Notes to an Activists guide...
Fighting Inequality – Various tactics to be used to help to achieve the end goals of all campaigns for the equality, freedom and protection of the people of this planet.
This is the first of many blogs describing how and a litlle of why we should make the world a better place, in solely my opinion, and how the the movement as fragmented and undefined as it is, is doing a lot of the necessary work.
It's basically a practical guide to getting involved in trying to stop the destruction of everything we hold dear.
1
Education
Lobbying/Petitioning
Workers Democracy/trade Unions
Consumer Democracy/Boycotts
Direct Action/Media Stunts
Demonstrations
Community work
Education –
Pros
Cons – can depress and deactivate without a clear aim and method for change.
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done – get on boards, change syllabuses
Currently state run education is a bit of a trap. Not only does it indoctrinate the vast majority of the populace from a young age (the police/government can do no wrong. Don’t question authority – or do question it within certain bounds), it also divides, rewards and punishes different people according to merits are fabricated. For instance being good at English and attending regularly is good, being a good plumber and not attending regularly (probably because there’s not much you’re going to get out of it) is bad. You will be graded accordingly and that will determine your future. The further up the age scale you go, the more prepared/able you are at performing the various tricks that are asked of you and the less you question them. More importantly your knowledge, or any of any commercial worth can become the property of private persons/interests.
There is also a scary amount of ignorance about three of the most important aspects of our culture, the ones that enable us to govern ourselves without fear or prejudice and with some competency. (maths and mathematical competency, English and basic grammar rules) (Choice)
Firstly - History.
Not only is a lot imperialism of the distant past justified, but also of the recent present, even if it is taught at all (most people don’t learn beyond the Second World War). Recent History is the most important to learn as it has a direct impact on us and where we come from. The Cold war is taught in a fashion couched in the terminology of being part of one side and internationalism and ideas of the state as a viable body are reinforced.
Secondly - Political Alternatives
There is not much presentation of systems different from our own, even in theory or practice, especially not in any terms that can be understood. It would be impossible to gain any form of qualification for such knowledge, but such knowledge is necessary to be a rounded and active citizen, surely? It also helps us overcome the matter of signing the contract with the state (i.e. the idea that you belong to a country through the choice of it and thereby accept it’s rules and norms).
Thirdly – Languages and useless knowledge
Languages are not taught from an early age and as a population the British are notoriously bad at languages. The understanding of other’s languages helps us to understand their cultures and break down boundaries, as well as understanding the routes of our own. If we understood others’ languages more it would also undermine the sense of separate national identity that undermines itself international unity.
Useless Knowledge – such as Music, Drama, Accountancy, Plumbing, Sustainable development, Social Research, Media Technology. All of these subjects are barely taught at pre 16 age, some not at all yet are invaluable tools and could quite easily be taught a lot more than they are and given qualification status. This could be done by having an extra hour per school day for volunteers to teach various subject, students having more choice in what subjects they study, or how much time they spend on them and also students being given more time and resource for independent study.
In general what the movement needs to address is political education – countering the current media and questioning them, informing people of the truth of international situations and national ones (especially in revealing what is going on unbeknownst to most of us) as they happen, and of patterns in current political and economic systemic behaviour.
Secondly we need to address and educate practical skills, such as those mentioned above, ones that are needed to immediately impact our surroundings (sustainable development – Languages, Artistic creation and practical apprenticeships) and ones to help us become more informed and capable citizens (social research, facilitating decision making, alternate political systems (though that can be a divider)).
The first is an absolute necessity in the current climate of fear, repression and misinformation. In many ways it sometimes this all the left is really involved in, fighting a losing battle to present the truth. The pros of the this are that it’s hugely essentially. People need to know the truth and start forming their own opinions before they can even think about acting on them.
The pros of this are obvious. The negatives are that it can be sometimes dispiriting, especially in the current climate of cynicism, which make reports harder to believe and even harder to act, there seems such an innumerable amount and – most importantly – no easy way to do anything about them. The information is also often boring and un-engaging, most specifically in the presentation.
There are ways round both of these things. Firstly all information should be presented with a clear and simple way to find out more and get involved with something (be it discussions or action) to effect the issue. Secondly the information should be presented in continuously interesting ways. We have the media and the capability to do it. Documentary showings are popular and far more interesting than speeches with an ability to package a lot more information and make it a lot more presentable. Music, the internet and animation, as well as merchandise are all modern, media savvy ways of engaging people.
Also it is best when tying information to one cause, or presenting any information, not to use terms that are not in every day usage. Proletarian, comrade, axiom, dialectic – those kind’s of word have no place in the basic education of the modern day anti establishment movement.
What is currently done are speaker tours, documentary showings (local ones are better with discussion groups afterwards) and internet activist tools. Most of these are used for other activists and have either become ways of preaching to the converted, or merely informing the converted of their decisions (Indymedia) (SWP speaker tours).
However if you want to get involved in these things then it is best to get involved either with Indy media – for internet information and media production, or the Socialist Workers Party for regular speaker tours and weekly discussion groups on the issues of the day (as well as Marxist ideology).
With practical education there are the pro’s that this educates people hugely in things to make real differences to themselves and their surroundings. The Cons are that it can lead to social isolation, where people follow their skill bases and live the dream without encouraging the rest of society or engaging them on a mass scale.
The way around this is too encourage all people doing (teaching or learning) community courses, development courses and so forth to form a national Union and with small donations create some form of national Media and a yearly co-ordinated campaign – or at least some information sharing device.
At the moment to teach or learn most of those skills takes entering the national education system in someway. That means Uni, College, community college or night school of some form. However for what’s going on in your area it is also good to check Indy media as there could be free or cheap community courses that they are doing that can also hook you up with some pretty impressive people.
There are small help points there, but a suggestion for greater improvement is more innovation in the presentation of information, more cohesion and knowledge of what everyone’s doing, and if you are an organiser, new or old, more promotion.
Radio, T.V or papers if you can get it, but simply postering every where is a good one. In fact if you have a regular event then create a regular poster run with either shared responsibility, rotation, or even make it paid (from donations or some form of enterprise). If you want to organise in your own area then it couldn’t be simpler. Organise a documentary showing round your house, or in a community centre, and depending on how many people you want, stick a poster up in the local post office/music store/co-op, etc, or in local community centres and schools and show the documentary and have chat with whoever wants to stick around. You might get some interesting results.
You can also join specific issue groups who do a lot of good work across the spectrum. For instance Justice for Colombia.
SWP, Indymedia, create your own. People and Planet. Amnesty International. Greens. Specific Interest Groups (JFC, Solidarity Groups).
What you can also do to improve the situation if you don’t fancy hardcore organising is getting on Student teacher boards, and local council boards. Shape and change Syllabuses. Change your community.
*********************************************************************************************************************
DO BULLET POINT BREAK DOWN OF THIS
Lobbying -
Pros
Cons
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Lobbying Petitioning/Complaining – to me - is a form of rule changing and opinion swaying that is a more studious and a little effective form of change.
It may come from writing letters to papers pointing out their factual inaccuracies or petitioning you MP to vote with their conscience on certain issues, or to even get the issues raised in the first place. There is high powered lobbying that includes wining and dining and presenting information at conferences and meetings to high powered people.
It’s pros are that it is one of the most legitimate and recognised ways to make your voice heard and can lead to public enquiry and policy debate in the highest arenas. It’s cons are that it basically panders to the people in power. They have no necessity to listen to it, no real necessity to act even if they make the right noises and are very hard to convince on the most fundamental of issues because there is an excepted belief in free market economics, private ownership of wealth or property and a necessity to maintain power with in the current structures.
It is not to say that these things are inherently bad in themselves – but sadly they do seem to be the major causes of environmental destruction and inequality – which in turn are causes of disease, war, famine, species extinction, sea levels rising, climate change, sexism, racism and most of the curses of modern humanity (which, to be fair, has come along some way in combating some of these things).
Most campaigning organisations have some form of lobbying arm – whether it’s someone who reads all the papers and writes nasty letters, to petition organisers, chain mail senders, fund raisers (we shall come to this in more detail later), and governmental and intergovernmental professional lobbyists.
The final are most common amongst Big NGOs (Non Governmental Organisations), charities and campaigning groups such as Greenpeace, Amnesty International, Oxfam and others. These positions tend to require a certain level of expertise in some area, often legal, but also in sustainable development, economics, accountancy and other areas.
If you want to organise a lobbying group then I suggest finding out all of your local government and media contact details and starting there. If you are the right kind of person you can poor over minutes of council meetings, help organise in the parish, correct factual inaccuracies in the local paper, get on the local call in shows and petition your MP. This however is pretty time intensive and takes a vigorous knowledge and the understanding of the facts that you wish to propagate. It is often – as ever – easier in a group, where you could divide responsibilities and it is a good idea to sign yourself up to any and all newsletters and try and get on the circulars of some journalists (such as John Pilfer) so that you stay well informed at the cheapest possible price.
