Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Tired of Vanguards? Radical/progressive Youth Anti-War Organizing Starting here!
here ya go, enjoy
this is long but please take the time to read it.
Ok everyone here is some news and updates. I think over the past few days we've all realized that our criticism only carries out so far,
until actuall action and change has to happen yes this weekend in Berkeley was a bit discouraging but that's not going to stop any of us from organizing against this tragic war. It's actually motiviated us more to work harder for a more collective and true democratic process.
So after this weekends awful experience in Berkeley and after talking this week to many many people all over so. cal, bay area, and Arizona a group of us calling ourselves so far "Progressive Radical Youth Against the War" are going to start organizing on a local campus, community level against the war. So far there are around 59 people from the Berkeley conference involved who are involved in this, the Long Beach info. shop has allowed the so. cal group a meeting space, and this group is open to ANYONE and EVERYONE who feels like the don't have a place or a voice within the liberal/ISOer anti-war movement.
another point that is important to make is that we are encouraging not only Students to get involved but for youth in general to get involved. Being able to go to a major college or university at many times is an extreme privilege, and there are plenty of youth within our movement who are extremely well organized and ready to help in the anti-war movement.. they just happen to not go to school. We want to push for more youth and especially youth of color,women, members of the queer community to become involved because these issues effect them directly, before it starts to effect the white priviledged class.
We have to realize just like the folks in Boston and Chicago have done over the past 2 weeks that IT is possible for us to have two anti-war movement. One for Liberal/Vanguard groups and one for more
progressive/radical/anti-authoritarian groups. Let's break the stereotypes and show that we can organize and we can allow for free
expression within this movement. Lets actually reach out to our middle eastern/muslim/south asian brothers and sisters in our communities and show them that they have a space and a voice in this movement. Instead of asking them to come to our meetings, and join our groups, let's go to them and take our guidance directly from them and help them in their struggle. Instead of going in and telling them how to organize and telling them what we think is the best way to organize, lets listen to them and take a bit of our direction and guidance from them.
We are a group of people who came out of the CSAW conference feeling a bit alienated and confused regarding the process of structure, and democratic process. For the most part we are youth from schools all over the West Coast who want to fight in this anti-war movement, in our communities and schools. Our group is a completely open group for discussion and dialogue and is going to be building and organizing around the anti-war movement from a non hierarchal, not patriarchal, anti-authoritarian standpoint. We want your input in every way possible, we have not set up the structure or decision making process of this group yet.
These are the points that we walked away with not wanting to repeat from the CSAW conference in Berkeley
Our main points were made and people brought up and had problems with were:
- the decision-making process in the conference was not agreed upon by the attendees, nor explained to us at any point
- the decision-making process before the conference was completely hidden from view - no one, including many Berkeley activists, had any idea what was being planned or had any input, even when they tried to participate.
- the ISO dominated many school delegations, dominated the speakers,
dominated the planning, and completely controlled the moderation.
- opposing views were almost always cut off "because we didn't have time" (At one point, an ISO woman named Leticia stood up and said "we don't have time for this, people want to go home. We can discuss this later! It's too late to bring this up anyway." Later? When would that be? It was the very last hour of the very last day of the conference! When she make this comment, a few people got furious and the rest tried not to laugh hysterically.
- speakers were often interrupted by ISO members
- an agenda for proposals was not public and information in general was tightly controlled by a few people, mostly ISO, who made little effor to get outside input or even let other people know what was going on.
-Women, people of color, and members of the queer community felt alianated by the conference, the moderator and structure that conference was set up towards.
-no explenation of consensus, majority vote, or any other decision making process was EVER at ANY point explained to anyone
-discussion were cut short, and voting was happening too quickly to the point that many stopped voting and felt a need to walk out
-3 conferences have been held at Berkeley, the first one anyone and everyone from schools was allowed to attend and participate in the decison making process, the 2nd Conference the decisions and voting was limited to only 5 delegates from each school, the 3rd conference that is now being planned took that even further and is planning on only allowing 1 delegate from each school to attend and make decisions. What's next? only one regional delegate representing 5 schools at a time?
we are going to be setting up meetings in So. Cal sometime a few days after Thanksgiving and that date will be announced, but this group is not going to be limited to So. CAl only because many people already involved are from Arizona, the Bay Area, and OR. So spread the message of this alternative setting trying to establish for people to plug into. We have a list server already set up that is not moderated and asking for discussion and organization within cities and groups to work autonomously and collectively.
If you would like to be involved, put on our list server, or know of people who would like to be involved and put on our list server please email:
antiwar [at] disinfo.net OR respond to this email
we always complain about not knowing where to plug in, well here is a forum now, and this group is young and just starting to organize. So we are all on the same page and equally need to be involved in the structure and decision making process.
