil society and native leaders read declarations on the meeting's main issues: Gulf Coast reconstruction in the post-Katrina era; militarism and the prison industrial complex; indigenous, sexual and immigrant rights; and labour struggles in the global economy.
Atlanta videographer Judy "Artemis" Condor said it was the youthfulness of the crowd that inspired her. "Usually, it's just us old folks at these marches and it takes all our energy just to get from point A to point B," she said.
The youth, on the other hand, were making music, singing, shouting, carrying huge puppets, and some even walking on stilts.
USSF Director Alice Lovelace said many participants were looking to possibly hold their own regional Social Forums in the months and years ahead.
"In January 2008, there will be International Days of Action," Lovelace said. "Next year will also feature a Social Forum of the Americas, and the USSF will send delegates. World Social Forums should resume in 2009," she said.
The Assembly did not go off without a hitch, as members of the Native American delegation rose in protest when a USSF organiser grabbed the microphone out of one of their speaker's hands because he went "over time." After backstage negotiations, the speaker was able to finish his comments and the Native Americans also held a "healing drum circle" to restore the speaker's dignity.
Still, according to two USSF organisers, some seasoned delegates to the World Social Forum walked away very impressed with the whole event.
"We hit 10,000 [participants]," Lovelace said. "The sessions were brilliant. People made a lot of connections. We had proclamations and declarations. It was an extraordinary gathering."
"Members of the [World Social Forum] International Council were here. They said this presented a great challenge to them because it was the best Social Forum they ever saw. They said it raised the bar across the board in terms of diversity. The sessions were focused on the future, on vision, on strategies. They were going to have to step up their game to match what we did," Lovelace told IPS.
It was still vague by what process the USSF participants will be able to endorse the various resolutions.
"There was a decision to extend the process," of submitting resolutions to the Assembly, said USSF organiser Ruben Solis. It "would continue to be organised once people got back home so they would include more people that did not have the opportunity to be here in Atlanta physically at the USSF. All of July and August will be dedicated to that."
The youth, on the other hand, were making music, singing, shouting, carrying huge puppets, and some even walking on stilts. USSF Director Alice Lovelace said many participants were looking to possibly hold their own regional Social Forums in the months and years ahead.
"The final adoption [of resolutions] will probably happen in September," Solis said. The adoption process would involve both the Internet and the next Planning Committee Meeting. "Get them out to all the delegates, give us a process of consultation, adoption, and voting them in, and a process. Because it was a social experiment that has never been done -- even at the World Social Forum -- this was really groundbreaking. This made history in that sense as well," Solis said.
And despite the bitter dispute that erupted when one of their speakers was cut off, the Native American contingent also saw gains from their participation in the USSF.
"This was really an awesome opportunity for the indigenous people of the U.S. to develop family with indigenous people from the South, delegations from Guatemala, from Chile and Argentina who were here... It really provided us an opportunity to develop a family," said Tom Goldtooth, a leader with the Cherokee Nation. "We're willing to share some of our knowledge," he added.
"The Water Ceremony [at the USSF] was our opportunity to help inform all people about the unification of water. It was announced on the USSF website to bring water from their homeland, whether contaminated or not. This was a ceremony for all people to pray for the water of life. People brought water from all four directions. We had an indigenous woman named Josephine Mandamin, the Water Walker or the Water Keeper, she's walked around each of the Great Lakes," Goldtooth said.
Kimberly Richards from the People's Institute for Survival and Beyond in New Orleans, Louisiana departed feeling ecstatic on the People's Caravan. Richards joined hundreds of others on a caravan of several buses that came from the Western U.S., went through New Orleans, Mississippi, and Alabama, to join the USSF. Now she was returning home.
"I think there was a lot of progress made. People from the Gulf Coast were able to see oppressive and repressive systems in housing and health care. Atlanta's Katrina was the Olympics. The Olympics displaced people and increased homelessness just as Katrina. For Detroit it was the closing of the auto mills. For North Carolina it was the textile factories," Richards said.
"People are [now] able to understand the intensity of the human rights violations. People's don't [typically] understand the U.S. has signed on to the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights. The evacuation was: get in your car and leave. People who didn't have cars were discriminated against. That's a human rights violation. We have to understand what our human rights are in order to protect and defend them," she told IPS.
Richards said the biggest benefit for the New Orleans delegation was the raising of consciousness. "To organise, people have to have all those things. To have the action, you have to have the awareness. We don't need unconscious people to take an action. Those parts are critical to effective action, to effective organising. We do need to do something, but we need to do it with consciousness," she said.
Meanwhile, public housing advocates from across the country at the USSF were able to make connections and have planted the seeds of starting a national organisation to protect public housing, said Carl Hartrampf of the Metro Atlanta Task Force for the Homeless.
After the People's Assembly, a delegation of about 50 public housing residents and advocates marched and delivered an "eviction notice" to the Atlanta Housing Authority, which they taped on the office's front door.
POLITICS:U.S. Social Forum Forges Common Ground
By Matthew Cardinale
ATLANTA, Jul 2 (IPS) - In all, the crowds were huge, the workshops passionate and inspiring, and participants made ideological, relational and personal gains, both large and small.
The U.S. Social Forum wrapped up Sunday in the southern city of Atlanta with a People's Assembly, where civil society and native leaders read declarations on the meeting's main issues: Gulf Coast reconstruction in the post-Katrina era; militarism and the prison industrial complex; indigenous, sexual and immigrant rights; and labour struggles in the global economy.
Atlanta videographer Judy "Artemis" Condor said it was the youthfulness of the crowd that inspired her. "Usually, it's just us old folks at these marches and it takes all our energy just to get from point A to point B," she said.
The youth, on the other hand, were making music, singing, shouting, carrying huge puppets, and some even walking on stilts.
USSF Director Alice Lovelace said many participants were looking to possibly hold their own regional Social Forums in the months and years ahead.
"In January 2008, there will be International Days of Action," Lovelace said. "Next year will also feature a Social Forum of the Americas, and the USSF will send delegates. World Social Forums should resume in 2009," she said.
The Assembly did not go off without a hitch, as members of the Native American delegation rose in protest when a USSF organiser grabbed the microphone out of one of their speaker's hands because he went "over time." After backstage negotiations, the speaker was able to finish his comments and the Native Americans also held a "healing drum circle" to restore the speaker's dignity.
Still, according to two USSF organisers, some seasoned delegates to the World Social Forum walked away very impressed with the whole event.
"We hit 10,000 [participants]," Lovelace said. "The sessions were brilliant. People made a lot of connections. We had proclamations and declarations. It was an extraordinary gathering."
"Members of the [World Social Forum] International Council were here. They said this presented a great challenge to them because it was the best Social Forum they ever saw. They said it raised the bar across the board in terms of diversity. The sessions were focused on the future, on vision, on strategies. They were going to have to step up their game to match what we did," Lovelace told IPS.
It was still vague by what process the USSF participants will be able to endorse the various resolutions.
"There was a decision to extend the process," of submitting resolutions to the Assembly, said USSF organiser Ruben Solis. It "would continue to be organised once people got back home so they would include more people that did not have the opportunity to be here in Atlanta physically at the USSF. All of July and August will be dedicated to that."
The youth, on the other hand, were making music, singing, shouting, carrying huge puppets, and some even walking on stilts. USSF Director Alice Lovelace said many participants were looking to possibly hold their own regional Social Forums in the months and years ahead.
"The final adoption [of resolutions] will probably happen in September," Solis said. The adoption process would involve both the Internet and the next Planning Committee Meeting. "Get them out to all the delegates, give us a process of consultation, adoption, and voting them in, and a process. Because it was a social experiment that has never been done -- even at the World Social Forum -- this was really groundbreaking. This made history in that sense as well," Solis said.
And despite the bitter dispute that erupted when one of their speakers was cut off, the Native American contingent also saw gains from their participation in the USSF.
"This was really an awesome opportunity for the indigenous people of the U.S. to develop family with indigenous people from the South, delegations from Guatemala, from Chile and Argentina who were here... It really provided us an opportunity to develop a family," said Tom Goldtooth, a leader with the Cherokee Nation. "We're willing to share some of our knowledge," he added.
"The Water Ceremony [at the USSF] was our opportunity to help inform all people about the unification of water. It was announced on the USSF website to bring water from their homeland, whether contaminated or not. This was a ceremony for all people to pray for the water of life. People brought water from all four directions. We had an indigenous woman named Josephine Mandamin, the Water Walker or the Water Keeper, she's walked around each of the Great Lakes," Goldtooth said.
Kimberly Richards from the People's Institute for Survival and Beyond in New Orleans, Louisiana departed feeling ecstatic on the People's Caravan. Richards joined hundreds of others on a caravan of several buses that came from the Western U.S., went through New Orleans, Mississippi, and Alabama, to join the USSF. Now she was returning home.
