[CIMC-work] w: [imc-us-process] Houston response: anti-semitism list

[Chris Kaihatsu]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Windmueller" <john at conflictresolver.com>
To: <imc-us-process at lists.indymedia.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 6:50 PM
Subject: RE: [imc-us-process] Houston response: anti-semitism list


> Hi everyone,
> 
> Two things about this I wanted to mention.  
> 
> 1. Because of the private responses from Indymedia participants I've
> received, I will be filling out the online form to request an
> anti-semitism discussion list.  Based on some of the discussion and
> concerns on imc-process, in the application I'm suggesting some
> groundrules to the list to help make sure that... 
> 
> a) the forum is not used as a way of making personal attacks against
> individuals or passing judgment on any IMC collective
> 
> b) the forum is not used by those outside indymedia to try and attack
> and harass the group
> 
> c) the forum is not used to forward some extreme view of antisemitsim
> that chills or blanket condemns the many rightful and just criticisms of
> Israel
> 
> d) the forum encourages members to not just discuss anti-semitism, but
> to participate in other forums, recognizing that there are larger
> dynamics of oppression (patriarchy, racism, etc.) that we all have an
> obligation to address as part of participating in the network
> 
> e) the forum also works to share ideas of how to defend the IMC against
> unjust accusations and persecutions of anti-semitism from government
> agencies and the right (e.g. Israel's very unjust attack against Israel
> IMC).  
> 
> This was not a request for the validity of this concern and desire for
> discussion to be put on trial.  Offhand I can't think of many indymedia
> discussions forums where even these sort of conditions or groundrules
> were needed as assurances just to allow folks to have the conversation
> about the concerns they want to have.  
> 
> I understand that some individuals are not interested in this
> discussion, or would rather discuss this in another context or format.
> I think that's great, and encourage them to create other lists to do
> that.  
> 
> 
> 2. I think it's unfair and inaccurate to pick me out personally and
> claim that I've somehow notably violated the IMC-Italy proposal on IMC
> Process.  Moreover, I think it's important to note both the unique
> treatment and the topic it surrounds.    
> 
> Formal proposals to imc-process should come from a collective and be in
> two languages.  But this was not a proposal or check for consensus, as
> creating a discussion list doesn't require that (unless creating an
> imc-antisemitsim discussion list is going to be singled out and treated
> differently).  
> 
> All English postings (that are not proposals) are fairly common on
> imc-process, for which other members have not been chastised or called
> in violation of the imc-italy proposal for in the same way.   
> 
> John
> p.s. I hope that anyone else who has ever wanted to have a discussion
> about a particular aspect of oppression will appreciate how frustrating
> and disheartening it can be to be put on trial for even raising the
> issue and be told that the discussion is only permissible if it's framed
> a certain way.  
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> imc-us-process mailing list
> imc-us-process at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-us-process
>