Thank you all, especially those who helped with your words and guidance this past week to fully help this be organized and for progress to FINALLY be made.
please spread/circulate this email at will to those you think are interested
Ok everyone here is some news and updates. I think over the past few days we've all realized that our criticism only carries out so far,
until actuall action and change has to happen yes this weekend in Berkeley was a bit discouraging but that's not going to stop any of us from organizing against this tragic war. It's actually motiviated us more to work harder for a more collective and true democratic process.
So after this weekends awful experience in Berkeley and after talking this week to many many people all over so. cal, bay area, and Arizona a group of us calling ourselves so far "Progressive Radical Youth Against the War" are going to start organizing on a local campus, community level against the war. So far there are around 59 people from the Berkeley conference involved who are involved in this, the Long Beach info. shop has allowed the so. cal group a meeting space, and this group is open to ANYONE and EVERYONE who feels like the don't have a place or a voice within the liberal/ISOer anti-war movement.
another point that is important to make is that we are encouraging not only Students to get involved but for youth in general to get involved. Being able to go to a major college or university at many times is an extreme privilege, and there are plenty of youth within our movement who are extremely well organized and ready to help in the anti-war movement.. they just happen to not go to school. We want to push for more youth and especially youth of color,women, members of the queer community to become involved because these issues effect them directly, before it starts to effect the white priviledged class.
We have to realize just like the folks in Boston and Chicago have done over the past 2 weeks that IT is possible for us to have two anti-war movement. One for Liberal/Vanguard groups and one for more
progressive/radical/anti-authoritarian groups. Let's break the stereotypes and show that we can organize and we can allow for free
expression within this movement. Lets actually reach out to our middle eastern/muslim/south asian brothers and sisters in our communities and show them that they have a space and a voice in this movement. Instead of asking them to come to our meetings, and join our groups, let's go to them and take our guidance directly from them and help them in their struggle. Instead of going in and telling them how to organize and telling them what we think is the best way to organize, lets listen to them and take a bit of our direction and guidance from them.
We are a group of people who came out of the CSAW conference feeling a bit alienated and confused regarding the process of structure, and democratic process. For the most part we are youth from schools all over the West Coast who want to fight in this anti-war movement, in our communities and schools. Our group is a completely open group for discussion and dialogue and is going to be building and organizing around the anti-war movement from a non hierarchal, not patriarchal, anti-authoritarian standpoint. We want your input in every way possible, we have not set up the structure or decision making process of this group yet.
These are the points that we walked away with not wanting to repeat from the CSAW conference in Berkeley
Our main points were made and people brought up and had problems with were:
- the decision-making process in the conference was not agreed upon by the attendees, nor explained to us at any point
- the decision-making process before the conference was completely hidden from view - no one, including many Berkeley activists, had any idea what was being planned or had any input, even when they tried to participate.
- the ISO dominated many school delegations, dominated the speakers,
dominated the planning, and completely controlled the moderation.
- opposing views were almost always cut off "because we didn't have time" (At one point, an ISO woman named Leticia stood up and said "we don't have time for this, people want to go home. We can discuss this later! It's too late to bring this up anyway." Later? When would that be? It was the very last hour of the very last day of the conference! When she make this comment, a few people got furious and the rest tried not to laugh hysterically.
- speakers were often interrupted by ISO members
- an agenda for proposals was not public and information in general was tightly controlled by a few people, mostly ISO, who made little effor to get outside input or even let other people know what was going on.
-Women, people of color, and members of the queer community felt alianated by the conference, the moderator and structure that conference was set up towards.
-no explenation of consensus, majority vote, or any other decision making process was EVER at ANY point explained to anyone
-discussion were cut short, and voting was happening too quickly to the point that many stopped voting and felt a need to walk out
-3 conferences have been held at Berkeley, the first one anyone and everyone from schools was allowed to attend and participate in the decison making process, the 2nd Conference the decisions and voting was limited to only 5 delegates from each school, the 3rd conference that is now being planned took that even further and is planning on only allowing 1 delegate from each school to attend and make decisions. What's next? only one regional delegate representing 5 schools at a time?
we are going to be setting up meetings in So. Cal sometime a few days after Thanksgiving and that date will be announced, but this group is not going to be limited to So. CAl only because many people already involved are from Arizona, the Bay Area, and OR. So spread the message of this alternative setting trying to establish for people to plug into. We have a list server already set up that is not moderated and asking for discussion and organization within cities and groups to work autonomously and collectively.
If you would like to be involved, put on our list server, or know of people who would like to be involved and put on our list server please email:
antiwar [at] disinfo.net OR respond to this email
we always complain about not knowing where to plug in, well here is a forum now, and this group is young and just starting to organize. So we are all on the same page and equally need to be involved in the structure and decision making process.