Alternately, you may wish to join a group and just ask to get stuck in on that side of things. Most single issue groups and Big NGOs will have something to do in that area and there should be local groups to get involved with that. Thanks to the wonders of modern telecommunications, that’s not even necessary – but it is necessary to know what you’re looking for and who you might be devoting your time to. Make sure you do good research and check newint.org for a fairly unbiased breakdown of world issue.
I think the big NGOs have got lobbying pretty nailed and tackle their issues with power and panache, within the strictures of power. So as far as they are going on there is not much to be improved. However the rest of the movement that is devoted to a rather wider set of issues and cannot afford to have correspondents in many countries and high powered presentation to the government figures could do with enough money to fund enough people to do research for all of us, write letters for us and highlight current issues and turn the press onto it as soon as maybe. This does happen across the movement, just in a very disparate fashion that provides no unanimity of information or a singularly and readily available source, nor unanimity of purpose or goal.
List of Single Issue groups and NGOS and Major political groupings
Note about how much work it takes, work life balance
How you will end up doing a bit of all things
*********************************************************************************************************************
Workers democracy/rights (Unions) -
Pros
Cons
Global cap.
What’s currently done – ILO, Arg. Trade Unions, Int. Socialists?
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Workers rights have been fought over for many centuries, before The French revolution, or English Civil war (which was mainly capitalists attacking the king until the Levellers came along – but that’s another matter) before Wat Tyler and peasants revolt, back to the times of the Romans and not just the Slave revolts but the revolts of the Plebians, the lower working classes of Rome. Many of these movements have been successful in many ways and this has always been through the working together of the workers. Sadly however there seems to be an equally tragic history of betrayal and failure by the leaders of these movements. The Trade Unions sold short by their leader, The Plebians elected representatives (tribunes) usurped and taken over by the Upper classes, the leaders killed or imprisoned (Wat Tyler, the Levellers) or dominated and destroyed by the most fanatical leaders (Lenin, Stalin, Bonaparte). It is clearly imperative for people around the world to combine together to use each others small amounts of power to protect themselves from the abuse of others, however it has left problems in the past.
The pros of Unions and workers democracy are great for the workers in the Union and can be enormous when combined with other workers movements. It can ensure decent wages, working standards, health safety and benefits (such as compensation and pensions) for all involved and for future generations. As organisations they can also push governments to social democratic leanings providing the same comforts and protection for all members of society.
However this is a double edged sword when not applied internationally. Firstly it can make workers competitive towards the interests of workers from other countries – for instance asking for the state to subsidise their industry or workplace to remain internationally competitive – which then makes all prices for labour across the world have to compete at a lower price and thereby force workers in other countries accept lower standards of working environment and pay just to gain employment. Secondly having driven down labour prices and safety measures the industry that the Union workers work in become less and less competitive, so they demand more and more security until eventually they are forced out of work or the public lose sympathy for their strikes which are invariably broken. Thus they have lost themselves work and forced others to do their jobs in worse conditions.
This has been the history of the past twenty five years, started with Thatcherism and Reaganism in the early eighties, which has lead to what is known as ‘capital flight’ which destroys economies and continually oppresses workers across the world. This is when a company decides to invest somewhere cheaper which is invariably worse for the people working in that cheaper place, it’s not all about exchange rates).
The other problem has come from the leadership. Workers democracy has mostly worked along the lines of national democracy (which is equally ineffective – more later) which is representative. Representative Dem. Has shown a tendency for the rep. to become corrupt or ineffective at many points, especially in the face of a seemingly un-opposable and alluring systems of power/culture/elitism/etc. This is reference to teamsters Unions and the pyramid democracy of the Stalinist systems employed during the Cold war. However there some very recent examples of workable workers Democracy.
Firstly, to have a look at what is currently done, well there are National Unions in most developed nations, sometimes week and ineffectual, sometimes strong and strident. What ever line of work you do it is hugely important to get involved if you are employed.
Don’t worry what your salary is, if you get a pay check instead of giving it then you are a worker and one of the best things you can do is team up with some other workers to make sure you don’t get shafted (there will always come a time, whatever job you do, when you are likely to get shafted). Plus it can be a good way to get to know some work mates and do stuff together as well as develop your view and learn how to engage in real democracy (i.e. making decisions together on an equal basis).
There is also the ILO (Int. Labour Org.) and a few other international workers organisations. If you wish to get involved in lobbying, research, protection of int. workers rights and possibly helping build int. unity (which is really paramount to workers success) then these are well worth giving a look, even if it is just to spread the word about what they’re doing. With all of these things it’s always worth a look just to see about spreading the word.
Lastly I want to a look at a type of workers Democracy which has been tried very rarely but seems to yield the most positive results. The anarcho-syndicalists (yes lefties love big words) of the Spanish Civil war were the first people to try workers democracy with a far more involving system of decision making than elected a rep and getting them to do all the decision making (except for the occasional vote). After getting shafted by the Stalinist and the liberals this kind of haphazard, long but lovable and involving decision making has barely been seen, but in the past few years in Argentina a new bread has been found. Workers going back into their disposed factories – supposedly left because they couldn’t turn a profit – have been run solely by the workers. They elect a different president each week who does the admin duties, and they all take on different duties all the time so they are dependent on no-one person and can therefore not be held to ransom. Also it is a lot more interesting and they all care about their jobs enough to want to do a bit of everything. There are now nearly three hundred repossessed factories in Argentina. Maybe we can strive for a work place free of managers, with everyone on the same pay and interested in all the different facets of the job. That would be truly involving workers democracy.
List of Trade Unions and Int. Organisations fighting for workers rights.
The take and other info sources on
*********************************************************************************************************************
Consumer Democracy/Shareholder democracy –
Pros
Cons
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Consumer Democracy is a relatively new idea, but already has a certain amount of baggage. It is the idea that we can hold corporations to account through acting in concert on changing our shopping habits in favour or against certain points depending on their ethical credibility. One of the longest running boycotts has been of Nestle, I think at the Students’ Union of Manchester it has been running for twenty years. This was started because of the blanket selling of Nestle Milk to many African populations which is a lot worse for them than breast milk, to the point where it is responsible for a child’s death every minute. In response to this pressure groups have encouraged a multinational consumer boycott.
This has included institutions and shopping chains and has caused quite considerable costs to Nestle, however it might not be considered a success because of it’s inability to actually stop Nestlé’s practices. However there have been successful boycotts of things like Pepsi, where the corporations have ceased one particular unethical practice.
The pro’s of these boycotts is that it highlights the unethical and dangerous practices of particular corporations and gives people something quite simple to do to curb the excesses of those attacks/damaging practices. It has also changed a culture within a lot of corporations whereby they wish to at least appear like ethical companies which has had hugely positive effects for certain workers and environs. It is also something that is winnable and easy to organise around. You have the facts of X’s misdemeanours, publish them, try to stop people buying it and try and stop whatever organisation you are part of buying their products. There is almost always a more ethical alternative.
There other methods from merely encouraging people to stop putting something in their shopping basket. Institutional boycotts are far more effective tools, Unions, Schools, Churches, Trade Unions, Workplaces, even Supermarkets (very difficult). Also Shareholder democracy is being dabbled with, where consortiums of ethical investors buying shares in a particular culprit and trying to force them to change their practices with the power of their shares.
The problems with this practice it doesn’t tend to highlight the fact that corporations by their very nature and set up are abusive and destructive organisations. It also doesn’t tackle the route causes of their misdemeanours and attack corporate culture enough. This is reflected in the often only partial success of the boycotts and the swift shift back to more damaging practices by some corporations after a successful campaign. It also leads to boycott fatigue by some members of the public – with constant campaigns and new problems to fight all the time. It supports the critique of Corporations being inherently exploitative with out being explicit about it.
Things to look at at the moment are Campaigns against the Arms Trade, the Coca Cola Boycott and maybe the Nestle Boycott.
I think it would be imperative to add these actions together and try and support international bodies of law that curb the excesses of all Corporations. Also things like the World Bank Boycott are good new ways of looking at the problem, attack the institutions that support Corporations and their successes, so then you can go back to attacking your government that invariably subsidises them, but also the international institutions, which is far mor3e important. Corporations would not have the ground to use slave labour, destroy the environment, patent life saving drug and generally make money out of misery and destruction around the world without the Support of the World Bank and the IMF. It is these along with groups like the G8 and Forums like the WTO we should focus our efforts.
*********************************************************************************************************************
Pros
Cons - Can turn people off your cause and is very easily twisted by the media
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in – Earthfirst.org.uk
What else can be done
Direct Action –
Direct Action can be described in various ways. Classic direct Action are things like strikes and militant protests, but direct action can also mean media stunts and smaller strikes at the establishment, targeted to hit the offender right where it hurts (usually the wallet or prestige).