"I think there was a lot of progress made. People from the Gulf Coast were able to see oppressive and repressive systems in housing and health care. Atlanta's Katrina was the Olympics. The Olympics displaced people and increased homelessness just as Katrina. For Detroit it was the closing of the auto mills. For North Carolina it was the textile factories," Richards said.
"People are [now] able to understand the intensity of the human rights violations. People's don't [typically] understand the U.S. has signed on to the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights. The evacuation was: get in your car and leave. People who didn't have cars were discriminated against. That's a human rights violation. We have to understand what our human rights are in order to protect and defend them," she told IPS.
Richards said the biggest benefit for the New Orleans delegation was the raising of consciousness. "To organise, people have to have all those things. To have the action, you have to have the awareness. We don't need unconscious people to take an action. Those parts are critical to effective action, to effective organising. We do need to do something, but we need to do it with consciousness," she said.
Meanwhile, public housing advocates from across the country at the USSF were able to make connections and have planted the seeds of starting a national organisation to protect public housing, said Carl Hartrampf of the Metro Atlanta Task Force for the Homeless.
After the People's Assembly, a delegation of about 50 public housing residents and advocates marched and delivered an "eviction notice" to the Atlanta Housing Authority, which they taped on the office's front door.
Midwest Region of USSF, June 30, 2007 -- Peoples' Assembly
Midwest Region of USSF, June 30, 2007 – Peoples’ Assembly
We want to take this opportunity to thank all the Atlanta folks who made this forum happen, the USSF national planning committee, all the organizations that have worked long, long hours, and all the volunteers who have labored on behalf of building this movement.
1. We resolve to stand in solidarity with the people of the Gulf South. We support your movement for self determination and the right of return, and we resolve to educate the peoples of our region so we do not forget your struggle.
2. We resolve to continue our collective efforts to fight US imperialism, war, white supremacy and militarism. We also resolve to continue to fight against the prison industrial complex, in our region and all over the US.
3. We resolve to continue our collective efforts as both Native and non-Native peoples to address racist injustices confronting indigenous communities, particularly working to preserve our air, water and precious lands of this planet, and we resolve to continue to fight for Native sovereignty.
4. We resolve to fight for the rights of all immigrant communities in our region, and address the increased state repression immigrants face on a daily basis.
5. We resolve to always integrate gender and sexual justice across all aspects of our work, and be clear in our vision of the presence of and leadership from gay, lesbian, bisexual, two spirited and transgender peoples.
6. We resolve to continue to fight against neoliberalism and corporate globalization and to support workers’ rights and the labor movement throughout our region.
7. We resolve to address anti Arab racism and anti Muslim oppression throughout the Midwest, especially since so many Arab peoples live in Midwestern communities.
8. Lastly, we resolve to fight for public schools that are integrated, even though Brown v. Board of Education has been reversed. We are also resolved to support youth and educators who are challenging No Child Left Behind.
We declare that we will actively participate across our region in all the united days of action that the WSF and the USSF have proposed for January, 2008.
We declare that we will return to our Midwestern communities and organize events across all our communities to share the knowledge we have gained at this USSF.
Lastly, we declare that we will organize a Midwest regional gathering by 2009 in conjunction with planning for the 2010 USSF. We pledge that any gathering that we organize will be built around the principle of bringing all the incredibly diverse communities of our region to the table to plan and participate in the gathering.
We want to take this opportunity to thank all the Atlanta folks who made this forum happen, the USSF national planning committee, all the organizations that have worked long, long hours, and all the volunteers who have labored on behalf of building this movement.
1. We resolve to stand in solidarity with the people of the Gulf South. We support your movement for self determination and the right of return, and we resolve to educate the peoples of our region so we do not forget your struggle.
2. We resolve to continue our collective efforts to fight US imperialism, war, white supremacy and militarism. We also resolve to continue to fight against the prison industrial complex, in our region and all over the US.
3. We resolve to continue our collective efforts as both Native and non-Native peoples to address racist injustices confronting indigenous communities, particularly working to preserve our air, water and precious lands of this planet, and we resolve to continue to fight for Native sovereignty.
4. We resolve to fight for the rights of all immigrant communities in our region, and address the increased state repression immigrants face on a daily basis.
5. We resolve to always integrate gender and sexual justice across all aspects of our work, and be clear in our vision of the presence of and leadership from gay, lesbian, bisexual, two spirited and transgender peoples.
6. We resolve to continue to fight against neoliberalism and corporate globalization and to support workers’ rights and the labor movement throughout our region.
7. We resolve to address anti Arab racism and anti Muslim oppression throughout the Midwest, especially since so many Arab peoples live in Midwestern communities.
8. Lastly, we resolve to fight for public schools that are integrated, even though Brown v. Board of Education has been reversed. We are also resolved to support youth and educators who are challenging No Child Left Behind.
We declare that we will actively participate across our region in all the united days of action that the WSF and the USSF have proposed for January, 2008.
We declare that we will return to our Midwestern communities and organize events across all our communities to share the knowledge we have gained at this USSF.
Lastly, we declare that we will organize a Midwest regional gathering by 2009 in conjunction with planning for the 2010 USSF. We pledge that any gathering that we organize will be built around the principle of bringing all the incredibly diverse communities of our region to the table to plan and participate in the gathering.
Minutes from Last Mtg.
Minutes from the July 10th meeting – The Twin Cities return from the US Social Forum
I started taking minutes after we had already started so forgive me for not listing everyone’s name who attended.
Most important piece – we are planning on gathering on Saturday, July 21st, from 3:30 until 7:00, location to be announced. More information on this later in the minutes.
The conversation began with introductions and check ins on the Forum and our work in the Twin Cities. From there, we moved into a discussion about what the work is we need to do in the Twin Cities to build on the Forum.
In the Twin Cities, people stay in their silos. There is a movement happening, you could feel it and see it at the Forum, it is happening in big ways in the southeast and the southwest and it is led by people of color and organizations of color. It isn’t happening in the Twin Cities. We don’t connect here. We stay in our silos, we stay in our separations and we don’t talk to each other.
There was a lot of talk at the last two Midwest Social Forums about doing movement building in the Twin Cities. We had a few meetings afterwards but they just kind of trailed off.
What we doing movement building towards? Are we only getting together to talk or are we also thinking about action? Each of the plenaries dealt with really political issues that included action and not just meetings. How do we bring that here?
Project South talks about movement building in three different stages: Consciousness, Vision and then Strategy. Building movements and relationships takes time. We don’t know if we have the same visions, we still don’t know each other. We aren’t yet at the point of strategies.
I am not interested in creating a new organization, a new 501-c-3. Instead, I want to find a way to connect what is happening in the Twin Cities already. I know of lots of amazing organizers from the Twin Cities who do their work nationally. Who are known outside the Cities. But they don’t do it here. I want to take the time to really know this community, to have a sense of what is happening here, to see how we are connected and different and to see our movements and work interconnecting. I would assume that some groups and organizations would decide to do actions in the middle – that’s fine. In the meantime, others will keep building like this growing stream, building the connections and the trust and the relationships.
We need to be doing ground level organizing, building our analysis, making more connections. What moved me at the US Social Forum was the amount of analysis and cross-sector work. We don’t do cross-sector work here. This is where we have to build – our analysis and cross-sector work. To do that, we have to know each other. At the Forum, I was struck by how many areas had organizations who saw their role as movement building – this is what they were doing, they maintained the relationships and created opportunities. We don’t have anything like that here.
I want to encourage organizations to get hooked in with the Grassroots Global Justice folks – you can find them on the US Social Forum website. There isn’t anyone from the Twin Cities, any organizations, connected here.
We can spend time training each other, sharing our skills.
We need to find a way to meet regularly, someplace and time that we can count on.
We’re good at logistics here but then we get tired, we rarely seem to get past second meetings.
Well, it seems like there are two things happening right now – report backs to the community on what happened at the Forum which would include dialogue about what we have learned and then also a focus on movement building and what happens next. We have to look for organizations that were at the Forum but are not present at this table.
Charlotte is going to organize a list of report backs – folks can send her their information and she’ll put together a centralized list.
The irony here is that we’re having separate report backs – more of that silo stuff – all of these little communities are doing report backs without connecting at all.
January 26th is set aside as a week of action – this is when the World Social Forum would be taking place but we’re not having one centralized forum in 2008 – instead the idea is to have a world social forum that is literally taking place all over the world.
We’re interested in building towards a Twin Cities Social Forum or a Minnesota Social Forum of some sort for the January 26th period.
We’re going to have a meeting on July 21st from 3:30 until 7:00 to begin building relationships, defining the container that will hold this work as we move into January and beyond, etc.
Susan, Lena, Jen, Andrew and Lisa will work on the agenda (and I assume co-facilitate it although this will be more of a group facilitation). Agenda items suggested include 1) outlining the background of the forums, 2) personal sharing of what we took away from the Forum/what we experienced, 3) time to begin building relationships, 4) get a sense of what was at the Forum so we can also see who wasn’t, 5) build a TC movement map, 6) look at the container/infrastructure for moving forward.