Thank you all, especially those who helped with your words and guidance this past week to fully help this be organized and for progress to FINALLY be made.
please spread/circulate this email at will to those you think are interested
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Good luck to the new group, but as someone in the Berkeley Stop the War Coalition, I'd like to offer my services to clear up some misconceptions and just-plain inaccuracies.
The first conference Sept. 29th -- the CSAW founding conference -- was open to everyone just like the most recent West Coast conference.
However, at both conferences, each school was limited to 5 delegate votes in order to avoid the host school being able to outvote all the other schools. This was so that Berkeley wouldn't ride roughshod over everybody else.
You complain (legitimately) about Berkeley having hosted both the first two conferences, so you see some problem with different schools having different power -- yet you also complain at the attempts made to equalize the power.
As for many Berkeley activists not knowing how the conference was planned -- this is true, but mainly because not all of us are in the teach-in committee. The email list for the teach-in committee of the Berkleey Stop the War Coalition is "nowarteachin" on Yahoo! Groups. Check the archives.
There ARE legitimate transparency, power-sharing, process, democracy, and communications issues -- but many people from other schools are blowing these up into a conspiracy. If I wanted to see a conspiracy in this new group, I could -- e.g., "LIED about delegated nature of CSAW founding conference; ACTED UNDEMOCRATICALLY by walking out on a meeting; SPREAD UNSUBSTANTIATED RUMORS about Berkeley Stop the War Coalition -- but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt. Why won't you give us the same basic respect?
As for reaching out to youth in general, that is not something which is excluded in the present CSAW model. BSTWC has been forging links with SHRUB (the Berkeley High anti-war group) and the Solidarity Committee (predominantly activists of color against the war, with a strong youth element), for instance.
Perhaps also of interest, two of BSTWC's six elected spokespeople are Muslim/Middle Eastern, three more are other people of color, and only one is white. Three are male, three female. None are from the ISO.
Of the five BSTWC delegates to the West Coast Conference, only one is kind of a member of the ISO. Two to four of the five were from "targeted communities" (depending on whether you include the South Asian and Latino communities). Three men, two women.
I'm not saying there's not anything that needs to be done in terms of taking our lead from the communities most affected by the war. But I'm just pointing out that all this is already happening within the current CSAW structure, and specifically within BSTWC, which has been multiracial from the beginning (which isn't to say there haven't been issues surrounding race and gender -- but we have discussed them openly and we have not just swept them under the carpet, which you seem to be implying we do).
I'm sorry to keep going on and on about the Berkeley Stop the War Coalition, but the allegations about ISO manipulation center on Berkeley; as one of hundreds of non-ISO members of BSTWC, I just want to say that from my personal experience, I find the allegations to be largely unfounded. If it is not true in Berkeley, it is likely not to be true elsewhere, as well.
But still, genuinely, good luck with the new group!!! Stay in touch.
In solidarity,
Jim Fung
The first conference Sept. 29th -- the CSAW founding conference -- was open to everyone just like the most recent West Coast conference.
However, at both conferences, each school was limited to 5 delegate votes in order to avoid the host school being able to outvote all the other schools. This was so that Berkeley wouldn't ride roughshod over everybody else.
You complain (legitimately) about Berkeley having hosted both the first two conferences, so you see some problem with different schools having different power -- yet you also complain at the attempts made to equalize the power.
As for many Berkeley activists not knowing how the conference was planned -- this is true, but mainly because not all of us are in the teach-in committee. The email list for the teach-in committee of the Berkleey Stop the War Coalition is "nowarteachin" on Yahoo! Groups. Check the archives.
There ARE legitimate transparency, power-sharing, process, democracy, and communications issues -- but many people from other schools are blowing these up into a conspiracy. If I wanted to see a conspiracy in this new group, I could -- e.g., "LIED about delegated nature of CSAW founding conference; ACTED UNDEMOCRATICALLY by walking out on a meeting; SPREAD UNSUBSTANTIATED RUMORS about Berkeley Stop the War Coalition -- but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt. Why won't you give us the same basic respect?
As for reaching out to youth in general, that is not something which is excluded in the present CSAW model. BSTWC has been forging links with SHRUB (the Berkeley High anti-war group) and the Solidarity Committee (predominantly activists of color against the war, with a strong youth element), for instance.
Perhaps also of interest, two of BSTWC's six elected spokespeople are Muslim/Middle Eastern, three more are other people of color, and only one is white. Three are male, three female. None are from the ISO.
Of the five BSTWC delegates to the West Coast Conference, only one is kind of a member of the ISO. Two to four of the five were from "targeted communities" (depending on whether you include the South Asian and Latino communities). Three men, two women.
I'm not saying there's not anything that needs to be done in terms of taking our lead from the communities most affected by the war. But I'm just pointing out that all this is already happening within the current CSAW structure, and specifically within BSTWC, which has been multiracial from the beginning (which isn't to say there haven't been issues surrounding race and gender -- but we have discussed them openly and we have not just swept them under the carpet, which you seem to be implying we do).
