[New-imc] RE: IMC Belgium and proposed new IMC Vlaanderen

[lize]

And here we go, 
With some corrections/answers/remarks...


"... to set up a portal website that would gather all local IMC's. ..
Some people might like it (those who feel like being a diversity
excuse), but probably not the people from the PTB."

>> to put it very clear : I don't like the proposal at all. To me, it
just appears to be a tactic way to try 'to get rid' of the imc.be
collective (at least that's what wannabee imc.vl tries to make from this
proposal, I don't think this was the original goal). Except from imc.wvl
THERE ARE NO operational local imc'S in Belgium at the moment. Again, to
all wannabee imc's (local or supraregional) : start working on imc
coverage and THEN see if a portal site is possible. 

"You know some of us rather well Lize, and you know what these people
stand for."

>> euh, I don't know anyone of you. I just met Klaas once and had to
convince him very hardly to help me interviewing an Iraqi guy. 

" People with hidden agenda's and opposed to pluralism do indeed form an
"axis-of-somewhat-more-evil-than-others". I hope anyone involved
in Indymedia agrees on that one."

>> euh, I used these kind of 'Bush idiom' in a ironic way, please don't
start to introduce these kind of vocabulary on the imc lists in a
serious way. Thank you. 

"And they decide in the first place what happens with IMC-Belgium (not
you, I'm afraid)."

>> not you neither, I am afraid. If it comes to a final decision, it
should come from global I guess and not from a group of fresh wannabees.

"So if you're suggesting that we don't want to have PTB-members in our
collective, you're wrong."

>> okay I've noted this statement into my agenda

"Now, I think everybody involved in IMC (apart from the Crickx-group at
IMC-Belgium - some six people of the PTB) has asked him- of herself the
question if he/she could still cooperate with the people from the
Crickx-group. After all these troubles, fights, accusations and
propaganda, I think it is not really surprising that individuals don't
want to deal with any of these people in the future."

>> I can see by myself this is the situation, but then : work
separately. Don't make the other group shut up first before you start
speaking by yourselves. Try to proof by facts and not by endless
accusations that you can do better ? 

Okay buddies ?

