[New-imc] Query re: IMC Zimbabwe

[boud]

<cross-post new-imc, imc-zimbabwe, kilibarda78>

Dear Konstantin,

On Wed, 29 May 2002 Kilibarda78 at ... wrote:

> I was just wondering whether or not IMC Zimbabwe is an IMC site or not?  It 
> is very biased and partisan on an issue that seems to divide many on the old 
> factionalized left (no suprise), but also on the new left and within the 
> anti-globalization movement.  In particular it is interesting that ISO seems 
> to run most of the site.  I noticed Zimbabwe isn't listed under your Africa 

   IMC Zimbabwe is a "requested" site, and has not yet been officially
accepted. Most of the discussion (if i remember right) was in March:

http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/new-imc/2002-March/thread.html

In particular threads starting here:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/new-imc/2002-March/002878.html
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/new-imc/2002-March/002891.html
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/new-imc/2002-March/002902.html
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/new-imc/2002-March/002907.html

It was given the zimbabwe.indymedia.org address on the understanding
that the locals presently involved had the right intentions (going
through the new-imc process); that their existing site looked
reasonably open; that for security reasons, physical, face-to-face,
public meetings were dangerous; and that the situation (the elections)
was urgent. 

The idea was that they committed themselves to working towards the
indymedia style of openness and non-exclusion and a variety of
viewpoints, especially grassroots involvement, consensus
decision-making, and that they would ask for official recognition once
this process got going seriously.


> presented in the mainstream media.  I wanted to get alternative information 
> on Zimbabwe, of which there is much and I only got the same old 
...
> the views of activists occupying white farms, etc.  The struggle for
> land and land-reform is a cross-cutting feature in the South, yet it
> is precisely the voices of such peasants that are often marginalized
> and shut-out.  The MST is only ONE of many such movements world-wide
> (many of which are spontaneous),


Konstantin, could you help by taking constructive action?

Could you contact some grassroots groups in Zimbabwe and help them
post to the newswire, and participate in the mailing list:

http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-zimbabwe

If you search a bit with http://www.google.com i'm sure you could
find internet contacts for some internet-connected activists who
support these groups and are independent from the ISO. But maybe
you already have other ways of contacting grassroots groups in 
Zimbabwe.


On the other hand, it would be nice to see some comments from Zim Indy
how they are progressing... There's only spam (as fas as i can see) in
the last month of the imc-zimbabwe mailing list archive... (apart from
the post on the IMC Africa caravana)


BTW, since i'm cross-posting:

Dear Zim Indymedia,

(1) EDITORIAL POLICY

   Your editorial policy 

http://zimbabwe.indymedia.org/process/openpub.php

seems to say that only double posts and spam are hidden.

   So i'm a bit puzzled why the following two articles were hidden, 
since neither seems to be a double post nor spam, nor even an 
"unexpected" category which could conceivably justify a modification
of the editorial policy.

Microsoft vs. Open Source
by Martin Hu Thursday May 23, 2002 at 03:36 PM
http://zimbabwe.indymedia.org/news/2002/05/307.php

Women Bear Brunt of Suffering Caused by Angola War
by Nicoloe Itano Thursday May 09, 2002 at 09:34 AM
http://zimbabwe.indymedia.org/news/2002/05/303.php

IMHO, both articles are good contributions.

IMCs are supposed to encourage open source software, and the first article
does refer specifically to a struggle going on right now between M$oft
and the open source community in poor countries.

As for the second article, while AFAIK, Angola is not part of
Zimbabwe, i think that in the absence of IMC Lusaka or IMC Angola
etc., it makes sense that someone posts this information to the
geographically closest IMC.

However, apart from my personal opinion (which doesn't count for much
here) that both articles are good contributions, i think that very few
IMCs accept the idea of distinguishing between "good quality, highly
relevant" and "low quality, irrelevant" articles, since these sort of
judgments are simply far too subjective. 


(2) OUTREACH TO OTHER GROUPS

Let's be honest, there seems to be a strong involvement of ISO 
in the present Zim Indymedia group, committed to various political
strategies, such as "libertarian socialism". As i understand
Indymedia, this is *not* against our style of media activism.

However, we would prefer to get away from general political "theory"
(libertarian socialism, anti-capitalism, etc.) and concentrate on
having *news* articles on the newswire. Discussion (and "theory") can
follow in the comments, but the best way to get news from a variety of
oppressed groups is to help *them* contribute directly and manage the
site directly, themselves.

Have you got any further in contacting various grassroots groups, 
in helping them get internet access, in inviting them to meetings, 
making sure that the meetings are organised non-hierarchically, 
with rotation of facilitators, etc.?  Remember that the network 
supported your group at the time of the elections, in the expectation
that you were planning to contact a wide variety of local, grassroots
groups and get them involved.  It does seem from some of the posts
that ISO *is* contacting students and trade union groups, e.g.

http://zimbabwe.indymedia.org/news/2002/05/319.php

but if they have email contact, why don't you invite them to get
involved directly in Zim Indymedia? If there were a dozen or so
students, trade union people, women's rights activists, etc. 
who introduced themselves to the imc-zimbabwe mailing list, then
there would at least be enough critical mass for people to openly
talk about how to get into contact with and develop internet 
access for other grassroots groups, such as rural people.
At the moment, there's nothing (but spam) on the list...

(3) OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS

The same article

http://zimbabwe.indymedia.org/news/2002/05/319.php

says that 38 activists got together for the Anti-Privatisation
Forum meeting, despite the risks someone said earlier about
having public meetings.

In that case, it seems that it should be possible to have open
public meetings for the requested IMC Zimbabwe, with all sorts
of grassroots groups participating.

Is this a reasonable suggestion? Could you organise some regular
meetings and advertise them widely to groups involved in the
Anti-Privatisation Forum and other grassroots groups, and specifically
include announcements on the zimbabwe.indymedia.org site and 
the mailing list? 



solidarity
boud