I started taking minutes after we had already started so forgive me for not listing everyone’s name who attended.
Most important piece – we are planning on gathering on Saturday, July 21st, from 3:30 until 7:00, location to be announced. More information on this later in the minutes.
The conversation began with introductions and check ins on the Forum and our work in the Twin Cities. From there, we moved into a discussion about what the work is we need to do in the Twin Cities to build on the Forum.
In the Twin Cities, people stay in their silos. There is a movement happening, you could feel it and see it at the Forum, it is happening in big ways in the southeast and the southwest and it is led by people of color and organizations of color. It isn’t happening in the Twin Cities. We don’t connect here. We stay in our silos, we stay in our separations and we don’t talk to each other.
There was a lot of talk at the last two Midwest Social Forums about doing movement building in the Twin Cities. We had a few meetings afterwards but they just kind of trailed off.
What we doing movement building towards? Are we only getting together to talk or are we also thinking about action? Each of the plenaries dealt with really political issues that included action and not just meetings. How do we bring that here?
Project South talks about movement building in three different stages: Consciousness, Vision and then Strategy. Building movements and relationships takes time. We don’t know if we have the same visions, we still don’t know each other. We aren’t yet at the point of strategies.
I am not interested in creating a new organization, a new 501-c-3. Instead, I want to find a way to connect what is happening in the Twin Cities already. I know of lots of amazing organizers from the Twin Cities who do their work nationally. Who are known outside the Cities. But they don’t do it here. I want to take the time to really know this community, to have a sense of what is happening here, to see how we are connected and different and to see our movements and work interconnecting. I would assume that some groups and organizations would decide to do actions in the middle – that’s fine. In the meantime, others will keep building like this growing stream, building the connections and the trust and the relationships.
We need to be doing ground level organizing, building our analysis, making more connections. What moved me at the US Social Forum was the amount of analysis and cross-sector work. We don’t do cross-sector work here. This is where we have to build – our analysis and cross-sector work. To do that, we have to know each other. At the Forum, I was struck by how many areas had organizations who saw their role as movement building – this is what they were doing, they maintained the relationships and created opportunities. We don’t have anything like that here.
I want to encourage organizations to get hooked in with the Grassroots Global Justice folks – you can find them on the US Social Forum website. There isn’t anyone from the Twin Cities, any organizations, connected here.
We can spend time training each other, sharing our skills.
We need to find a way to meet regularly, someplace and time that we can count on.
We’re good at logistics here but then we get tired, we rarely seem to get past second meetings.
Well, it seems like there are two things happening right now – report backs to the community on what happened at the Forum which would include dialogue about what we have learned and then also a focus on movement building and what happens next. We have to look for organizations that were at the Forum but are not present at this table.
Charlotte is going to organize a list of report backs – folks can send her their information and she’ll put together a centralized list.
The irony here is that we’re having separate report backs – more of that silo stuff – all of these little communities are doing report backs without connecting at all.
January 26th is set aside as a week of action – this is when the World Social Forum would be taking place but we’re not having one centralized forum in 2008 – instead the idea is to have a world social forum that is literally taking place all over the world.
We’re interested in building towards a Twin Cities Social Forum or a Minnesota Social Forum of some sort for the January 26th period.
We’re going to have a meeting on July 21st from 3:30 until 7:00 to begin building relationships, defining the container that will hold this work as we move into January and beyond, etc.
Susan, Lena, Jen, Andrew and Lisa will work on the agenda (and I assume co-facilitate it although this will be more of a group facilitation). Agenda items suggested include 1) outlining the background of the forums, 2) personal sharing of what we took away from the Forum/what we experienced, 3) time to begin building relationships, 4) get a sense of what was at the Forum so we can also see who wasn’t, 5) build a TC movement map, 6) look at the container/infrastructure for moving forward.
Pictures of Change? U.S. Social Forum
http://www.mnartists.org/article.do?rid=153396
Pictures of Change? U.S. Social Forum
July 16, 2007
Shannon Gibney
Shannon Gibney attended the U.S. Social Forum in Atlanta, Georgia, at the end of June, and came away with this report on art in the service of social advocacy.
The U.S. Social Forum (USSF) was a nationwide conference held in Atlanta, Georgia at the end of June. Its organizers wrote, “The US Social Forum is more than a conference, more than a networking bonanza, more than a reaction to war and repression.” It was an outgrowth of the recognition at the World Social Forum that the solutions to many of the intractable problems in the world lay of necessity in the hands of U.S. citizens. –ed.
The notion that art can change people’s minds, and in doing so can change societies, is quite an attractive one – which might explain its staying power. But at a recent panel at the U.S. Social Forum, a lively debate about the efficacy of this strategy was ignited.
The panel was titled “A Hammer to Shape Reality: Art and Social Movement,” and was organized by the San Francisco Print Collective (SFPC), as well as by Liberation Ink, a T-shirt and garment printing company, and Just Seeds. These are all visual arts and social justice organizations which have taken different but related courses in using visual imagery to change peoples’ thinking about their world.
“What we were doing was very much shaped by a year of campaign work. There were people in the streets, public meetings, and the images themselves,” said Fernando Marti, of the SFPC, explaining the group’s 2000-2001 campaign to highlight the problems faced by residents in San Francisco’s Mission District.
“We were working with the homeless coalition, working with South of Market around a different kind of displacement,” Marti continued. “The Mission District was becoming increasingly gentrified. The Collective made posters, but also did other art projects. We worked with neighbors to define how they wanted to see their neighborhood. They created a ‘People’s Plan’ to define what the community wanted to see in their neighborhood in terms of housing, transportation, education, etc. So the basic strategy was to integrate the images into other organizing elements. We never intended for the images to do that work on their own.”
This multifaceted, multi-pronged coalition helped the SFPC’s images convey the power and voice of an otherwise unheard community. This in turn forced local politicians and developers to respond, and take action.
Josh MacPhee, the mind behind Just Seeds, which bills itself as a “visual resistance artists’ cooperative,” offered another view of the art and social justice conundrum. “I think there are two kinds of conflicting truisms: One is that you can’t confuse representations of direct democracy with direct democracy. You can’t draw the new world into being. But the flipside of that is that culture is so big and messy that you don’t know how things are going to impact communities, or what they’ll mean to various people. So it’s about finding some balance for yourself while you’re trying to negotiate it. And part of that is about sharing your work with people before you put a lot of time and energy into it. I know a lot of people who have rolled out 1,000 posters that were completely misunderstood because someone didn’t just get on a bus and ask people, ‘What does this mean to you?’ So doing your research and development is well worth it.”
MacPhee has been doing just that in Chicago, for a while now. He initiated the “Celebrate People’s History Poster Series,” which includes “Mothers of East Los Angeles,” “The Silent Majority,” “El Agua is Nuestra Carajo,” and “Fred Hamption 1948-1969.”
“We have produced 44 posters so far, and they are close to being able to produce around 10 a year. Different artists do each one, and it’s a way to build a network,” said MacPhee. “The posters were inspired by a bunch of my friends who were teaching in the public school system and had absolutely no materials to use to engage their students.”
Toward the conclusion of the discussion, an audience member posed a related question, about how to keep mainstream/capitalist forces from appropriating images – a process that is becoming more and more pervasive with every Malcolm X image printed.
Le Tim Ly, of Liberation Ink, “a worker owned apparel printing and design collective created to fund social justice organizing” in the Bay area (www.liberationink.com), said, “At Liberation Ink, we try to place all our images in time and space. We go deeper than just an image by including text. So if we had a t-shirt of Che, we would include something significant that he said.”
Related Links
U. S. Social Forum For more information on the U.S. Social Forum, visit here.
Street Art Workers Street Art Workers are at this webaddress.
Twin Cities delegation to the U.S. Social Forum To get involved with the Twin Cities delegation, contact Ryan Li Dahlstrom here.
Articles Forum Comment on this article here.
Pictures of Change? U.S. Social Forum
July 16, 2007
Shannon Gibney
Shannon Gibney attended the U.S. Social Forum in Atlanta, Georgia, at the end of June, and came away with this report on art in the service of social advocacy.
The U.S. Social Forum (USSF) was a nationwide conference held in Atlanta, Georgia at the end of June. Its organizers wrote, “The US Social Forum is more than a conference, more than a networking bonanza, more than a reaction to war and repression.” It was an outgrowth of the recognition at the World Social Forum that the solutions to many of the intractable problems in the world lay of necessity in the hands of U.S. citizens. –ed.
The notion that art can change people’s minds, and in doing so can change societies, is quite an attractive one – which might explain its staying power. But at a recent panel at the U.S. Social Forum, a lively debate about the efficacy of this strategy was ignited.
The panel was titled “A Hammer to Shape Reality: Art and Social Movement,” and was organized by the San Francisco Print Collective (SFPC), as well as by Liberation Ink, a T-shirt and garment printing company, and Just Seeds. These are all visual arts and social justice organizations which have taken different but related courses in using visual imagery to change peoples’ thinking about their world.