Kind Regards,
Lize

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: tuc2002 at fastmail.fm [mailto:tuc2002 at fastmail.fm]
> Verzonden: dinsdag 5 augustus 2003 12:07
> Aan: lize at indymedia.be; new-imc at lists.indymedia.org; imc-
> process at lists.indymedia.org
> CC: info at imc-vl.org
> Onderwerp:
> 
> 
> Dear lize and other listmembers,
> 
> Let me clarify some issues, to know where we all stand.
> 
> Of course, I agree with your comments on the PTB-dominated
IMC-Belgium. I
> personally don't know of many people and organisations that still
support
> IMC-Belgium (and are not satellites of the PTB). I, too, felt like a
> 'diversity excuse' when wanting to be involved in IMC.be (even when
> actively trying to install diversity I felt like legitimising the
> situation).
> 
> IMC-Vlaanderen is indeed a group of people (already bigger and more
> diverse than IMC-Belgium when things weren't discussed in public) that
> wants to leave all these problems behind and work on a healthy IMC and
> cooperation between IMC's in Belgium. You know some of us rather well
> Lize, and you know what these people stand for. For the others, like
me,
> you'll have to find out in the future. Just like everybody does when
> meeting new people I guess.
> 
> You referred to the discussions on the forum on our testsite
> http://pingpong.piexie.net/.
> 
> First of all, this is an open forum. The views of people on that forum
> are personal views, not views of the collective. We have to be honest
in
> these things (you know the pros and cons of for a – and the
explosivity
> of internet debates).
> 
> Second, we indeed want all these problems to be over with. We don't
lie
> about this. We want diversity, democracy and pluralism and therefore
we
> wanted a new IMC. We've been trying for years to make a pluralist and
> positive IMC out of belgium.indymedia.org, but it didn't work.
Therefore,
> people want to start IMC-Vlaanderen.
> So I guess you're right that a lot of us want to see an end to the
> existing Belgium IMC, for being non-democratic, non-pluralist, etc. I
> don't think it's bad to end such practices. All that we did in the
past
> years tells even more: we wanted to end it, but we didn't want to end
it
> with fights.
> Now, two weeks ago a proposal was made by IMC-Liège and IMC-wvl. It
> called to discontinue superregional IMC's (meaning IMC-Vlaanderen and
> IMC-Belgium) and to set up a portal website that would gather all
local
> IMC's. Something completely new for a lot of us. But hey, it solved
our
> problem (undemocratic and non-pluralist IMC's). So we started
discussing
> the proposal.
> On thing about the proposal is clear: we don't think IMC-Belgium will
> like it. Some people might like it (those who feel like being a
diversity
> excuse), but probably not the people from the PTB. And they decide in
the
> first place what happens with IMC-Belgium (not you, I'm afraid).
> This being said, we don't want to implement the proposal if it is
> implemented as far as 3 out of 4 IMC's is concerned and not
implemented
> for the IMC that constitutes the reason why we are going through all
this
> in the first place. If it wasn't for the problems with IMC-Belgium,
none
> of all these discussions needed to take place.
> In other words, we (and I suppose the people from IMC-Wvl and
IMC-Liège
> too) are dealing with this proposal in order to solve the existing
> problems. If IMC-Belgium does not cease to exist, of course the
proposal
> is null and void, because it wouldn't solve the problem.
> 
> So: the people on the forum were discussing what to do with the
proposal
> of the two local IMC's. You were referring to the discussions we had
> about the situation wherein we would retreat from the new-IMC process
in
> order to implement the proposal, but IMC-Belgium would continue to
exist.
> 
> And in that respect IMC-Belgium needs to be dissolved before the
proposal
> can be implemented. That was what we were discussing. We just want an
end
> to the undemocratic practices at the IMC-Belgium level, and we want it
as
> hard as IMC-wvl en -Liège want it.
> 
> If it is clear that the problems with IMC-Belgium can not be solved
this
> way, then we continue with making alternatives for it. And I hope to
> cooperate with IMC-Wvl and –Liège while doing this.
> 
> "They even think about
> withdrawing their proposal to become a new imc.vl if the imc.be
> collective could be "purified", which means : they take over and throw
> the ptb members out of the imc.be collective. "
> 
> You should read what is written on the forum: we are thinking about
> withdrawing our proposal for an IMC-Vlaanderen, if we can implement
the
> portal-proposal. In that proposal, a portal website will be put in
place
> of IMC-Belgium. We are not going to "take something over" if that
> "something" doesn't exist anymore.
> 
> Concerning the "purification" of IMC-Belgium: if you want a pluralist
IMC
> (like we do) than you'll have to accept PTB-members in your
collective.
> So if you're suggesting that we don't want to have PTB-members in our
> collective, you're wrong.
> Now, I think everybody involved in IMC (apart from the Crickx-group at
> IMC-Belgium - some six people of the PTB) has asked him- of herself
the
> question if he/she could still cooperate with the people from the
> Crickx-group. After all these troubles, fights, accusations and
> propaganda, I think it is not really surprising that indiciduals don't
> want to deal with any of these people in the future. That is their
> PERSONAL opinion (and I confess: I understand it).
> Personnaly, I could cooperate with anyone in the future. As long as we
