[CIMC-work] a good read, from us process

[Garth Liebhaber]

hey gang!
finished my movie!  here's a good read that's pertinent to 
our discussions on revisiting consensus and process,
mr g.

---- Begin Included Message ----

From: "k.skvorak" <k.skvorak at verizon.net>
Sent: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 13:22:50 -0500
To: imc-us-process at lists.indymedia.org
Subject: [imc-us-process] process 'vs' culture & security in 
the IMC network


hi all,

kevin s from NYC here

the only concrete thing i will offer folks re conflict 
resolution, vs 
mediation, vs arbitration etc, are some links on the 
bottom - they 
might be redundant for many of you - UCIMC also seems 
to have some 
great online resources

i  do want to share though some brief general 
observations  about 
some of the conflicts i have seen in IMC work

essentially, it seems to me, that surviving and thriving 
thru the 
conflicts and disagreements that are -inevitable-  in 
collectives, 
rests finally more on the 'culture'  within the collective, 
than it 
does any particular 'process'

if a collective and the individuals within it  genuinely and 
conscientiously practice and promote a culture of 
tolerance, respect, 
fundamental fairness, commitment to nonviolent 
communication and so 
forth, virtually any decision making process will serve it's 
needs

however, if their are individuals in a group that, like us 
poor 
primates everywhere,  are prone to strong feelings of 
protectiveness 
over their creative work,  hurt feelings, or even an instinct 
to 
'getting ones way'  -AND- lack such a collective culture, 
any 
conflict can spin quickly out of control, and any process 
can be 
abused by clever folks who wish to bend a collective to 
their will

  complex process can even be used to actually subvert 
the egalitarian 
goals that are, at least in theory, the basis of the IMC 
identity and 
the IMC  principles of unity

  i believe that folks involved in IMC's are generally people 
of 
goodwill, as are most people on the left, and i believe that 
most 
people on the 'opposite' sides of  all these  IMC conflicts 
are also 
decent folks.    (barring possible infiltration- see below)

unfortunately this doesn't mean that people, when they 
are hurt, and 
in conflict, do not sometimes abandon any commitment to 
true 
egalitarian relationships, and fall back quickly into 
factions, power 
plays, personal attacks, and otherwise the kind of coercive 
and 
authoritarian/majoritarian power dynamics that we are 
explicitly, in 
words at least, against

'apparatchik' behavior , it seems, has always been 
endemic to much of 
the left.  people seem to too often operate from the 
individual 
(perhaps unconscious) rationalization  that the 'ends 
justifies the 
means'  and tend toward instinctively 'managing' conflict 
in a group 
by various inherently coercive means (note; 'managing' 
conflict does 
not equal 'resolving' conflict - sharon's aparthied wall is 
an 
example of  conflict 'management')

perhaps it is simply because people within imc collectives 
are 
products of this dysfuntional and violent culture  that we 
fall so 
often into these patterns, and perhaps it is because we are 
all, at 
heart, the wounded children of this culture

in any case, imho, some of the most important work that 
can go on in 
an IMC collective is our revolutionary commitment to 
building another 
world from the ground up, and our relationships with each 
other, and 
the community we build and support are the essence of 
that work - 
equal if not possibly more important than 'getting the 
message out' 
as media makers

and if we fail to sustain and build our new vision of 
community, 
then we will inherently fail in virtually all of our other 
goals

of course not all people in IMC's agree with this idea, and 
to some 
consensus and egalitarianism  is sometimes a burden, and 
'get's in 
the way'  of 'doing the work'   ( not to imply that truly 
egalitarian 
groups cannot work by some form of revised consensus)

it is certainly possible that when this frustration creeps in  
that 
more process can help things move more smoothly, but 
sometimes no 
amount of process will help if the shared commitment to 
these 
principles are not fundamental to the group

  there are a lot of nominally  radical and liberal media 
outlets that 
people can use besides the IMC if they just want to 
disseminate 
information, and imho folks that feel constrained by MC 
principles 
should avail themselves of those


re infiltration and 'cointelpro' style tactics of disruption - 
it is 
pretty darn hard to quantify this risk, but certainly should 
be 
considered
- we are probably by no means surrounded with 
provocatuers- but it is 
likely that it  has/is happening at least in  locations 
towards which 
a lot of anti-terrorism task force resources have been 
flowing in the 
past few years

      Of course the types of internal splits we are all 
discussing are 
exactly the types of strategies that have been used in the 
past
against radical collectives and organizations.

The fact that we are  vulnerable to these types of 
deliberate 
internal disruptions, is another important reason that we 
are 
dilligent about maintaining safe and nonviolent 'spaces', 
and 
creating effective conflict resolution process.   resolving 
conflict 
in this manner can effectively disempower  this  possibility 
of 
disruption, while at the same time creating a safe and 
supportive 
place for individuals to work out principled, and  
sometimes painful 
personal disagreements.

if a collective does NOT discourage personal attacks, 
power plays, 
and all other coercive dynamics with seriousness, and 
conscientiousness, then this collective will remain highly 
vulnerable 
to internal attacks like this  - this reality is all too 
common in 
our groups!

Now, we all know that not every "problem child" in the 
movement is an 
infiltrator.  If that was the case most of us would be on the
payroll.   In recognizing this though, we have to take even 
more 
seriously the need to support  resolution and address the 
needs
even of these  "problem children" -   if we are to avoid the 
deliberate damage that may be the intent of the more  
malicious
"children"  out there.

   It is important to remember that there was a time when 
members of 
organizations were so turned against
each other (BPP, AIM, etc) that they did the feds job and 
attacked & 
even killed each other.

anyway, if you have read this far i appreciate your time 
and dedication!

in peace,
kevin

"Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing there is 
a field. I'll 
meet you there. When the soul lies in that grass, the world 
is too 
full to talk about. Ideas, language, even the phrase 'each 
other' 
doesn't make any sense."
     Rumi


i wish that we all had in our principles of unity a 
amendment about a 
commitment to nonviolent communication - we as anti-
authoritarians 
tend to engage in terribly coercive and 'violent' 
communication  esp 
on our email lists - including this one

nonviolent communication check out :  http://
www.cnvc.org/  a little 
cheesy perhaps, (and somehow too 'commercial')  but 
some very useful 
tools nonetheless - there are nvc groups in most cities

also just try a google search on "nonviolent 
communication"


and  if anyone hasn't checked out the collective book, pls 
do so - it 
is an excellent resource on collective practice and 
problems
http://www.geocities.com/collectivebook/index.html


i personally think the work that has gone on in the 
intentional 
communities movement is some of the most thoughtful 
and experienced 
regarding conflict resolution and consensus - a couple of 
resources, 
but again do a google for more extensive resources

http://www.treegroup.info/resources/

http://www.ic.org/


more interesting links:
http://www.geocities.com/collectivebook/links.html

-- 
_______________________________________________
imc-us-process mailing list
imc-us-process at lists.indymedia.org
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-us-
process


---- End Included Message ----


Stop baby sea turtles from being crushed!
http://www.care2.com/go/z/11745/1008