“What we were doing was very much shaped by a year of campaign work. There were people in the streets, public meetings, and the images themselves,” said Fernando Marti, of the SFPC, explaining the group’s 2000-2001 campaign to highlight the problems faced by residents in San Francisco’s Mission District.
“We were working with the homeless coalition, working with South of Market around a different kind of displacement,” Marti continued. “The Mission District was becoming increasingly gentrified. The Collective made posters, but also did other art projects. We worked with neighbors to define how they wanted to see their neighborhood. They created a ‘People’s Plan’ to define what the community wanted to see in their neighborhood in terms of housing, transportation, education, etc. So the basic strategy was to integrate the images into other organizing elements. We never intended for the images to do that work on their own.”
This multifaceted, multi-pronged coalition helped the SFPC’s images convey the power and voice of an otherwise unheard community. This in turn forced local politicians and developers to respond, and take action.
Josh MacPhee, the mind behind Just Seeds, which bills itself as a “visual resistance artists’ cooperative,” offered another view of the art and social justice conundrum. “I think there are two kinds of conflicting truisms: One is that you can’t confuse representations of direct democracy with direct democracy. You can’t draw the new world into being. But the flipside of that is that culture is so big and messy that you don’t know how things are going to impact communities, or what they’ll mean to various people. So it’s about finding some balance for yourself while you’re trying to negotiate it. And part of that is about sharing your work with people before you put a lot of time and energy into it. I know a lot of people who have rolled out 1,000 posters that were completely misunderstood because someone didn’t just get on a bus and ask people, ‘What does this mean to you?’ So doing your research and development is well worth it.”
MacPhee has been doing just that in Chicago, for a while now. He initiated the “Celebrate People’s History Poster Series,” which includes “Mothers of East Los Angeles,” “The Silent Majority,” “El Agua is Nuestra Carajo,” and “Fred Hamption 1948-1969.”
“We have produced 44 posters so far, and they are close to being able to produce around 10 a year. Different artists do each one, and it’s a way to build a network,” said MacPhee. “The posters were inspired by a bunch of my friends who were teaching in the public school system and had absolutely no materials to use to engage their students.”
Toward the conclusion of the discussion, an audience member posed a related question, about how to keep mainstream/capitalist forces from appropriating images – a process that is becoming more and more pervasive with every Malcolm X image printed.
Le Tim Ly, of Liberation Ink, “a worker owned apparel printing and design collective created to fund social justice organizing” in the Bay area (www.liberationink.com), said, “At Liberation Ink, we try to place all our images in time and space. We go deeper than just an image by including text. So if we had a t-shirt of Che, we would include something significant that he said.”
Related Links
U. S. Social Forum For more information on the U.S. Social Forum, visit here.
Street Art Workers Street Art Workers are at this webaddress.
Twin Cities delegation to the U.S. Social Forum To get involved with the Twin Cities delegation, contact Ryan Li Dahlstrom here.
Articles Forum Comment on this article here.
Thank you
Thank you to Shannon for setting this up - I'm looking forward to seeing lots of conversation and information on this blog.
Agenda for Mtg. 7.20.07
Building A Twin Cities Left – A response to the US Social Forum
June 21, 2007 3:30 – 6:30
Please bring snacks to share and bring your own beverage.
1. Why are we here? Collective exercise but also presented by one of the facilitators including how we imagined this agenda and what, in putting it together, we talked about and imagined as next possible steps after this day.
2. Groundrules - As a group, we lay out ground rules for the day, what are our expectations of our own behavior, what is the culture of our day?
3. Project South timeline exercise – When did you first begin to recognize injustice?
4. Building a Twin Cities movement map – First, begin with ourselves using one color of marker. Draw a map showing who is in the room by showing what we are involved in. (EG: Draw squares representing issue/movement fronts with your name in them, draw lines between those you are involved in, others add their name to the squares they share or add new squares, until we have a map showing what we are all involved in. After this is complete, take another color marker and draw squares showing the issues/movement fronts not in the room until we have a two-color map that includes us and those not in the room.)
5. US Social Forum report backs – build on what the map by reporting back on what we experienced, were excited by, were inspired by, were confused by in terms of the US Social Forum. Whenever possible, direct it to our work here. If at all possible, add the information (when appropriate) to the TC movement map we’ve just drawn.
6. Where do we go from here? What is the container that will carry us during the next steps? How are we going to keep moving forward during this phase of our Twin Cities movement-building work (how will we set dates, find places for those dates to meet, send reminder emails, reach out to new folks when appropriate, bring new folks in, keep minutes, keep track of the flow from meeting to meeting, remember where we are going, be a point person if someone wants info on what we’re doing, how do we transmit that info, etc.)
7. Next steps.
June 21, 2007 3:30 – 6:30
Please bring snacks to share and bring your own beverage.
1. Why are we here? Collective exercise but also presented by one of the facilitators including how we imagined this agenda and what, in putting it together, we talked about and imagined as next possible steps after this day.
2. Groundrules - As a group, we lay out ground rules for the day, what are our expectations of our own behavior, what is the culture of our day?
3. Project South timeline exercise – When did you first begin to recognize injustice?
4. Building a Twin Cities movement map – First, begin with ourselves using one color of marker. Draw a map showing who is in the room by showing what we are involved in. (EG: Draw squares representing issue/movement fronts with your name in them, draw lines between those you are involved in, others add their name to the squares they share or add new squares, until we have a map showing what we are all involved in. After this is complete, take another color marker and draw squares showing the issues/movement fronts not in the room until we have a two-color map that includes us and those not in the room.)
5. US Social Forum report backs – build on what the map by reporting back on what we experienced, were excited by, were inspired by, were confused by in terms of the US Social Forum. Whenever possible, direct it to our work here. If at all possible, add the information (when appropriate) to the TC movement map we’ve just drawn.
6. Where do we go from here? What is the container that will carry us during the next steps? How are we going to keep moving forward during this phase of our Twin Cities movement-building work (how will we set dates, find places for those dates to meet, send reminder emails, reach out to new folks when appropriate, bring new folks in, keep minutes, keep track of the flow from meeting to meeting, remember where we are going, be a point person if someone wants info on what we’re doing, how do we transmit that info, etc.)
7. Next steps.
Twin Cities USSF Mtg. TOMORROW, Sat. 7/21 -- NEW LOCATION!
Hi everyone,
Thisis a reminder and clarification about our meeting, this Saturday, 3:30 - 6:30pm to connect and strategize in the aftermath of the US Social Forum. THE MEETING WILL BE HELD AT THE PLYMOUTH CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH, which is at 1900 Nicollet Ave, near the intersection of Nicollet and Franklin in Minneapolis and is accessible by the #2 and #18 buses.
Please bring some snacks to share and a beverage and email back to let us know if you'll be coming (if you've already replied to previous emails saying you can come or not, there's no need to do so again).
Charlotte Albrecht
Thisis a reminder and clarification about our meeting, this Saturday, 3:30 - 6:30pm to connect and strategize in the aftermath of the US Social Forum. THE MEETING WILL BE HELD AT THE PLYMOUTH CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH, which is at 1900 Nicollet Ave, near the intersection of Nicollet and Franklin in Minneapolis and is accessible by the #2 and #18 buses.
Please bring some snacks to share and a beverage and email back to let us know if you'll be coming (if you've already replied to previous emails saying you can come or not, there's no need to do so again).
Charlotte Albrecht
Reflections on the U.S. Social Forum: Three Cautions for the Future of the Left
Published on Wednesday, July 18, 2007 by CommonDreams.org
Reflections on the US Social Forum: Three Cautions for the Future of the Left
by Sally Kohn
A few weeks ago, I attended the first-ever United States Social Forum, June 27 to July 1, 2007 in Atlanta, Georgia. It was an awe-inspiring event, bringing together over 15,000 grassroots activists from every issue area and every corner of the United States. And while the conferences
I'm used to anyway are populated by slick white men in suits who work for glossy advocacy organizations in Washington, the Social Forum was dominated by members of community-based organizations who more often wore colorful matching t-shirts detailing their group's origins and their proud participation in Atlanta. And as far as I could tell, most of the participants were people of color, again a far cry from the elite and exclusive gatherings that often claim to represent "the left".
Without question, we need a profound, broad-based movement for cultural, political and economic transformation of the United States - and we need it soon. And being at the US Social Forum prickled my skin with the inexplicable but tangible sense that a social justice movement in the United States is really possible. Like static electricity hanging pregnant in the air, there is an exciting potential for movement to spark.
But in addition to displaying the many parts of our social justice infrastructure up to the task — grassroots organizing groups and popular education work and strong, community leaders humming all around us like charged particles — the US Social Forum also revealed some of the worst of our field. Sectarian bad habits kept us fighting among ourselves and scrutinizing our own navels rather than using the historic gathering space of the forum to actually challenge ourselves and each other, articulate a bold vision for the future and develop a shared strategy for action. If we're ever to build a truly powerful, multi-issue movement for economic, political and social justice, we must overcome the following barriers that loomed large at the US Social Forum - which I attribute to dangerous patterns across the left more so than the particular organizers of the Forum, many of whom raised the same concerns.