The pros of these actions are quite large, they usually are very effective at either bringing the target into disrepute and/or highlighting a cause (Fathers for Justice, Fox Hunting – for and against) or actually damaging the target financially.
The Cons tend to be that they can turn people off, both inside and outside the movement (Animal Rights Activists being a classic example – digging up people is not in great taste) and their actions can be verily easily twisted by the media. They can also often run the risk of arrest and worse (I hate to break the news to you that the police aren’t all like the guys off the Bill,).
However for a small group direct action is often the most effective form of protest and actually action. In fact it is true no matter what size group you are. University groups have a lot more success from Direct Action than they do from Demonstrations and it’s a lot easier to get in the papers and get to the Chancellor if you dress up foolishly and invade her office than to stand around in the cold with some banners trying to look angry. It is the easiest thing for small groups to do if they wish to bring attention to a cause that hasn’t got the support of a large group – or if they disagree with the policies/tactics of the large group – and are going it alone. Even if the message is twisted by the media at least it is in the media, which is something a lot of campaigns struggle with hugely. And people are aware that there is a very dedicated set of people fighting for this cause.
If you want to find out how to get involved in Direct Action then Earthfirst.co.uk is a very useful resource, if not that then again indymedia. Starting your own group you should just whack posters around with a meeting place on, or get involved in your local community centre (like the Basement in Manchester), find out when the meetings are and get stuck in.
I think direct action should be taken to the door of the CEOs and bureaucrats who make the decisions, in opposing war let us not oppose the Police or army. It’s not their fault or decision (at least as they see it) and they’ll win anyway. One thing to learn from Animal rights activists is how they approach the people directly responsible and confront them. We might want to avoid using their methods, but anything within the bounds of peaceful protest seems fine to me. That means we need flawless research of the facts surrounding who does what and why we should oppose it.
Demonstrations
Pros
Cons
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Demonstrations
We all know what they are and we’re all likely to have seen at least one big one in the past year or so, but was it is their actual effect and why do people do them.
Whilst they do not practically solve problems or attempt to, they are a powerful display of disappointment or anger at a certain policy or institution. The past five years have seen some of the largest civil movements in British history and their foundation and power have been marked by huge demonstrations. The two I talk about in particular are the Stop the War movement, which had the largest demonstration in British History (Police est. 1 Mil., organisers 2 mil., pick somewhere between) and the demonstrations at the G8 (Police est. 300hun.thou. Organisers 500). These demonstrations and the build up to them gathered huge interest in the media and marked very special occasions in British Political history, marking huge public movements against war, enforced poverty and environmental destruction.
The problems come from the fact that practically they seem to have achieved very little, the war was not stopped, nor were terrorist attacks stopped by the general public’s opposition to the war. The concessions gained at the G8 were paltry face jobs that have since been reneged upon. This often leads to disappointment with the movements that organised them and general disillusionment by the general public who support the demonstrations whether they were there or not.
It must be taken into account that the marches and demonstrations are not there specifically to change things themselves. They are important for people involved in the movements to remember that they are part of a large movement and a large body of opinion. It is important when being an activist to remember that you are not alone, there are hundred of thousands, nay millions, like you. Secondly they’re important to remind the general public of that fact, especially those who support the cause. They are also important to highlight the cause in general and bring them to public attention, even if it is just for one day, it may be enough to involve a lot more people in the movement.
The larger organisations will organise demonstrations and if you want to help become a local organiser or just join in demos then it is worth checking out the websites of the major movements such as stop the war, Oxfam (the white band movement), Globalise Resistance or Greenpeace and Eathfirst for environmentalist stuff. People and Planet are involved in a very broad range of Demos and actions as well. Sign yourself up to the mailing lists to keep yourself informed and offer help to demonstrators at the sites or by speaking to them when you see them and they’ll bite your arm off.
The problem still remains about the disillusioning factor of Demonstrations and I think clear plans of action should be put forward and handed out during the demonstrations to make sure people feel that it is just the beginning, not the end of, a whole lot more action about a movement. Community action, direct action, education programs, all of those should be outlined and contact details for local organisers or at least details of how to get support to start your own groups to carry out these programs. The very least there should be regional meetings and/or a national meeting to go to work out progress for the campaign. A movement is not about building up for a series of demonstrations. A lot of effort, time and resources goes into doing this and could be re-directed elsewhere to greater effect.
Community Work/Organising
Pros
Cons
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Legal/Legislative (government)(democratic revolution)
Pros
Cons - Has consistently failed (even Mosely pointed out that Labour had in his time singularly failed to be true to their class). Is dependent on current powers to sustain it’s viability
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Create a Civil Service/United Community activist service/United Press(media)/Corporation(source of Money)/Lobbyist organisation/Active membership in the workplace(do something for them and build the Unions)/Legal Community – Demonstrations and Direct action will be borne of this. Trained sustainable developers/democratic facilitators/linguist and international co-ordinators should be borne out of this training and educational schemes. Job Bank. In all cities.
This is an end goal. Originally the important thing is to get the first steps of all to get underway (which they are – kind of) and get them talking to each other as well as letting people know what to get into.
How do we fund a movement like this?
Well first of all we need to look at the needs of the movement
A lot of people need to be gainfully employed either on a part time basis or doing what it is that might be useful to the movement/what they would be interested in.
It needs to reach a wide an audience as possible, have it’s own means of disseminating information and be organised internationally (if possible).
It needs to show in it’s practices what else is capable of being done and lead by example.
It needs to alleviate people, educate them and provide opportunities for progression through different channels than the current ones.
It could need to be able to compete with current structures of power so as to remain independent and not dependent on the current powers for continuance.
It needs to be able to undertake all kind of programs and actions without being narrowed to a single way of work. It also needs to be interdependent on/with other organisations and open to constant change.
It needs to publicise it’s many successes.
I originally conceptualised the answer to the overwhelming power of modern corporations by thinking ‘fight fire with fire’ after breading No Logo when I was seventeen. It seemed to me that the only way we could compete with the global hegemony of ideas that corporations had is to create one that challenged everything they stood for. This would be internally as well as externally – everyone would be on equal pay, everyone could do work that was satisfying to them, make a positive difference and tell the truth.
This then is how would answer the question. I would examine our first need and say that it is our most important. We are nothing as a movement if not the people who make up the movement. And as those people we often (have to) dedicate our lives to the movement, but without the necessary support we either have to drop out of society all together to sustain our way of living, which forces into a position where we don’t entirely identify with the people we wish to persuade and they certainly don’t identify with us. Alternatively we have to get jobs (for the most part) that might compromise us morally, settle us into an area of life where we gather commitments that make us not want to question society as much or generally take up so much of our time that we don’t have the time or the energy to effect society around us as much as we may wish.
The challenge to our active citizenship is clear. Whilst difficult we should certainly be able to over come it.
Another challenge is that we have very little control over any mass media and any fashion of broadcasting objective reality and criticism outside of socially/systemically accepted norms.
Even the areas that are so prized to the human soul and creation in general are commercialised, but they provide opportunity and hope as industries they can be run in a fashion where no-one is exploited and everyone is a creator. The arts (and specifically music) are industries where the creator is adulated, but is being quickly taken over by the purveyors of the medium rather than the medium itself. Yet in the current age where the celebrity is king being able to create and support the arts and media creation would help reach a far vaster audience than any previous attempts at mass explanation of our ideas, hopes and goals (as well as our scathing and constant criticism).
We have had two problems with our organisation till now in terms of anything to do with money making. It either is amateur, charity based or inefficient, or it tends to support abuses that It shouldn’t (Oxfam and the Chinese bracelets, The body Shop getting taken over by shareholders, the Co-op supporting the World Bank). In the first instance we need a very strong and organised decision making structure that can react quickly to change is competent at producing economically competitive goods. The later part requires organisation along the lines of a Co-Op, with all the workers owning shares, everyone being paid an equal amount and there being a decision making process that can and does involve all members, at least once a year. It should also include democratic fail-safes such as the ability to have instant recall on elected reps and even the bosses.
At the moment we offer no practical alternatives to living current modern, mostly urban, life. There is option to become part of a co-op or commune, which is great and offers a lot of variety, but it still doesn’t cater for all and it certainly is not widely known about. What we need is to provide an organisation that provides many opportunities in many different areas to many different skill sets but show there is a different way of working and a different end.
We cannot constrict ourselves solely to hopeful charity or donations as the people can and will lose faith and money. We cannot remain in the hands of employers, we must be able to stand on our own and be able to weather the storms that can happen to organisations that oppose the current system.
