[IMC Bombay] Re: How to Respond to Boud? / imc- Bombay

[Petros Evdokas]

Friends, 

My name is Petros, I'm one the volunteers who
occasionally help out with the work of the New- imc
work- group, and I’m a member of the Cyprus Indymedia
group. 

This letter is in response to the concerns expressed by
our new friends and contacts related to the imc- Bombay
organizational efforts, especially the concerns raised
by Shekhar and Sanjay.

I'm not writing this on behalf of anyone but myself,
but my participation in this global process and my
familiarity with it, might count for something.


On the outset, I'd like to point out that Boud has
apologised for any parts of his letter or aspects of
his tone which may have offended. It would be courtesy
to aknowledge that; even better, to accept it in good
faith. I believe this to be an honest misunderstanding,
as  he does, and I hope we can find ways to by-pass it.
But we also need to have a clearer understanding.

So what is at the root of our problem?
 
We, at the New imc work group, are eager to help expand
the imc network, especially with collectives who are
representing the parts of the globe with a long history
of colonization, exclusion from the global public
awareness, and deprived of means to expression and
communication.

But we also want this expansion to reflect certain
social/ political principles - those which unite us in
this network. Otherwise, *any* group can operate Open
Publishing technologies but does not have to
necessarily be a member of Indymedia. Boud's only fault
here is an effort to make explicit (perhaps had
articulated more in depth than was necessary, at the
present level of trust) what our concerns are, in terms
of how to actualise them in the context of organizing a
new imc group. Our emphasis in on "group", not
"website", not "technology".

What we want is for a group to be committed to
*excluding* and to *embracing* participations of
certain kinds, guided by our principles: 
- we want all imc groups to *exclude* the influences of
profit- seeking corporations or operations, the
influences of governments, and the influences of
authoritarian parties.
- we want all imc groups to *embrace* the
disenfranchised, those whose voices are excluded,
cencored, strangled. 

For those of us living in the "third world" this means
having to overcome certain types of obstacles in our
organisational work. None of us, here at New imc, has
the arrogance to tell our colleagues how to do that
work, but we need to hear some assurances that it is
being done in that direction.

Indymedia already has too many individuals who wrongly
think that it's all about "operating a website", and we
need to change that. Even among our old- time members,
there are still several embarassing situations occuring
where that's the only model being promoted to new
communities (new to imc). We have been working hard
trying to change this, especially by trying to create
enough clarity with the new imc groups which are
emerging now, to help tilt the balance toward a
healthier way of operating radical media and doing
anti-globalization politics. 

We engage in a process of clarification with as many
new imc's as possible. For each co-operation that’s
evolving with a new  imc group, we find the need to
re-define and re-articulate our principles in ways
which can be applied by the new group. We even have to
do this with existing, older imc groups.

Only *you* know what the best way is to actualise
Indymedia principles in your community work.  But we
need to be re-assured by  you, that you either know
what you're doing, or if not (which is fine, and often
preferable), that you're open to a process of exploring
that together with us, and coming up together with
options, solutions.

So  far, three issues seem to be relevant to the
evolving imc- Bombay group (and to the majority of imc
groups): 
- the effort to be as inclusive as possible of *all*
classes, categories, sections, and strata of people,
being especially concerned with racism, sexism, and
homophobia as tools which divide people, and,
- the issue of language, and 
- the issue of appropriate medium (print, video, radio,
internet, etc.).

There is a need to explore the question of languages,
media, and forms of organization along with questions
of mission: "Whose needs for communication are we
serving by publishing in language A?", "Which
communication medium (radio?, print?) is appropriate
for publishing in Language B, if most of the people
using it have a mostly oral (spoken) use, and it is not
written?".

Questions of this type help elucidate the mission and
the type of community service around which each imc
group is organised. We need to see a new imc group
grapple with these questions realistically.

Similar concerns came up in a discussion about another
imc group, an already existing one, and if you’d  like
to read about it, it might help stimulate some good
dialogue among us about how to best serve our
communities through Indymedia. It’s here:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-finance/2002-June/001335.html 

Essentially, our problem is that we have many
individuals in imc whose stance toward our work is
inappropriate. We want to make soure that those
inappropriate stances are not adopted by entire
collectives. You will see that, as soon as you join the
network , since there is complete and total autonomy
for each imc group, there will be no way to influece
the direction taken by your group, or by any other imc
group. And you will see that violations of our
principles occur every day, some unintentionally, some
systematically and on purpose. We have no way to
enforce anything. Our best investment for a sane and
healty co-operation, is to begin correctly.

Please tell us how we can make this a better process
for you? So far, there are no objections or blocks to
your new imc application, and it does not seem anyone
has implied or hinted at any opposition. Nor do we
anticipate any problem that can’t be solved. Your
application is on the right track, and much farther
along than other groups.

My proposal is that Boud is still the right person to
continue beeing the primary contact and ally for your
group’s procedure with New imc, unless of course you
clearly object to this as a group, collectively, in
which case we will have to decide among us what to do
about it. 

What would you suggest might be a good starting point
to re-start our co-operation on better footing
together?

Looking forward to your thoughts, 
Petros
http://PetrosEvdokas.cjb.net
--------------------------