1. We must be allies, not enemies!
At the US Social Forum, one group of immigrant-led organizations nastily attacked another because of disagreements over pursuing immigration reform strategy. A Jewish woman who tried to make a statement sympathetic with Palestinians was publicly attacked as anti-Arab and anti-Islam. One peace activist was attacked with a pie was thrown in her face by others calling her a sell-out.
As someone once said, "With friends like these, who needs enemies?" Is that really where to best concentrate our energy, on attacking those who are slightly to the left or right of us on any given issue but generally otherwise in agreement? Don't we have more important things to do?
At one point, I left the Social Forum to visit the museum dedicated to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. King, who was heartily evoked throughout the forum, preached non-violence and compassion for our opponents. He also was attacked by many on the far-left as a sell-out in his day, for working with the federal government to pass imperfect yet necessary civil rights legislation. Are the immigrant rights groups who pushed for reform legislation any different? Would King have had a pie thrown in his face at the US Social Forum today?
History has taught us that successful social movements have involved a spectrum of ideologies. Malcolm X and the Black Panthers made King and others' demands seem "reasonable" and thus politically acceptable to center-right elites. Social movements that rely on totalitarian dogmatism fail. See, e.g., communism everywhere. Before the US Social Forum, I thought the American left had learned this lesson and believed in compassion and respect for differences. Now I'm not so sure. The US Social Forum was a hot bed of ugly and disrespectful sectarian attacks lobbed by the self-righteous far-left against the merely left-of-center-left. Is it possible that we could appreciate the need for diversity and difference of opinion within the left and cultivate a new habit of respectful yet robust debate - rather than pie throwing?
2. Identity does not equal politics
Political correctness and identity politics have been much maligned on the left and right. At their best, these notions challenge us to remedy past habits of exclusion and elitism, include the full spectrum of human diversity in our movement building and society in general, and give voice to multiple perspectives and not just those that generally dominate. But identity politics fails us when we treat racial, ethnic and sexual diversity as a proxy for political and ideological diversity. They're not necessarily interchangeable.
On each plenary at the US Social Forum, for instance, there were as many as eight speakers who were extremely diverse in terms of identity but barely so in terms of politics. Speakers who looked different from one another nonetheless repeated the same rhetoric over and over again. Much of it was identity-based shout-outs, how we have to connect this issue or that with the GLBT community or we can't ignore the plight of women in one situation or another. That's all important — the whole point to identity politics is to include in the political conversation and process those who have been horribly excluded for so long. But we can't stop at the politics of recognition. If we don't go any deeper — to not just talk about why we have to connect our issues but have the challenging conversations about how we make these connections in practice, to not just care about who is on stage but also what they have to say — otherwise, aren't we the self-imposed victims of the tokenism we say we reject?
And if at a gathering of 15,000 left-wing social justice activists who in their daily work and struggle are trying to bring voice and power to those most often left behind, our main internal priority is still the main fight to be fought internally, see point #1 above. Sure, some of the straight folks at the forum could use more analysis around issues of homophobia and gender identity. And sure, the non-Native folks there probably need to learn much more about Native history and struggles. But frankly just trotting out a diverse set of faces and giving rhetorical lip service to these issues isn't much progress in that direction. Rather than saying simply, "We have to respect and include Native communities," followed by a show of solidarity in the form of applause, what if we were really engaged and challenged to think about why Native communities and issues are often last on our laundry list of progressive causes, or what it means for American activists who so often despise the nation-state to nonetheless champion Native sovereignty? What if our solidarity came in the form of rigorous thinking, rather than ceremonial clapping?
The point of identity politics isn't to rank the issues or perspectives of one community as more important than another but, rather, to use the often intense experiences of inequality and discrimination faced by some communities as a lens for better understanding the injustice faced by all of us. In other words, diversity and inclusion are vital but we can't just stop there.
3. We need positive alternatives, not just critique
Along the same lines, we have to do more than just complain about the problems in society. Analysis and critique are very important. We need to understand structural racism, how it's perpetuated in society's political and cultural crevices and the polluting impact it has in our communities. We need to understand economic inequality, how the economy is designed to produce injustice, how that injustice is manifest. But cathartic though it might be, it's not enough to just complain and critique. If we believe another world is possible and are about building power in communities to achieve that alternative future, then we have to set about the task of actually describing what that future should be.
That's hard. We know what we're against, but we're not entirely sure what we're for. And to the point above, it's much easier to prove you belong in the progressive club by throwing down some fierce analysis of war and militarism and the connection to the prison industrial complex. But what's your alternative solution? Is war necessary and sometimes just? If we can't prevent all crimes, do we think prison is sometimes okay or what's our alternative? At the level of critique and analysis, we're damn good at exchanging rhetorical hi-fives. But what if you and I disagree at the level of vision? Or worse, what if I don't even have a vision at all? It's a much more vulnerable position to be in.
At a meeting I was at recently, a grassroots activist said, "We wouldn't know what to do with power if we got it. We haven't had that meeting yet!" Power, of course, isn't a end but a means to and end. What will the world look like when we, the people, have the power to change it? Critique and analysis are important but not enough. Part of building power is planning for power. And we must build our future vision along the way. From the worker-owned cooperative businesses to models of participatory democracy, examples are springing up across the country of an alternative vision in action. Our power comes not only from critiquing what is but envisioning what will be and inspiring millions with the vivid reality that another world is possible. At social justice gatherings going forward, we should do more than dwell on the many problems in society and talk about how we need alternatives. We should discuss what those alternatives actually are.
Comments or critiques of this article are welcome and invited. Please send them to skohn@communitychange.org . Pies? I prefer banana cream.
Sally Kohn is the director of the Movement Vision Lab at the Center for Community Change, supporting grassroots leaders across the United States to explore and debate visionary ideas for the future.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Discuss this story Discuss this story Printer Friendly Version Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
12 Comments so far
1.
Rodso64 July 18th, 2007 12:19 pm
Huzzah, my lady! Your three points are well taken. I worry, though, about the Left's ability to take heed. Twenty years ago, I worked as a volunteer at the California State Democratic Party convention, and I saw much of the same thing: Many great ideas and many good intentions hamstrung by petty bickering. Mostly over who deserved the title of "Most Abused Victims of All Time".
"Political Correctness" is a much-abused term that, at its heart, really means simply "fashionable politeness". I have not EVER been a fan of fashion, but I remain a staunch defender of politeness in human affairs. It's this simple, folks: How good or bad the world turns out actually really does come down to a question of how much respect (yes, I'll use the 'flabby' word) niceness are YOU, as an individual, going to show THAT PERSON in front of you now, regardless of how different OR alike you both are.
2.
eshu July 18th, 2007 12:22 pm
What you identify as the "far left" attacking merely the "left of center" is in reality a mismash of perspectives.
Your critique of the attacks on the pro-Palestinian statement dont' make sense if we do not know what was said. A lot of people on the "left" who imagine themselves pro-Palestinian quite naively continue to endorse a "peace" process which is overseen by the west and Israel. To critique such a position is not to be "pure" in one's politics, it is simply to recognize concrete conditions on the ground and call for clarity. The Palestinians have a full and unconditional right to autonomy, whether Israel or the United States recognize it or not, and hence, any resistance they mount, despite the contradictions of such a resistance, must be given supportive criticism, not merely critical support. The difference between the two positions is complex and immense, as at the end of the day, no one in the west has anything to say about Palestine short of full support for liberation that anyone in the Middle East should have to listen to anyway. As for the rights of the Jewish population to a homeland, that too should be respected, but it must come with full recognition of the rights of the Palestinian people to return. That comes first. There has never been any rhyme or reason behind the concept that Palestine should pay for what the European did to European Jewery sixty years ago, and those who do not understand that little piece don't understand much about the debacle in the Middle East right now. So, unless you'd care to outline what the actual dispute was in the situation you alluded to, your lack of detail hazes the issue, and incidentally, due to its lack of clarity, comes off as an attack and adds to the sectarian behavior you are so allegedly concerned about.
As for the pie incident, Medea and her supporters need to get a sense of humor. To suggest she has never been guilty of grandstanding, or that her schtick in front of the camera isn't exhausting at moments, is ridiculous. She got a pie in the face because she's well deserving of same. She is a pompous ass much of the time, and ridicule is an appropriate response to that. In fact, it's the American way, if you want to get culture specific. Be glad you're not in a tendency that just meets Benjamin's self-righteousness with a baseball bat. You know they're out there.