As a movement we often tend to constrict ourselves into organisations or doctrines that prescribe only one way of working. The system we have faced has changed in it’s attempts to reach the same goal – endless profit – and so must we. We cannot always be tied by doctrine, and those who aren’t shouldn’t always have to change organisation, or quit altogether, but should be able to move about within the movement comfortably applying ourselves as we wish, to what we wish. All for the same end (hopefully).
To this end I still consider my original proposal the most sound to cover all these shortfalls in our movement. If this, pretty controversial proposal, is not accepted then there other more piecemeal steps forward we can take in improving our interaction as a movement.
If we build an organisation that sets it’s goals to expand and grow beyond national borders, yet constantly redistribute it’s money to the communities and members of the organisation and into their programs we can achieve a much more concerted effort in achieving the goals of those programs. We can set up a project bank for investment into new teaching/community/sustainable development/activist/workers/legislative/lobbying programs with some of the proceeds, some to directed locally, some nationally, some internationally. We can set up a job bank to offer people work in ethical industries.
The most important arm, to start with, and the one that should originally set out to be money making, is the creative arm. If we can set up a music label, promotions company, paper, magazine and television channel as well as a film making company that all pursue commercial projects at least half the time, then we will have a voice. We will, more importantly, have a voice that has credibility. If we are involved in credible commercial projects that will engage a wider audience in our messages about the state of the globe, both critical and hopeful.
Many people feel we don’t have time to engage in this type of promotion of our causes, but that is exactly why we don’t have a voice with mass appeal. It is also felt that this undermines our credibility. If we can use the tools of the enemy and subvert them (like making documentary films) then why not, they are definitely working for the enemy. We have to think in a new way, especially to publicise all the good work we are doing.
If we can make this organisation a co-operative with all the rights mentioned above, yet also be so multi faceted and open to change we can show people that there is a way of organising society, with joy and variety, that can work with viability. That example needs to be set and soon. And Internationally.
It will also offer people all sorts of opportunities upon joining that might not have been open to them considering there state academic qualifications. However we should encourage more open expression of talent, community training, alternative education, scholarships and apprenticeships.
It can compete with the current powers by being independent and getting independent powers, enough power to even engage in shareholder wars with the bigger corporations and change them and their practices from the inside.
It needs to be remain open, it’s only doctrine being democracy and social entrepreneurship, no Marxism, Anarchism, Libertarianism, or any other ism or ist. It’s support for programs should be based democratically on local control at the local level, national council and international councils beyond, on the basis of it’s merits and benefits for the intended population and/or movement. We also need to publicise and support programs that are by other large organisations, based on their merits.
With these tools we can publicise the numerous successes we’ve had and help people believe in alternative styles and modes of living, self governance and relationships with states, government, economics and the international system, as well as other people and the environment.
We can attack these problems piecemeal and in a more indoctrinated friendly way. For instance we can start with creating a job bank and help build the idea of alternative civil service, one that you can become active in internationally. For that we have to do very little except research thoroughly what is already being done by people and advertise it well.
We can also try to raise a fund to support alternative community centres, of which there are many. We can help set them up, provide an internet link with them and maybe some standardised form of qualification in their teaching and outreach work. Again this can create the idea of an alternative civil society. We can try and encourage international links, mobility of personnel between them, maybe some more commercial activities if they wish (for instance like NUS ltd, that supplies all Students’ Unions with their cheap products at heavily discounted prices). Though that might seem like a radical step it may not be for things like music and films. We can also encourage a lot more knowledge sharing between these groups and places, maybe international training or conferences.
We can try and take on the same pattern towards co-op businesses and housing schemes.
We can try and hook up the networks of guerrilla promoters that there are in each city and use that network to promote local, national and international services to be found on the internet and in the community. A lot of what is missing from the movement is good promotion, but that is easily rectified with a little training and a bit of funding.
Training is something that we should look into and producing curricula and internationally recognised qualifications is not to be sniffed at. It gives us a way into teaching younger people, opening up their minds whilst they learn a new skill. We need to teach languages and arts for what we hope to produce and young people need to be abler to express themselves in new and better ways to overcome their problems. Beyond that however we can train international organisers, sustainable developers and democratic facilitators. That way we can solidify the knowledge gained in the past in these areas (which has never been done and is a huge criticism of the movement, all that ever gets passed on is cynicism) and give people not only something more to look to in the future, but the validity of looking at it as a life skill and something to be used in some kind of gainful employment. Sadly the world is such that qualifications are looked at as such (only by young people, once you’ve finish university you realise that it is hopelessly pointless).
I would look at it in a more comprehensive fashion.
We need to set up a media company that produces films, music, T.V and literary publications of some/different form(s). This is our mouthpiece and unifying product. With this we can use these things as part of the products that we would supply our own network of community centres. This community centres would be self sustaining, catering food , clothing and certain media items at a very cheap price, whilst also offering a place for education, for planning of community action and as a general focal point of the community.
This would supply a certain base for distribution of our products, an organising and training base and a support to the local communities who would also benefit from becoming more active citizens . I know this sounds a little military, but it’s not and it would be really grassroots. People could suggest schemes and projects and apply for funding from their local funds, or from the national and international funds. This also means that these centres would become recognisable symbols for dissent and people would know where to go for information, jobs, support and to get involved in the movement proper.
Through these centres we could also spread the information about all parts of the movement, help make connections with different communities across the world (maybe through exchange programs), advertise all the different jobs available in all different parts of the movement and different housing situations.
These would need a very simple system of one computer with an internet portal to combine them, and hopefully one internet service to provide those links for them. We would obviously need people servicing that as well.
This plan is a lot more ambitious, but a lot more comprehensive. It creates a beacon of light (and how we need a beacon) that is sure, open and un-indoctrinated. It will be clear and it will be a secure base from which to support our activities from, as anything else is ephemeral and can easily be torn down. We can create the most wonderful eye opening products, but with no where to showcase them and no sure means of distribution we will be loosened to the prevailing winds of power (which blow evermore ill).
We would need 2 six teams of social entrepreneurs to undertake this enormous creation.
Firstly and most importantly we would need a team of fund raisers. They would have to go Unions, existing community centres, co-ops and organisations, Chavez (I think he might be able to spare a couple of mil with the right line) then also funds such as the Bill gates fund, lottery funding and all sorts of other bits. Maybe even some world bank funding.
Secondly and almost equally as importantly we need the community centre organisers. We need a small team who could find people to set them up with very little funding in most of the major cities in the UK, Europe, Australia and the U.S. this is where the movement needs to concentrate it’s efforts first and foremost.
Thirdly is linked into secondly, we need explorers and link men, people who know the industries we’re getting into, as well as the ones who know people who will set up shop in a place and a re reliable and to be trusted.
Then we need promoters, people who can sell what we have, again with next nothing, and can help us promote what is already going on. We will need web designers who can collate the current information and present it in an accessible fashion, guerrilla promoters and local promoters and maybe set up a company that we can piggy back off. We can set up a company to promote other peoples products (all ethical) and at the same time use the poster runs their using, or little bit of their ad space, or whatever to promoter our own gigs.
The major set up will be the Media company, film producers, journalists, writers, music reps, label owners, we will need them on board for a whole new project.
Lastly, but not least, we need someone who can set up a work bank or agency for ethical and sustainable work and start using the promoters to promote it.
Each of these teams would have an optimium five or six, but, if they’re the right people, could be run and started with one or two people.
Really.
The important thing from the criticism of the movements and their activities is take is this, the work is being done, it just needs to be dovetailed. Then increased and promoted better.
Community centres,
Explorers, link men
Promoters
Media company
Agency Company
Need to get to the young, forget the old and jaded and indoctrinated.
Use the community shop model of export.
Chavez, People and Planet, Unions.
The Media Company model
Coming soon… “So what should we be heading for?”
1. Leaflet on ‘Why you need a Union’
2. Community Democracy – a modern solution for the awful decisions taken in our name
3. Economic Politics
4. Corporations and combating them – The Profit motive and Consumer, worker and shareholder democracy
5. Judging Tactics
6. SDM
7. Owning the Media
8. Problems and solutions to Democracy
9. Transport Issues – Out of town depots.
10.100% Death Tax – SDM, Inequality without inequality
11. Higher taxes=Brain Drain – Why that’s not a bad thing
12. Victories in the Battle of Manchester
13. Monbiots Plan
14. Getting a cause
9. Transport issues – Out of town Depots
It is not out of bounds to suggest that one of the first things we could do to decrease congestion and environmental damage in out cities is to disallow Lorries to drive into cities under pain of heavy Road Tax. Freight Depots could be set up on the outskirts of town where Electric freight vehicle could continue the freight exercise for them, specific areas of the city being giving to different transport (trains, electric floats, and so forth) on their own set out routes. NOT SO SURE ABOUT THIS, MAYBE SHOULDN’T CONSIDER DAD’S IDEAS SO MUCH.