> work in respect to the IMC principles and philosophy. I don't think I
> should work together with people not supporting these principles and
> trying to impose their agenda through IMC's. If people work in a
positive
> and correct way in all IMC collectives, I personally wouldn't have a
> problem with people from the PTB or even the six from the Crickx-group
in
> any future IMC.
> 
> Gosh, I don't think I ask to much, do I?
> 
> "At imc.vl there is simply no door for ptb-linked people. Ptb-members
in
> their eyes seem to be '(the axis of ?)evil' and they want to 'purify'
> Indymedia from ptb presence."
> Again: not true. Without hidden agenda's and undemocratic practices,
> everything is possible. PTB-members are not evil (gosh, I have
personal
> relationships with some low-ranking members, though I'm an anarchist
> myself). People with hidden agenda's and opposed to pluralism do
indeed
> form an "axis-of-somewhat-more-evil-than-others". I hope anyone
involved
> in Indymedia agrees on that one.
> 
> Conclusion: we should leave words like "purifying", etc. out of the
> debate. They distort any serious discussion, in particular any
discussion
> that is going to be difficult and hard anyway. This counts for both
> parties. We are no better than you are. Especially because I know that
> you care about the IMC-philosophy and you want things to be right.
> 
> Hopefully we can work together soon,
> best regards,
> 
> TUc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> 
> I am lize and I am working since a year as an edito member of imc.be.
I
> made some reportages (sometimes together with other imc members) about
> ESF Florence, about the repression of the movement in italy and I
> followed up the Iraq war, the G8 of Evian and some international
issues
> like the situation in Argentina and Venezuela.
> 
> I would like to give my opinion on the terrible discussion going on
now
> about the imc's in Belgium.
> 
> 
> 
> First. ** About IMC Belgium **
> 
> There are some true problems at imc.be. Diversity in the collective is
> lacking and hence the coverage of all actions of the Belgian diverse
> movement against globalization. The presence of people linked to the
> Belgian communist party (ptb) in the collective is dominant and other
> members of the .be collective - like myself - often feel as a kind of
> 'diversity' excuse to cover up the ptb dominance.
> 
> 
> 
> Second. ** About proposed new IMC Vlaanderen **
> 
> The IMC.vl people seemed to turn their endless criticism on IMC.be
into
> a positive project by starting to become imc activists themselves.
> 
> My enthusiasm for these newcomers is reducing rapidly when I read
their
> discussion list at the test <http://pingpong.piexie.net/>  site :
> instead of building up imc teams and start covering, all energy goes
to
> what seems to be there main objective : dissolve the present imc.be
> collective. Horrible words like "purifying" ("cleansing?") are used.
> They also write that "the dissolution of imc.be has always been part
of
> 'their plan' ".I don't think the aim of putting up a new Imc could be
to
> destroy another one. But it goes further. They even think about
> withdrawing their proposal to become a new imc.vl if the imc.be
> collective could be "purified", which means : they take over and throw
> the ptb members out of the imc.be collective.
> 
> 
> 
> ** My conclusion **
> 
> At imc.be it was always (and still is) very difficult to get (and
stay)
> involved as a non-ptb member. One quickly feels isolated as there is a
> lack of democratic decision making. But the door to other groups is
> still open at the imc.be collective, and could solve the problem of
ptb
> dominance.
> 
> At imc.vl there is simply no door for ptb-linked people. Ptb-members
in
> their eyes seem to be '(the axis of ?)evil' and they want to 'purify'
> Indymedia from ptb presence. This can not be tolerated. The ptb is
part
> of the movement, and at Indymedia, that's it's place : part of. Not to
> be dominant, but surely not to be 'purified' neither.
> 
> 
> 
> ** My  proposal **
> 
> As both 'collectives' refuse to work together, I think an additional
> imc.vl site might be the best solution to get more people involved
into
> Indymedia making in Belgium. There are not a lot of different
> independent media channels in belgium, so the more media-activists,
the
> better I think.
> 
> So I would give green light to their proposal, let them work out a
> 'competing' imc in Belgium and let's see if in a future some
> 'collaboration' (e.g. by taking over some features from each other)
> could be possible.
> 
> The aim of imc.vl to dissolve imc.be cannot be tolerated. If global
> Indymedia would make it possible for them to do this, there is a risk
> that no good Indymedia coverage at all will be done in Belgium, as the
> imc.vl people didn't prove yet a lot about their skills of Indymedia
> making untill now. I really would like to see them make some coverages
> and features before talking about dissolving another, after all, hard
> working IMC collective.
> 
> 
> 
> That's it I guess. Sorry if we Belgians are giving you so much
troubles,
> but I do not feel responsible for it.
> 
> 
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Lize
> 
> 
> 
> Ps due to some personal problems and the fact that I urgently need to
> find a job, my participation into the imc.be collective is very low at
> the moment. When things get better for me, I'll be back !
> --
> 
>   tuc2002 at fastmail.fm
> 
> --
> http://www.fastmail.fm - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service