Speaking of the American way, the splitting and arguing you're looking at is a natural part of a political culture steeped in spectacular reference and political leadership that spends much of its time posing for the cameras. That's not going to be outgrown in a short time simply by calling for unity. There are serious political disputes that must get worked out, concrete questions that must get addressed, platforms to be constructed. That won't come without splits. If you actually believe that you're going to build a majoritarian movement that's going to overturn this mess simply by calling for unity, you are quite mistaken, and need to look at real U.S. history. It will be a minority faction, united around a real concrete program, that will carry this thing forward. It will attain majority support only through long, hard, experience and error, and constantly correcting itself through concrete tactics, as opposed to Medea- type media events.
And if you spent any time studying or analyzing the history of communism, which you denigrate as a totalitarian movement, but which, up to this point in history, has been the only successful mass movement in opposition to imperialism and the corporate state, you'd understand that. Communism must be understood as an outgrowth of the capitalist war on the world, otherwise, you'll never understand it. If you oppose stalinism, you have a responsibility to get clear on the actual consequences of capitalist mayhem. New Orleans is the truest indicator of who these bastards are. Get busy studying.
You've got a lot of damn homework to do just like the rest of us, so you need not get all righteous in your calls for unity. Unity brokers are every bit as capable of being sectarian and vicious as any "ultra left" group. As a veteran of the labor movement, and having been on the receiving end of "mainstream" union thuggery and it's unity broking friends, I can assure you that political purity is a disease not unknown to the center. No one was more of a centrist then Joseph Stalin. So cool your jets. There's a long, hard road ahead. You're not anywhere near as open or prepared as you present yourself being.
—M. Hureaux, Seattle
3.
eshu July 18th, 2007 12:28 pm
As for the first commenter here, the "democrats" aren't even in it, and haven't been for a long time. The democrats are full of beans, they were twenty years ago when I was still working with them, and they exist to confuse and mislead. Screw that noise.
Respect for your perspective compels me to be honest with you, however painful we both may find it. Anything else is just passive aggressive bullshit.
Finally, both the columnist, and her respondee, need to understand Medea Benjamin doesn't even reach up to MLK's shoelaces. No one's talking political purity here. We're talking integrity. And she hasn't found it yet, despite her posing.
4.
Bobus July 18th, 2007 12:41 pm
To start is to stop thinking in terms of right and left as this is exactly what the ruling powers want everybody to think. There is great but unpublished work of Paul Ray that put the political map in much better perspective and this is not based on just theoretical speculation.
http://www.culturalcreatives.org/Library/docs/NewPoliticalCompassV73.pdf
We also need to understand what unites all the movements. Clearly, it is rebellion against the ruling Moderns culture and its principles which are embodied by all the ruling powers. Yet, that rebellion always starts in one particular area of life. This is represented by particular social movements as against the war, saving the earth, civil rights, etc. Individually, rebellion seems to be spreading to other parts of our individual lives, gradually but accelerating. That is why those who oppose third world exploitation can also be involved, for instance, in organics or alternative medicine. And vice versa.
Sally is right that the problem, the ultimate problem is that we know what we fight against but we don't know what we want to replace it with. Apparently, "it is all about economy, stupid". And it is, because we all want to live and most of us want to live well. Here is the really bad news. Is there a realistic economic model that can address goals of all these various individual "against" movements? If we want to save the earth, how can we support lives of 6.5 billions people? Something must die.
Meanwhile, Democrats and Republicans fight who will be the next version of the rulling Moderns powers…
5.
conscience July 18th, 2007 12:44 pm
Articles like this of lesser quality have from time to time given me concern about whose minding the store at Common Dreams. Democrats can surely take criticism . . .
But the old Republican rag of a story that attacking hate speech is merely attacking politically correct expression simply paves the way for the fascist Supreme Court to now tell us that "Integration is Discrimination."
6.
alamac July 18th, 2007 12:54 pm
Yeah. It's the "herding cats" problem–lefties are damned independent thinkers who each have fervently-held beliefs and the will to back them up.
So we are cursed by our big advantage–we are thinkers who live by the mantra "Don't follow leaders & watch your parking meters". Sheep follow blindly and as a pack. Cats, on the other hand, do what they think is right, the rest of the world be damned.
I have thought long and hard about this and don't see a solution. Ironically, it may take a Neil Young-style "Leader" to create the buzz and will to overcome our parochialism and work together (for once) to accomplish real change.
Note to Neil, though: It isn't Obama, and not because he's "too young", but because he's too korporatist. And it isn't a "woman" because the only one in the race is the hyper-korporatist Klintstone.
So back to the drawing board. Signed– >^..^<
7.
Vern July 18th, 2007 1:13 pm
"The US Social Forum was a hot bed of ugly and disrespectful sectarian attacks lobbed by the self-righteous far-left against the merely left-of-center-left. Is it possible that we could appreciate the need for diversity and difference of opinion within the left and cultivate a new habit of respectful yet robust debate - rather than pie throwing?"
Garbage. Go to any of the "progressive" forums on the net and you will see the "far-left" constantly hounded, sneered at, condemned, red-baited, censored and thrown off by "the merely left-of-center-left" (note how the author frames the far-left as self-righteous and the centrists as "merely")Cindy Sheehan is a case in point. There is more venom directed at her by mindless centrists than targeting the Bush administration. It is amazing how people are so easily hoodwinked and absorb the talking points targeting the Left. Of course, that is what both parties fear the most–a populist uprising championing social and economic justice and end to imperial looting that drain or treasury for the enrichment of the few. FDR actually preserved capitalism by adopting some socialism, thereby providing checks and balances, but there is increasing unfairness and a rolling back of protections and accountability–and little room in the Democratic party anymore for true advocates to weld any influence. It is all bought and sold. So, I take some offense that the author says we should play nice with the centrists–they don't play nice with us–I have seen "Commondreams" referred to as the Left's equiviliant of Fox News", when they are closer in philosophy to Fox news.
The Left needs and should have the right to stridently say no to a "Left" who aligns itself more often than not with the Right. We are not allies when they are the ones who drag down Nader, joke about Kucinich, dismiss Michael Moore, attack Cindy Sheehan and demand that we line up behind Hillary Clinton.
8.
John Freeman July 18th, 2007 1:16 pm
Socialism, as in the Northern European countries or as emerging in South America sounds like the best solution to me. Communism and Capitalism are both proven failures, countries who opted for Socialism seem to have a lot more happy people living there. I do not really care if the rich are not rich enough, it's the status of the poor that define a country. Ours? Well, just look around and see what you think.
9.
gleibman July 18th, 2007 2:04 pm
Regarding point 3, for a positive alternative to capitalism/corporatism, check out parecon (participatory economics), a vision largely shaped by Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel. It contains ideas from socialism, but diverges from classical Marxism in several ways, for example, it replaces the Marxist two class model of proletarians and capitalists with one including a "coordinator" class–people who, without owning businesses (as capitalists do), are still a priveleged elite in that they have power over other workers as managers, lawyers, doctors, etc. Parecon is discussed and debated at http://www.zmag.org/parecon/indexnew.htm.
10.
dponcy July 18th, 2007 2:22 pm
Vern, I don't know where you come from politically, but I think you have a misunderstanding of what people are talking about when they refer to the "far-left".
The far left I know are the one's who "drag down Nader, joke about Kucinich, dismiss Michael Moore, attack Cindy Sheehan and demand that we line up behind" …The Revolution. That is, their particular sectarian vision of The Revolution. Some of these folks are Trotskyists, some anarchists, some environmentalists, some other ists, but they are all absolutist and unbending about their issue, or their "analysis". To them, Kucinich, et al, are all sell-outs.
As an organizer on the ("sellout" democratic socialist) left for over two decades, I can assure you that this divisiveness is rampant. Every group I have been involved with for more than a year or so has made itself irrelevent through this sectarian bickering.
This sectarianism, of course, is not limited to the "far left". It exists everywhere on the broader left, including the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, the Greens, etc.
Time for unity or death. We get to choose.
11.
dponcy July 18th, 2007 2:42 pm
12.
Vern July 18th, 2007 2:50 pm
It occured to me that I might be using the wrong scale within the context of the event, but it still holds true across the board. Sometimes I see this niche stuff at ANSWER rallies and it can be alienating, and groups like the Greens have become gated communities unto themselves–totally irrelevant. Some on the Left become so doctrinaire they don't even deal with in the moment situations. So, what good are they? The Left has to push to get their voices and ideas out there–what good is it to withdraw into isolated ivory towers? Don't know the answer but will continue to push.
Reflections on the US Social Forum: Three Cautions for the Future of the Left
by Sally Kohn
A few weeks ago, I attended the first-ever United States Social Forum, June 27 to July 1, 2007 in Atlanta, Georgia. It was an awe-inspiring event, bringing together over 15,000 grassroots activists from every issue area and every corner of the United States. And while the conferences
I'm used to anyway are populated by slick white men in suits who work for glossy advocacy organizations in Washington, the Social Forum was dominated by members of community-based organizations who more often wore colorful matching t-shirts detailing their group's origins and their proud participation in Atlanta. And as far as I could tell, most of the participants were people of color, again a far cry from the elite and exclusive gatherings that often claim to represent "the left".