Transaction for the value of:
GBP 10.0
Reference:
GA2012-08571-0048-62623
This is the first of many blogs describing how and a litlle of why we should make the world a better place, in solely my opinion, and how the the movement as fragmented and undefined as it is, is doing a lot of the necessary work.
It's basically a practical guide to getting involved in trying to stop the destruction of everything we hold dear.
1
Education
Lobbying/Petitioning
Workers Democracy/trade Unions
Consumer Democracy/Boycotts
Direct Action/Media Stunts
Demonstrations
Community work
Education –
Pros
Cons – can depress and deactivate without a clear aim and method for change.
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done – get on boards, change syllabuses
Currently state run education is a bit of a trap. Not only does it indoctrinate the vast majority of the populace from a young age (the police/government can do no wrong. Don’t question authority – or do question it within certain bounds), it also divides, rewards and punishes different people according to merits are fabricated. For instance being good at English and attending regularly is good, being a good plumber and not attending regularly (probably because there’s not much you’re going to get out of it) is bad. You will be graded accordingly and that will determine your future. The further up the age scale you go, the more prepared/able you are at performing the various tricks that are asked of you and the less you question them. More importantly your knowledge, or any of any commercial worth can become the property of private persons/interests.
There is also a scary amount of ignorance about three of the most important aspects of our culture, the ones that enable us to govern ourselves without fear or prejudice and with some competency. (maths and mathematical competency, English and basic grammar rules) (Choice)
Firstly - History.
Not only is a lot imperialism of the distant past justified, but also of the recent present, even if it is taught at all (most people don’t learn beyond the Second World War). Recent History is the most important to learn as it has a direct impact on us and where we come from. The Cold war is taught in a fashion couched in the terminology of being part of one side and internationalism and ideas of the state as a viable body are reinforced.
Secondly - Political Alternatives
There is not much presentation of systems different from our own, even in theory or practice, especially not in any terms that can be understood. It would be impossible to gain any form of qualification for such knowledge, but such knowledge is necessary to be a rounded and active citizen, surely? It also helps us overcome the matter of signing the contract with the state (i.e. the idea that you belong to a country through the choice of it and thereby accept it’s rules and norms).
Thirdly – Languages and useless knowledge
Languages are not taught from an early age and as a population the British are notoriously bad at languages. The understanding of other’s languages helps us to understand their cultures and break down boundaries, as well as understanding the routes of our own. If we understood others’ languages more it would also undermine the sense of separate national identity that undermines itself international unity.
Useless Knowledge – such as Music, Drama, Accountancy, Plumbing, Sustainable development, Social Research, Media Technology. All of these subjects are barely taught at pre 16 age, some not at all yet are invaluable tools and could quite easily be taught a lot more than they are and given qualification status. This could be done by having an extra hour per school day for volunteers to teach various subject, students having more choice in what subjects they study, or how much time they spend on them and also students being given more time and resource for independent study.
In general what the movement needs to address is political education – countering the current media and questioning them, informing people of the truth of international situations and national ones (especially in revealing what is going on unbeknownst to most of us) as they happen, and of patterns in current political and economic systemic behaviour.
Secondly we need to address and educate practical skills, such as those mentioned above, ones that are needed to immediately impact our surroundings (sustainable development – Languages, Artistic creation and practical apprenticeships) and ones to help us become more informed and capable citizens (social research, facilitating decision making, alternate political systems (though that can be a divider)).
The first is an absolute necessity in the current climate of fear, repression and misinformation. In many ways it sometimes this all the left is really involved in, fighting a losing battle to present the truth. The pros of the this are that it’s hugely essentially. People need to know the truth and start forming their own opinions before they can even think about acting on them.
The pros of this are obvious. The negatives are that it can be sometimes dispiriting, especially in the current climate of cynicism, which make reports harder to believe and even harder to act, there seems such an innumerable amount and – most importantly – no easy way to do anything about them. The information is also often boring and un-engaging, most specifically in the presentation.
There are ways round both of these things. Firstly all information should be presented with a clear and simple way to find out more and get involved with something (be it discussions or action) to effect the issue. Secondly the information should be presented in continuously interesting ways. We have the media and the capability to do it. Documentary showings are popular and far more interesting than speeches with an ability to package a lot more information and make it a lot more presentable. Music, the internet and animation, as well as merchandise are all modern, media savvy ways of engaging people.
Also it is best when tying information to one cause, or presenting any information, not to use terms that are not in every day usage. Proletarian, comrade, axiom, dialectic – those kind’s of word have no place in the basic education of the modern day anti establishment movement.
What is currently done are speaker tours, documentary showings (local ones are better with discussion groups afterwards) and internet activist tools. Most of these are used for other activists and have either become ways of preaching to the converted, or merely informing the converted of their decisions (Indymedia) (SWP speaker tours).
However if you want to get involved in these things then it is best to get involved either with Indy media – for internet information and media production, or the Socialist Workers Party for regular speaker tours and weekly discussion groups on the issues of the day (as well as Marxist ideology).
With practical education there are the pro’s that this educates people hugely in things to make real differences to themselves and their surroundings. The Cons are that it can lead to social isolation, where people follow their skill bases and live the dream without encouraging the rest of society or engaging them on a mass scale.
The way around this is too encourage all people doing (teaching or learning) community courses, development courses and so forth to form a national Union and with small donations create some form of national Media and a yearly co-ordinated campaign – or at least some information sharing device.
At the moment to teach or learn most of those skills takes entering the national education system in someway. That means Uni, College, community college or night school of some form. However for what’s going on in your area it is also good to check Indy media as there could be free or cheap community courses that they are doing that can also hook you up with some pretty impressive people.
There are small help points there, but a suggestion for greater improvement is more innovation in the presentation of information, more cohesion and knowledge of what everyone’s doing, and if you are an organiser, new or old, more promotion.
Radio, T.V or papers if you can get it, but simply postering every where is a good one. In fact if you have a regular event then create a regular poster run with either shared responsibility, rotation, or even make it paid (from donations or some form of enterprise). If you want to organise in your own area then it couldn’t be simpler. Organise a documentary showing round your house, or in a community centre, and depending on how many people you want, stick a poster up in the local post office/music store/co-op, etc, or in local community centres and schools and show the documentary and have chat with whoever wants to stick around. You might get some interesting results.
You can also join specific issue groups who do a lot of good work across the spectrum. For instance Justice for Colombia.
SWP, Indymedia, create your own. People and Planet. Amnesty International. Greens. Specific Interest Groups (JFC, Solidarity Groups).
What you can also do to improve the situation if you don’t fancy hardcore organising is getting on Student teacher boards, and local council boards. Shape and change Syllabuses. Change your community.
*********************************************************************************************************************
DO BULLET POINT BREAK DOWN OF THIS
Lobbying -
Pros
Cons
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Lobbying Petitioning/Complaining – to me - is a form of rule changing and opinion swaying that is a more studious and a little effective form of change.
It may come from writing letters to papers pointing out their factual inaccuracies or petitioning you MP to vote with their conscience on certain issues, or to even get the issues raised in the first place. There is high powered lobbying that includes wining and dining and presenting information at conferences and meetings to high powered people.
It’s pros are that it is one of the most legitimate and recognised ways to make your voice heard and can lead to public enquiry and policy debate in the highest arenas. It’s cons are that it basically panders to the people in power. They have no necessity to listen to it, no real necessity to act even if they make the right noises and are very hard to convince on the most fundamental of issues because there is an excepted belief in free market economics, private ownership of wealth or property and a necessity to maintain power with in the current structures.
It is not to say that these things are inherently bad in themselves – but sadly they do seem to be the major causes of environmental destruction and inequality – which in turn are causes of disease, war, famine, species extinction, sea levels rising, climate change, sexism, racism and most of the curses of modern humanity (which, to be fair, has come along some way in combating some of these things).
Most campaigning organisations have some form of lobbying arm – whether it’s someone who reads all the papers and writes nasty letters, to petition organisers, chain mail senders, fund raisers (we shall come to this in more detail later), and governmental and intergovernmental professional lobbyists.
The final are most common amongst Big NGOs (Non Governmental Organisations), charities and campaigning groups such as Greenpeace, Amnesty International, Oxfam and others. These positions tend to require a certain level of expertise in some area, often legal, but also in sustainable development, economics, accountancy and other areas.
If you want to organise a lobbying group then I suggest finding out all of your local government and media contact details and starting there. If you are the right kind of person you can poor over minutes of council meetings, help organise in the parish, correct factual inaccuracies in the local paper, get on the local call in shows and petition your MP. This however is pretty time intensive and takes a vigorous knowledge and the understanding of the facts that you wish to propagate. It is often – as ever – easier in a group, where you could divide responsibilities and it is a good idea to sign yourself up to any and all newsletters and try and get on the circulars of some journalists (such as John Pilfer) so that you stay well informed at the cheapest possible price.
