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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)