Without question, we need a profound, broad-based movement for cultural, political and economic transformation of the United States - and we need it soon. And being at the US Social Forum prickled my skin with the inexplicable but tangible sense that a social justice movement in the United States is really possible. Like static electricity hanging pregnant in the air, there is an exciting potential for movement to spark.
But in addition to displaying the many parts of our social justice infrastructure up to the task — grassroots organizing groups and popular education work and strong, community leaders humming all around us like charged particles — the US Social Forum also revealed some of the worst of our field. Sectarian bad habits kept us fighting among ourselves and scrutinizing our own navels rather than using the historic gathering space of the forum to actually challenge ourselves and each other, articulate a bold vision for the future and develop a shared strategy for action. If we're ever to build a truly powerful, multi-issue movement for economic, political and social justice, we must overcome the following barriers that loomed large at the US Social Forum - which I attribute to dangerous patterns across the left more so than the particular organizers of the Forum, many of whom raised the same concerns.
1. We must be allies, not enemies!
At the US Social Forum, one group of immigrant-led organizations nastily attacked another because of disagreements over pursuing immigration reform strategy. A Jewish woman who tried to make a statement sympathetic with Palestinians was publicly attacked as anti-Arab and anti-Islam. One peace activist was attacked with a pie was thrown in her face by others calling her a sell-out.
As someone once said, "With friends like these, who needs enemies?" Is that really where to best concentrate our energy, on attacking those who are slightly to the left or right of us on any given issue but generally otherwise in agreement? Don't we have more important things to do?
At one point, I left the Social Forum to visit the museum dedicated to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. King, who was heartily evoked throughout the forum, preached non-violence and compassion for our opponents. He also was attacked by many on the far-left as a sell-out in his day, for working with the federal government to pass imperfect yet necessary civil rights legislation. Are the immigrant rights groups who pushed for reform legislation any different? Would King have had a pie thrown in his face at the US Social Forum today?
History has taught us that successful social movements have involved a spectrum of ideologies. Malcolm X and the Black Panthers made King and others' demands seem "reasonable" and thus politically acceptable to center-right elites. Social movements that rely on totalitarian dogmatism fail. See, e.g., communism everywhere. Before the US Social Forum, I thought the American left had learned this lesson and believed in compassion and respect for differences. Now I'm not so sure. The US Social Forum was a hot bed of ugly and disrespectful sectarian attacks lobbed by the self-righteous far-left against the merely left-of-center-left. Is it possible that we could appreciate the need for diversity and difference of opinion within the left and cultivate a new habit of respectful yet robust debate - rather than pie throwing?
2. Identity does not equal politics
Political correctness and identity politics have been much maligned on the left and right. At their best, these notions challenge us to remedy past habits of exclusion and elitism, include the full spectrum of human diversity in our movement building and society in general, and give voice to multiple perspectives and not just those that generally dominate. But identity politics fails us when we treat racial, ethnic and sexual diversity as a proxy for political and ideological diversity. They're not necessarily interchangeable.
On each plenary at the US Social Forum, for instance, there were as many as eight speakers who were extremely diverse in terms of identity but barely so in terms of politics. Speakers who looked different from one another nonetheless repeated the same rhetoric over and over again. Much of it was identity-based shout-outs, how we have to connect this issue or that with the GLBT community or we can't ignore the plight of women in one situation or another. That's all important — the whole point to identity politics is to include in the political conversation and process those who have been horribly excluded for so long. But we can't stop at the politics of recognition. If we don't go any deeper — to not just talk about why we have to connect our issues but have the challenging conversations about how we make these connections in practice, to not just care about who is on stage but also what they have to say — otherwise, aren't we the self-imposed victims of the tokenism we say we reject?
And if at a gathering of 15,000 left-wing social justice activists who in their daily work and struggle are trying to bring voice and power to those most often left behind, our main internal priority is still the main fight to be fought internally, see point #1 above. Sure, some of the straight folks at the forum could use more analysis around issues of homophobia and gender identity. And sure, the non-Native folks there probably need to learn much more about Native history and struggles. But frankly just trotting out a diverse set of faces and giving rhetorical lip service to these issues isn't much progress in that direction. Rather than saying simply, "We have to respect and include Native communities," followed by a show of solidarity in the form of applause, what if we were really engaged and challenged to think about why Native communities and issues are often last on our laundry list of progressive causes, or what it means for American activists who so often despise the nation-state to nonetheless champion Native sovereignty? What if our solidarity came in the form of rigorous thinking, rather than ceremonial clapping?
The point of identity politics isn't to rank the issues or perspectives of one community as more important than another but, rather, to use the often intense experiences of inequality and discrimination faced by some communities as a lens for better understanding the injustice faced by all of us. In other words, diversity and inclusion are vital but we can't just stop there.
3. We need positive alternatives, not just critique
Along the same lines, we have to do more than just complain about the problems in society. Analysis and critique are very important. We need to understand structural racism, how it's perpetuated in society's political and cultural crevices and the polluting impact it has in our communities. We need to understand economic inequality, how the economy is designed to produce injustice, how that injustice is manifest. But cathartic though it might be, it's not enough to just complain and critique. If we believe another world is possible and are about building power in communities to achieve that alternative future, then we have to set about the task of actually describing what that future should be.
That's hard. We know what we're against, but we're not entirely sure what we're for. And to the point above, it's much easier to prove you belong in the progressive club by throwing down some fierce analysis of war and militarism and the connection to the prison industrial complex. But what's your alternative solution? Is war necessary and sometimes just? If we can't prevent all crimes, do we think prison is sometimes okay or what's our alternative? At the level of critique and analysis, we're damn good at exchanging rhetorical hi-fives. But what if you and I disagree at the level of vision? Or worse, what if I don't even have a vision at all? It's a much more vulnerable position to be in.
At a meeting I was at recently, a grassroots activist said, "We wouldn't know what to do with power if we got it. We haven't had that meeting yet!" Power, of course, isn't a end but a means to and end. What will the world look like when we, the people, have the power to change it? Critique and analysis are important but not enough. Part of building power is planning for power. And we must build our future vision along the way. From the worker-owned cooperative businesses to models of participatory democracy, examples are springing up across the country of an alternative vision in action. Our power comes not only from critiquing what is but envisioning what will be and inspiring millions with the vivid reality that another world is possible. At social justice gatherings going forward, we should do more than dwell on the many problems in society and talk about how we need alternatives. We should discuss what those alternatives actually are.
Comments or critiques of this article are welcome and invited. Please send them to skohn@communitychange.org . Pies? I prefer banana cream.
Sally Kohn is the director of the Movement Vision Lab at the Center for Community Change, supporting grassroots leaders across the United States to explore and debate visionary ideas for the future.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Discuss this story Discuss this story Printer Friendly Version Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
12 Comments so far
1.
Rodso64 July 18th, 2007 12:19 pm
Huzzah, my lady! Your three points are well taken. I worry, though, about the Left's ability to take heed. Twenty years ago, I worked as a volunteer at the California State Democratic Party convention, and I saw much of the same thing: Many great ideas and many good intentions hamstrung by petty bickering. Mostly over who deserved the title of "Most Abused Victims of All Time".
"Political Correctness" is a much-abused term that, at its heart, really means simply "fashionable politeness". I have not EVER been a fan of fashion, but I remain a staunch defender of politeness in human affairs. It's this simple, folks: How good or bad the world turns out actually really does come down to a question of how much respect (yes, I'll use the 'flabby' word) niceness are YOU, as an individual, going to show THAT PERSON in front of you now, regardless of how different OR alike you both are.
2.
eshu July 18th, 2007 12:22 pm
What you identify as the "far left" attacking merely the "left of center" is in reality a mismash of perspectives.
Your critique of the attacks on the pro-Palestinian statement dont' make sense if we do not know what was said. A lot of people on the "left" who imagine themselves pro-Palestinian quite naively continue to endorse a "peace" process which is overseen by the west and Israel. To critique such a position is not to be "pure" in one's politics, it is simply to recognize concrete conditions on the ground and call for clarity. The Palestinians have a full and unconditional right to autonomy, whether Israel or the United States recognize it or not, and hence, any resistance they mount, despite the contradictions of such a resistance, must be given supportive criticism, not merely critical support. The difference between the two positions is complex and immense, as at the end of the day, no one in the west has anything to say about Palestine short of full support for liberation that anyone in the Middle East should have to listen to anyway. As for the rights of the Jewish population to a homeland, that too should be respected, but it must come with full recognition of the rights of the Palestinian people to return. That comes first. There has never been any rhyme or reason behind the concept that Palestine should pay for what the European did to European Jewery sixty years ago, and those who do not understand that little piece don't understand much about the debacle in the Middle East right now. So, unless you'd care to outline what the actual dispute was in the situation you alluded to, your lack of detail hazes the issue, and incidentally, due to its lack of clarity, comes off as an attack and adds to the sectarian behavior you are so allegedly concerned about.