Alternately, you may wish to join a group and just ask to get stuck in on that side of things. Most single issue groups and Big NGOs will have something to do in that area and there should be local groups to get involved with that. Thanks to the wonders of modern telecommunications, that’s not even necessary – but it is necessary to know what you’re looking for and who you might be devoting your time to. Make sure you do good research and check newint.org for a fairly unbiased breakdown of world issue.
I think the big NGOs have got lobbying pretty nailed and tackle their issues with power and panache, within the strictures of power. So as far as they are going on there is not much to be improved. However the rest of the movement that is devoted to a rather wider set of issues and cannot afford to have correspondents in many countries and high powered presentation to the government figures could do with enough money to fund enough people to do research for all of us, write letters for us and highlight current issues and turn the press onto it as soon as maybe. This does happen across the movement, just in a very disparate fashion that provides no unanimity of information or a singularly and readily available source, nor unanimity of purpose or goal.
List of Single Issue groups and NGOS and Major political groupings
Note about how much work it takes, work life balance
How you will end up doing a bit of all things
*********************************************************************************************************************
Workers democracy/rights (Unions) -
Pros
Cons
Global cap.
What’s currently done – ILO, Arg. Trade Unions, Int. Socialists?
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Workers rights have been fought over for many centuries, before The French revolution, or English Civil war (which was mainly capitalists attacking the king until the Levellers came along – but that’s another matter) before Wat Tyler and peasants revolt, back to the times of the Romans and not just the Slave revolts but the revolts of the Plebians, the lower working classes of Rome. Many of these movements have been successful in many ways and this has always been through the working together of the workers. Sadly however there seems to be an equally tragic history of betrayal and failure by the leaders of these movements. The Trade Unions sold short by their leader, The Plebians elected representatives (tribunes) usurped and taken over by the Upper classes, the leaders killed or imprisoned (Wat Tyler, the Levellers) or dominated and destroyed by the most fanatical leaders (Lenin, Stalin, Bonaparte). It is clearly imperative for people around the world to combine together to use each others small amounts of power to protect themselves from the abuse of others, however it has left problems in the past.
The pros of Unions and workers democracy are great for the workers in the Union and can be enormous when combined with other workers movements. It can ensure decent wages, working standards, health safety and benefits (such as compensation and pensions) for all involved and for future generations. As organisations they can also push governments to social democratic leanings providing the same comforts and protection for all members of society.
However this is a double edged sword when not applied internationally. Firstly it can make workers competitive towards the interests of workers from other countries – for instance asking for the state to subsidise their industry or workplace to remain internationally competitive – which then makes all prices for labour across the world have to compete at a lower price and thereby force workers in other countries accept lower standards of working environment and pay just to gain employment. Secondly having driven down labour prices and safety measures the industry that the Union workers work in become less and less competitive, so they demand more and more security until eventually they are forced out of work or the public lose sympathy for their strikes which are invariably broken. Thus they have lost themselves work and forced others to do their jobs in worse conditions.
This has been the history of the past twenty five years, started with Thatcherism and Reaganism in the early eighties, which has lead to what is known as ‘capital flight’ which destroys economies and continually oppresses workers across the world. This is when a company decides to invest somewhere cheaper which is invariably worse for the people working in that cheaper place, it’s not all about exchange rates).
The other problem has come from the leadership. Workers democracy has mostly worked along the lines of national democracy (which is equally ineffective – more later) which is representative. Representative Dem. Has shown a tendency for the rep. to become corrupt or ineffective at many points, especially in the face of a seemingly un-opposable and alluring systems of power/culture/elitism/etc. This is reference to teamsters Unions and the pyramid democracy of the Stalinist systems employed during the Cold war. However there some very recent examples of workable workers Democracy.
Firstly, to have a look at what is currently done, well there are National Unions in most developed nations, sometimes week and ineffectual, sometimes strong and strident. What ever line of work you do it is hugely important to get involved if you are employed.
Don’t worry what your salary is, if you get a pay check instead of giving it then you are a worker and one of the best things you can do is team up with some other workers to make sure you don’t get shafted (there will always come a time, whatever job you do, when you are likely to get shafted). Plus it can be a good way to get to know some work mates and do stuff together as well as develop your view and learn how to engage in real democracy (i.e. making decisions together on an equal basis).
There is also the ILO (Int. Labour Org.) and a few other international workers organisations. If you wish to get involved in lobbying, research, protection of int. workers rights and possibly helping build int. unity (which is really paramount to workers success) then these are well worth giving a look, even if it is just to spread the word about what they’re doing. With all of these things it’s always worth a look just to see about spreading the word.
Lastly I want to a look at a type of workers Democracy which has been tried very rarely but seems to yield the most positive results. The anarcho-syndicalists (yes lefties love big words) of the Spanish Civil war were the first people to try workers democracy with a far more involving system of decision making than elected a rep and getting them to do all the decision making (except for the occasional vote). After getting shafted by the Stalinist and the liberals this kind of haphazard, long but lovable and involving decision making has barely been seen, but in the past few years in Argentina a new bread has been found. Workers going back into their disposed factories – supposedly left because they couldn’t turn a profit – have been run solely by the workers. They elect a different president each week who does the admin duties, and they all take on different duties all the time so they are dependent on no-one person and can therefore not be held to ransom. Also it is a lot more interesting and they all care about their jobs enough to want to do a bit of everything. There are now nearly three hundred repossessed factories in Argentina. Maybe we can strive for a work place free of managers, with everyone on the same pay and interested in all the different facets of the job. That would be truly involving workers democracy.
List of Trade Unions and Int. Organisations fighting for workers rights.
The take and other info sources on
*********************************************************************************************************************
Consumer Democracy/Shareholder democracy –
Pros
Cons
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Consumer Democracy is a relatively new idea, but already has a certain amount of baggage. It is the idea that we can hold corporations to account through acting in concert on changing our shopping habits in favour or against certain points depending on their ethical credibility. One of the longest running boycotts has been of Nestle, I think at the Students’ Union of Manchester it has been running for twenty years. This was started because of the blanket selling of Nestle Milk to many African populations which is a lot worse for them than breast milk, to the point where it is responsible for a child’s death every minute. In response to this pressure groups have encouraged a multinational consumer boycott.
This has included institutions and shopping chains and has caused quite considerable costs to Nestle, however it might not be considered a success because of it’s inability to actually stop Nestlé’s practices. However there have been successful boycotts of things like Pepsi, where the corporations have ceased one particular unethical practice.
The pro’s of these boycotts is that it highlights the unethical and dangerous practices of particular corporations and gives people something quite simple to do to curb the excesses of those attacks/damaging practices. It has also changed a culture within a lot of corporations whereby they wish to at least appear like ethical companies which has had hugely positive effects for certain workers and environs. It is also something that is winnable and easy to organise around. You have the facts of X’s misdemeanours, publish them, try to stop people buying it and try and stop whatever organisation you are part of buying their products. There is almost always a more ethical alternative.
There other methods from merely encouraging people to stop putting something in their shopping basket. Institutional boycotts are far more effective tools, Unions, Schools, Churches, Trade Unions, Workplaces, even Supermarkets (very difficult). Also Shareholder democracy is being dabbled with, where consortiums of ethical investors buying shares in a particular culprit and trying to force them to change their practices with the power of their shares.
The problems with this practice it doesn’t tend to highlight the fact that corporations by their very nature and set up are abusive and destructive organisations. It also doesn’t tackle the route causes of their misdemeanours and attack corporate culture enough. This is reflected in the often only partial success of the boycotts and the swift shift back to more damaging practices by some corporations after a successful campaign. It also leads to boycott fatigue by some members of the public – with constant campaigns and new problems to fight all the time. It supports the critique of Corporations being inherently exploitative with out being explicit about it.
Things to look at at the moment are Campaigns against the Arms Trade, the Coca Cola Boycott and maybe the Nestle Boycott.
I think it would be imperative to add these actions together and try and support international bodies of law that curb the excesses of all Corporations. Also things like the World Bank Boycott are good new ways of looking at the problem, attack the institutions that support Corporations and their successes, so then you can go back to attacking your government that invariably subsidises them, but also the international institutions, which is far mor3e important. Corporations would not have the ground to use slave labour, destroy the environment, patent life saving drug and generally make money out of misery and destruction around the world without the Support of the World Bank and the IMF. It is these along with groups like the G8 and Forums like the WTO we should focus our efforts.
*********************************************************************************************************************
Pros
Cons - Can turn people off your cause and is very easily twisted by the media
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in – Earthfirst.org.uk
What else can be done
Direct Action –
Direct Action can be described in various ways. Classic direct Action are things like strikes and militant protests, but direct action can also mean media stunts and smaller strikes at the establishment, targeted to hit the offender right where it hurts (usually the wallet or prestige).
The pros of these actions are quite large, they usually are very effective at either bringing the target into disrepute and/or highlighting a cause (Fathers for Justice, Fox Hunting – for and against) or actually damaging the target financially.
The Cons tend to be that they can turn people off, both inside and outside the movement (Animal Rights Activists being a classic example – digging up people is not in great taste) and their actions can be verily easily twisted by the media. They can also often run the risk of arrest and worse (I hate to break the news to you that the police aren’t all like the guys off the Bill,).
However for a small group direct action is often the most effective form of protest and actually action. In fact it is true no matter what size group you are. University groups have a lot more success from Direct Action than they do from Demonstrations and it’s a lot easier to get in the papers and get to the Chancellor if you dress up foolishly and invade her office than to stand around in the cold with some banners trying to look angry. It is the easiest thing for small groups to do if they wish to bring attention to a cause that hasn’t got the support of a large group – or if they disagree with the policies/tactics of the large group – and are going it alone. Even if the message is twisted by the media at least it is in the media, which is something a lot of campaigns struggle with hugely. And people are aware that there is a very dedicated set of people fighting for this cause.
If you want to find out how to get involved in Direct Action then Earthfirst.co.uk is a very useful resource, if not that then again indymedia. Starting your own group you should just whack posters around with a meeting place on, or get involved in your local community centre (like the Basement in Manchester), find out when the meetings are and get stuck in.
I think direct action should be taken to the door of the CEOs and bureaucrats who make the decisions, in opposing war let us not oppose the Police or army. It’s not their fault or decision (at least as they see it) and they’ll win anyway. One thing to learn from Animal rights activists is how they approach the people directly responsible and confront them. We might want to avoid using their methods, but anything within the bounds of peaceful protest seems fine to me. That means we need flawless research of the facts surrounding who does what and why we should oppose it.
Demonstrations
Pros
Cons
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Demonstrations
We all know what they are and we’re all likely to have seen at least one big one in the past year or so, but was it is their actual effect and why do people do them.
Whilst they do not practically solve problems or attempt to, they are a powerful display of disappointment or anger at a certain policy or institution. The past five years have seen some of the largest civil movements in British history and their foundation and power have been marked by huge demonstrations. The two I talk about in particular are the Stop the War movement, which had the largest demonstration in British History (Police est. 1 Mil., organisers 2 mil., pick somewhere between) and the demonstrations at the G8 (Police est. 300hun.thou. Organisers 500). These demonstrations and the build up to them gathered huge interest in the media and marked very special occasions in British Political history, marking huge public movements against war, enforced poverty and environmental destruction.
The problems come from the fact that practically they seem to have achieved very little, the war was not stopped, nor were terrorist attacks stopped by the general public’s opposition to the war. The concessions gained at the G8 were paltry face jobs that have since been reneged upon. This often leads to disappointment with the movements that organised them and general disillusionment by the general public who support the demonstrations whether they were there or not.
It must be taken into account that the marches and demonstrations are not there specifically to change things themselves. They are important for people involved in the movements to remember that they are part of a large movement and a large body of opinion. It is important when being an activist to remember that you are not alone, there are hundred of thousands, nay millions, like you. Secondly they’re important to remind the general public of that fact, especially those who support the cause. They are also important to highlight the cause in general and bring them to public attention, even if it is just for one day, it may be enough to involve a lot more people in the movement.
The larger organisations will organise demonstrations and if you want to help become a local organiser or just join in demos then it is worth checking out the websites of the major movements such as stop the war, Oxfam (the white band movement), Globalise Resistance or Greenpeace and Eathfirst for environmentalist stuff. People and Planet are involved in a very broad range of Demos and actions as well. Sign yourself up to the mailing lists to keep yourself informed and offer help to demonstrators at the sites or by speaking to them when you see them and they’ll bite your arm off.
The problem still remains about the disillusioning factor of Demonstrations and I think clear plans of action should be put forward and handed out during the demonstrations to make sure people feel that it is just the beginning, not the end of, a whole lot more action about a movement. Community action, direct action, education programs, all of those should be outlined and contact details for local organisers or at least details of how to get support to start your own groups to carry out these programs. The very least there should be regional meetings and/or a national meeting to go to work out progress for the campaign. A movement is not about building up for a series of demonstrations. A lot of effort, time and resources goes into doing this and could be re-directed elsewhere to greater effect.
Community Work/Organising
Pros
Cons
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Legal/Legislative (government)(democratic revolution)
Pros
Cons - Has consistently failed (even Mosely pointed out that Labour had in his time singularly failed to be true to their class). Is dependent on current powers to sustain it’s viability
What’s currently done
How to organise and join in
What else can be done
Create a Civil Service/United Community activist service/United Press(media)/Corporation(source of Money)/Lobbyist organisation/Active membership in the workplace(do something for them and build the Unions)/Legal Community – Demonstrations and Direct action will be borne of this. Trained sustainable developers/democratic facilitators/linguist and international co-ordinators should be borne out of this training and educational schemes. Job Bank. In all cities.
This is an end goal. Originally the important thing is to get the first steps of all to get underway (which they are – kind of) and get them talking to each other as well as letting people know what to get into.
How do we fund a movement like this?
Well first of all we need to look at the needs of the movement
A lot of people need to be gainfully employed either on a part time basis or doing what it is that might be useful to the movement/what they would be interested in.
It needs to reach a wide an audience as possible, have it’s own means of disseminating information and be organised internationally (if possible).
It needs to show in it’s practices what else is capable of being done and lead by example.
It needs to alleviate people, educate them and provide opportunities for progression through different channels than the current ones.
It could need to be able to compete with current structures of power so as to remain independent and not dependent on the current powers for continuance.
It needs to be able to undertake all kind of programs and actions without being narrowed to a single way of work. It also needs to be interdependent on/with other organisations and open to constant change.
It needs to publicise it’s many successes.
I originally conceptualised the answer to the overwhelming power of modern corporations by thinking ‘fight fire with fire’ after breading No Logo when I was seventeen. It seemed to me that the only way we could compete with the global hegemony of ideas that corporations had is to create one that challenged everything they stood for. This would be internally as well as externally – everyone would be on equal pay, everyone could do work that was satisfying to them, make a positive difference and tell the truth.
This then is how would answer the question. I would examine our first need and say that it is our most important. We are nothing as a movement if not the people who make up the movement. And as those people we often (have to) dedicate our lives to the movement, but without the necessary support we either have to drop out of society all together to sustain our way of living, which forces into a position where we don’t entirely identify with the people we wish to persuade and they certainly don’t identify with us. Alternatively we have to get jobs (for the most part) that might compromise us morally, settle us into an area of life where we gather commitments that make us not want to question society as much or generally take up so much of our time that we don’t have the time or the energy to effect society around us as much as we may wish.
The challenge to our active citizenship is clear. Whilst difficult we should certainly be able to over come it.
Another challenge is that we have very little control over any mass media and any fashion of broadcasting objective reality and criticism outside of socially/systemically accepted norms.
Even the areas that are so prized to the human soul and creation in general are commercialised, but they provide opportunity and hope as industries they can be run in a fashion where no-one is exploited and everyone is a creator. The arts (and specifically music) are industries where the creator is adulated, but is being quickly taken over by the purveyors of the medium rather than the medium itself. Yet in the current age where the celebrity is king being able to create and support the arts and media creation would help reach a far vaster audience than any previous attempts at mass explanation of our ideas, hopes and goals (as well as our scathing and constant criticism).
We have had two problems with our organisation till now in terms of anything to do with money making. It either is amateur, charity based or inefficient, or it tends to support abuses that It shouldn’t (Oxfam and the Chinese bracelets, The body Shop getting taken over by shareholders, the Co-op supporting the World Bank). In the first instance we need a very strong and organised decision making structure that can react quickly to change is competent at producing economically competitive goods. The later part requires organisation along the lines of a Co-Op, with all the workers owning shares, everyone being paid an equal amount and there being a decision making process that can and does involve all members, at least once a year. It should also include democratic fail-safes such as the ability to have instant recall on elected reps and even the bosses.
At the moment we offer no practical alternatives to living current modern, mostly urban, life. There is option to become part of a co-op or commune, which is great and offers a lot of variety, but it still doesn’t cater for all and it certainly is not widely known about. What we need is to provide an organisation that provides many opportunities in many different areas to many different skill sets but show there is a different way of working and a different end.
We cannot constrict ourselves solely to hopeful charity or donations as the people can and will lose faith and money. We cannot remain in the hands of employers, we must be able to stand on our own and be able to weather the storms that can happen to organisations that oppose the current system.
As a movement we often tend to constrict ourselves into organisations or doctrines that prescribe only one way of working. The system we have faced has changed in it’s attempts to reach the same goal – endless profit – and so must we. We cannot always be tied by doctrine, and those who aren’t shouldn’t always have to change organisation, or quit altogether, but should be able to move about within the movement comfortably applying ourselves as we wish, to what we wish. All for the same end (hopefully).