As for the pie incident, Medea and her supporters need to get a sense of humor. To suggest she has never been guilty of grandstanding, or that her schtick in front of the camera isn't exhausting at moments, is ridiculous. She got a pie in the face because she's well deserving of same. She is a pompous ass much of the time, and ridicule is an appropriate response to that. In fact, it's the American way, if you want to get culture specific. Be glad you're not in a tendency that just meets Benjamin's self-righteousness with a baseball bat. You know they're out there.
Speaking of the American way, the splitting and arguing you're looking at is a natural part of a political culture steeped in spectacular reference and political leadership that spends much of its time posing for the cameras. That's not going to be outgrown in a short time simply by calling for unity. There are serious political disputes that must get worked out, concrete questions that must get addressed, platforms to be constructed. That won't come without splits. If you actually believe that you're going to build a majoritarian movement that's going to overturn this mess simply by calling for unity, you are quite mistaken, and need to look at real U.S. history. It will be a minority faction, united around a real concrete program, that will carry this thing forward. It will attain majority support only through long, hard, experience and error, and constantly correcting itself through concrete tactics, as opposed to Medea- type media events.
And if you spent any time studying or analyzing the history of communism, which you denigrate as a totalitarian movement, but which, up to this point in history, has been the only successful mass movement in opposition to imperialism and the corporate state, you'd understand that. Communism must be understood as an outgrowth of the capitalist war on the world, otherwise, you'll never understand it. If you oppose stalinism, you have a responsibility to get clear on the actual consequences of capitalist mayhem. New Orleans is the truest indicator of who these bastards are. Get busy studying.
You've got a lot of damn homework to do just like the rest of us, so you need not get all righteous in your calls for unity. Unity brokers are every bit as capable of being sectarian and vicious as any "ultra left" group. As a veteran of the labor movement, and having been on the receiving end of "mainstream" union thuggery and it's unity broking friends, I can assure you that political purity is a disease not unknown to the center. No one was more of a centrist then Joseph Stalin. So cool your jets. There's a long, hard road ahead. You're not anywhere near as open or prepared as you present yourself being.
—M. Hureaux, Seattle
3.
eshu July 18th, 2007 12:28 pm
As for the first commenter here, the "democrats" aren't even in it, and haven't been for a long time. The democrats are full of beans, they were twenty years ago when I was still working with them, and they exist to confuse and mislead. Screw that noise.
Respect for your perspective compels me to be honest with you, however painful we both may find it. Anything else is just passive aggressive bullshit.
Finally, both the columnist, and her respondee, need to understand Medea Benjamin doesn't even reach up to MLK's shoelaces. No one's talking political purity here. We're talking integrity. And she hasn't found it yet, despite her posing.
4.
Bobus July 18th, 2007 12:41 pm
To start is to stop thinking in terms of right and left as this is exactly what the ruling powers want everybody to think. There is great but unpublished work of Paul Ray that put the political map in much better perspective and this is not based on just theoretical speculation.
http://www.culturalcreatives.org/Library/docs/NewPoliticalCompassV73.pdf
We also need to understand what unites all the movements. Clearly, it is rebellion against the ruling Moderns culture and its principles which are embodied by all the ruling powers. Yet, that rebellion always starts in one particular area of life. This is represented by particular social movements as against the war, saving the earth, civil rights, etc. Individually, rebellion seems to be spreading to other parts of our individual lives, gradually but accelerating. That is why those who oppose third world exploitation can also be involved, for instance, in organics or alternative medicine. And vice versa.
Sally is right that the problem, the ultimate problem is that we know what we fight against but we don't know what we want to replace it with. Apparently, "it is all about economy, stupid". And it is, because we all want to live and most of us want to live well. Here is the really bad news. Is there a realistic economic model that can address goals of all these various individual "against" movements? If we want to save the earth, how can we support lives of 6.5 billions people? Something must die.
Meanwhile, Democrats and Republicans fight who will be the next version of the rulling Moderns powers…
5.
conscience July 18th, 2007 12:44 pm
Articles like this of lesser quality have from time to time given me concern about whose minding the store at Common Dreams. Democrats can surely take criticism . . .
But the old Republican rag of a story that attacking hate speech is merely attacking politically correct expression simply paves the way for the fascist Supreme Court to now tell us that "Integration is Discrimination."
6.
alamac July 18th, 2007 12:54 pm
Yeah. It's the "herding cats" problem–lefties are damned independent thinkers who each have fervently-held beliefs and the will to back them up.
So we are cursed by our big advantage–we are thinkers who live by the mantra "Don't follow leaders & watch your parking meters". Sheep follow blindly and as a pack. Cats, on the other hand, do what they think is right, the rest of the world be damned.
I have thought long and hard about this and don't see a solution. Ironically, it may take a Neil Young-style "Leader" to create the buzz and will to overcome our parochialism and work together (for once) to accomplish real change.
Note to Neil, though: It isn't Obama, and not because he's "too young", but because he's too korporatist. And it isn't a "woman" because the only one in the race is the hyper-korporatist Klintstone.
So back to the drawing board. Signed– >^..^<
7.
Vern July 18th, 2007 1:13 pm
"The US Social Forum was a hot bed of ugly and disrespectful sectarian attacks lobbed by the self-righteous far-left against the merely left-of-center-left. Is it possible that we could appreciate the need for diversity and difference of opinion within the left and cultivate a new habit of respectful yet robust debate - rather than pie throwing?"
Garbage. Go to any of the "progressive" forums on the net and you will see the "far-left" constantly hounded, sneered at, condemned, red-baited, censored and thrown off by "the merely left-of-center-left" (note how the author frames the far-left as self-righteous and the centrists as "merely")Cindy Sheehan is a case in point. There is more venom directed at her by mindless centrists than targeting the Bush administration. It is amazing how people are so easily hoodwinked and absorb the talking points targeting the Left. Of course, that is what both parties fear the most–a populist uprising championing social and economic justice and end to imperial looting that drain or treasury for the enrichment of the few. FDR actually preserved capitalism by adopting some socialism, thereby providing checks and balances, but there is increasing unfairness and a rolling back of protections and accountability–and little room in the Democratic party anymore for true advocates to weld any influence. It is all bought and sold. So, I take some offense that the author says we should play nice with the centrists–they don't play nice with us–I have seen "Commondreams" referred to as the Left's equiviliant of Fox News", when they are closer in philosophy to Fox news.
The Left needs and should have the right to stridently say no to a "Left" who aligns itself more often than not with the Right. We are not allies when they are the ones who drag down Nader, joke about Kucinich, dismiss Michael Moore, attack Cindy Sheehan and demand that we line up behind Hillary Clinton.
8.
John Freeman July 18th, 2007 1:16 pm
Socialism, as in the Northern European countries or as emerging in South America sounds like the best solution to me. Communism and Capitalism are both proven failures, countries who opted for Socialism seem to have a lot more happy people living there. I do not really care if the rich are not rich enough, it's the status of the poor that define a country. Ours? Well, just look around and see what you think.
9.
gleibman July 18th, 2007 2:04 pm
Regarding point 3, for a positive alternative to capitalism/corporatism, check out parecon (participatory economics), a vision largely shaped by Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel. It contains ideas from socialism, but diverges from classical Marxism in several ways, for example, it replaces the Marxist two class model of proletarians and capitalists with one including a "coordinator" class–people who, without owning businesses (as capitalists do), are still a priveleged elite in that they have power over other workers as managers, lawyers, doctors, etc. Parecon is discussed and debated at http://www.zmag.org/parecon/indexnew.htm.
10.
dponcy July 18th, 2007 2:22 pm
Vern, I don't know where you come from politically, but I think you have a misunderstanding of what people are talking about when they refer to the "far-left".
The far left I know are the one's who "drag down Nader, joke about Kucinich, dismiss Michael Moore, attack Cindy Sheehan and demand that we line up behind" …The Revolution. That is, their particular sectarian vision of The Revolution. Some of these folks are Trotskyists, some anarchists, some environmentalists, some other ists, but they are all absolutist and unbending about their issue, or their "analysis". To them, Kucinich, et al, are all sell-outs.
As an organizer on the ("sellout" democratic socialist) left for over two decades, I can assure you that this divisiveness is rampant. Every group I have been involved with for more than a year or so has made itself irrelevent through this sectarian bickering.
This sectarianism, of course, is not limited to the "far left". It exists everywhere on the broader left, including the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, the Greens, etc.
Time for unity or death. We get to choose.
11.
dponcy July 18th, 2007 2:42 pm
12.
Vern July 18th, 2007 2:50 pm
It occured to me that I might be using the wrong scale within the context of the event, but it still holds true across the board. Sometimes I see this niche stuff at ANSWER rallies and it can be alienating, and groups like the Greens have become gated communities unto themselves–totally irrelevant. Some on the Left become so doctrinaire they don't even deal with in the moment situations. So, what good are they? The Left has to push to get their voices and ideas out there–what good is it to withdraw into isolated ivory towers? Don't know the answer but will continue to push.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)