To this end I still consider my original proposal the most sound to cover all these shortfalls in our movement. If this, pretty controversial proposal, is not accepted then there other more piecemeal steps forward we can take in improving our interaction as a movement.
If we build an organisation that sets it’s goals to expand and grow beyond national borders, yet constantly redistribute it’s money to the communities and members of the organisation and into their programs we can achieve a much more concerted effort in achieving the goals of those programs. We can set up a project bank for investment into new teaching/community/sustainable development/activist/workers/legislative/lobbying programs with some of the proceeds, some to directed locally, some nationally, some internationally. We can set up a job bank to offer people work in ethical industries.
The most important arm, to start with, and the one that should originally set out to be money making, is the creative arm. If we can set up a music label, promotions company, paper, magazine and television channel as well as a film making company that all pursue commercial projects at least half the time, then we will have a voice. We will, more importantly, have a voice that has credibility. If we are involved in credible commercial projects that will engage a wider audience in our messages about the state of the globe, both critical and hopeful.
Many people feel we don’t have time to engage in this type of promotion of our causes, but that is exactly why we don’t have a voice with mass appeal. It is also felt that this undermines our credibility. If we can use the tools of the enemy and subvert them (like making documentary films) then why not, they are definitely working for the enemy. We have to think in a new way, especially to publicise all the good work we are doing.
If we can make this organisation a co-operative with all the rights mentioned above, yet also be so multi faceted and open to change we can show people that there is a way of organising society, with joy and variety, that can work with viability. That example needs to be set and soon. And Internationally.
It will also offer people all sorts of opportunities upon joining that might not have been open to them considering there state academic qualifications. However we should encourage more open expression of talent, community training, alternative education, scholarships and apprenticeships.
It can compete with the current powers by being independent and getting independent powers, enough power to even engage in shareholder wars with the bigger corporations and change them and their practices from the inside.
It needs to be remain open, it’s only doctrine being democracy and social entrepreneurship, no Marxism, Anarchism, Libertarianism, or any other ism or ist. It’s support for programs should be based democratically on local control at the local level, national council and international councils beyond, on the basis of it’s merits and benefits for the intended population and/or movement. We also need to publicise and support programs that are by other large organisations, based on their merits.
With these tools we can publicise the numerous successes we’ve had and help people believe in alternative styles and modes of living, self governance and relationships with states, government, economics and the international system, as well as other people and the environment.
We can attack these problems piecemeal and in a more indoctrinated friendly way. For instance we can start with creating a job bank and help build the idea of alternative civil service, one that you can become active in internationally. For that we have to do very little except research thoroughly what is already being done by people and advertise it well.
We can also try to raise a fund to support alternative community centres, of which there are many. We can help set them up, provide an internet link with them and maybe some standardised form of qualification in their teaching and outreach work. Again this can create the idea of an alternative civil society. We can try and encourage international links, mobility of personnel between them, maybe some more commercial activities if they wish (for instance like NUS ltd, that supplies all Students’ Unions with their cheap products at heavily discounted prices). Though that might seem like a radical step it may not be for things like music and films. We can also encourage a lot more knowledge sharing between these groups and places, maybe international training or conferences.
We can try and take on the same pattern towards co-op businesses and housing schemes.
We can try and hook up the networks of guerrilla promoters that there are in each city and use that network to promote local, national and international services to be found on the internet and in the community. A lot of what is missing from the movement is good promotion, but that is easily rectified with a little training and a bit of funding.
Training is something that we should look into and producing curricula and internationally recognised qualifications is not to be sniffed at. It gives us a way into teaching younger people, opening up their minds whilst they learn a new skill. We need to teach languages and arts for what we hope to produce and young people need to be abler to express themselves in new and better ways to overcome their problems. Beyond that however we can train international organisers, sustainable developers and democratic facilitators. That way we can solidify the knowledge gained in the past in these areas (which has never been done and is a huge criticism of the movement, all that ever gets passed on is cynicism) and give people not only something more to look to in the future, but the validity of looking at it as a life skill and something to be used in some kind of gainful employment. Sadly the world is such that qualifications are looked at as such (only by young people, once you’ve finish university you realise that it is hopelessly pointless).
I would look at it in a more comprehensive fashion.
We need to set up a media company that produces films, music, T.V and literary publications of some/different form(s). This is our mouthpiece and unifying product. With this we can use these things as part of the products that we would supply our own network of community centres. This community centres would be self sustaining, catering food , clothing and certain media items at a very cheap price, whilst also offering a place for education, for planning of community action and as a general focal point of the community.
This would supply a certain base for distribution of our products, an organising and training base and a support to the local communities who would also benefit from becoming more active citizens . I know this sounds a little military, but it’s not and it would be really grassroots. People could suggest schemes and projects and apply for funding from their local funds, or from the national and international funds. This also means that these centres would become recognisable symbols for dissent and people would know where to go for information, jobs, support and to get involved in the movement proper.
Through these centres we could also spread the information about all parts of the movement, help make connections with different communities across the world (maybe through exchange programs), advertise all the different jobs available in all different parts of the movement and different housing situations.
These would need a very simple system of one computer with an internet portal to combine them, and hopefully one internet service to provide those links for them. We would obviously need people servicing that as well.
This plan is a lot more ambitious, but a lot more comprehensive. It creates a beacon of light (and how we need a beacon) that is sure, open and un-indoctrinated. It will be clear and it will be a secure base from which to support our activities from, as anything else is ephemeral and can easily be torn down. We can create the most wonderful eye opening products, but with no where to showcase them and no sure means of distribution we will be loosened to the prevailing winds of power (which blow evermore ill).
We would need 2 six teams of social entrepreneurs to undertake this enormous creation.
Firstly and most importantly we would need a team of fund raisers. They would have to go Unions, existing community centres, co-ops and organisations, Chavez (I think he might be able to spare a couple of mil with the right line) then also funds such as the Bill gates fund, lottery funding and all sorts of other bits. Maybe even some world bank funding.
Secondly and almost equally as importantly we need the community centre organisers. We need a small team who could find people to set them up with very little funding in most of the major cities in the UK, Europe, Australia and the U.S. this is where the movement needs to concentrate it’s efforts first and foremost.
Thirdly is linked into secondly, we need explorers and link men, people who know the industries we’re getting into, as well as the ones who know people who will set up shop in a place and a re reliable and to be trusted.
Then we need promoters, people who can sell what we have, again with next nothing, and can help us promote what is already going on. We will need web designers who can collate the current information and present it in an accessible fashion, guerrilla promoters and local promoters and maybe set up a company that we can piggy back off. We can set up a company to promote other peoples products (all ethical) and at the same time use the poster runs their using, or little bit of their ad space, or whatever to promoter our own gigs.
The major set up will be the Media company, film producers, journalists, writers, music reps, label owners, we will need them on board for a whole new project.
Lastly, but not least, we need someone who can set up a work bank or agency for ethical and sustainable work and start using the promoters to promote it.
Each of these teams would have an optimium five or six, but, if they’re the right people, could be run and started with one or two people.
Really.
The important thing from the criticism of the movements and their activities is take is this, the work is being done, it just needs to be dovetailed. Then increased and promoted better.
Community centres,
Explorers, link men
Promoters
Media company
Agency Company
Need to get to the young, forget the old and jaded and indoctrinated.
Use the community shop model of export.
Chavez, People and Planet, Unions.
The Media Company model
Coming soon… “So what should we be heading for?”
1. Leaflet on ‘Why you need a Union’
2. Community Democracy – a modern solution for the awful decisions taken in our name
3. Economic Politics
4. Corporations and combating them – The Profit motive and Consumer, worker and shareholder democracy
5. Judging Tactics
6. SDM
7. Owning the Media
8. Problems and solutions to Democracy
9. Transport Issues – Out of town depots.
10.100% Death Tax – SDM, Inequality without inequality
11. Higher taxes=Brain Drain – Why that’s not a bad thing
12. Victories in the Battle of Manchester
13. Monbiots Plan
14. Getting a cause
9. Transport issues – Out of town Depots
It is not out of bounds to suggest that one of the first things we could do to decrease congestion and environmental damage in out cities is to disallow Lorries to drive into cities under pain of heavy Road Tax. Freight Depots could be set up on the outskirts of town where Electric freight vehicle could continue the freight exercise for them, specific areas of the city being giving to different transport (trains, electric floats, and so forth) on their own set out routes. NOT SO SURE ABOUT THIS, MAYBE SHOULDN’T CONSIDER DAD’S IDEAS SO MUCH.
Transaction for the value of:
GBP 10.0
Reference:
GA2012-08571-0048-62623
posted by Thirdeyemedia at 4:21 PM
1 comments