I'm sorry to keep going on and on about the Berkeley Stop the War Coalition, but the allegations about ISO manipulation center on Berkeley; as one of hundreds of non-ISO members of BSTWC, I just want to say that from my personal experience, I find the allegations to be largely unfounded. If it is not true in Berkeley, it is likely not to be true elsewhere, as well.
But still, genuinely, good luck with the new group!!! Stay in touch.
In solidarity,
Jim Fung
Good luck to the new group, but as someone in the Berkeley Stop the War Coalition, I'd like to offer my services to clear up some misconceptions and just-plain inaccuracies.
The first conference Sept. 29th -- the CSAW founding conference -- was open to everyone just like the most recent West Coast conference.
However, at both conferences, each school was limited to 5 delegate votes in order to avoid the host school being able to outvote all the other schools. This was so that Berkeley wouldn't ride roughshod over everybody else.
You complain (legitimately) about Berkeley having hosted both the first two conferences, so you see some problem with different schools having different power -- yet you also complain at the attempts made to equalize the power.
As for many Berkeley activists not knowing how the conference was planned -- this is true, but mainly because not all of us are in the teach-in committee. The email list for the teach-in committee of the Berkleey Stop the War Coalition is "nowarteachin" on Yahoo! Groups. Check the archives.
There ARE legitimate transparency, power-sharing, process, democracy, and communications issues -- but many people from other schools are blowing these up into a conspiracy. If I wanted to see a conspiracy in this new group, I could -- e.g., "LIED about delegated nature of CSAW founding conference; ACTED UNDEMOCRATICALLY by walking out on a meeting; SPREAD UNSUBSTANTIATED RUMORS about Berkeley Stop the War Coalition -- but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt. Why won't you give us the same basic respect?
As for reaching out to youth in general, that is not something which is excluded in the present CSAW model. BSTWC has been forging links with SHRUB (the Berkeley High anti-war group) and the Solidarity Committee (predominantly activists of color against the war, with a strong youth element), for instance.
Perhaps also of interest, two of BSTWC's six elected spokespeople are Muslim/Middle Eastern, three more are other people of color, and only one is white. Three are male, three female. None are from the ISO.
Of the five BSTWC delegates to the West Coast Conference, only one is kind of a member of the ISO. Two to four of the five were from "targeted communities" (depending on whether you include the South Asian and Latino communities). Three men, two women.
I'm not saying there's not anything that needs to be done in terms of taking our lead from the communities most affected by the war. But I'm just pointing out that all this is already happening within the current CSAW structure, and specifically within BSTWC, which has been multiracial from the beginning (which isn't to say there haven't been issues surrounding race and gender -- but we have discussed them openly and we have not just swept them under the carpet, which you seem to be implying we do).
I'm sorry to keep going on and on about the Berkeley Stop the War Coalition, but the allegations about ISO manipulation center on Berkeley; as one of hundreds of non-ISO members of BSTWC, I just want to say that from my personal experience, I find the allegations to be largely unfounded. If it is not true in Berkeley, it is likely not to be true elsewhere, as well.
But still, genuinely, good luck with the new group!!! Stay in touch.
In solidarity,
Jim Fung
The first conference Sept. 29th -- the CSAW founding conference -- was open to everyone just like the most recent West Coast conference.
However, at both conferences, each school was limited to 5 delegate votes in order to avoid the host school being able to outvote all the other schools. This was so that Berkeley wouldn't ride roughshod over everybody else.
You complain (legitimately) about Berkeley having hosted both the first two conferences, so you see some problem with different schools having different power -- yet you also complain at the attempts made to equalize the power.
As for many Berkeley activists not knowing how the conference was planned -- this is true, but mainly because not all of us are in the teach-in committee. The email list for the teach-in committee of the Berkleey Stop the War Coalition is "nowarteachin" on Yahoo! Groups. Check the archives.
There ARE legitimate transparency, power-sharing, process, democracy, and communications issues -- but many people from other schools are blowing these up into a conspiracy. If I wanted to see a conspiracy in this new group, I could -- e.g., "LIED about delegated nature of CSAW founding conference; ACTED UNDEMOCRATICALLY by walking out on a meeting; SPREAD UNSUBSTANTIATED RUMORS about Berkeley Stop the War Coalition -- but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt. Why won't you give us the same basic respect?
As for reaching out to youth in general, that is not something which is excluded in the present CSAW model. BSTWC has been forging links with SHRUB (the Berkeley High anti-war group) and the Solidarity Committee (predominantly activists of color against the war, with a strong youth element), for instance.
Perhaps also of interest, two of BSTWC's six elected spokespeople are Muslim/Middle Eastern, three more are other people of color, and only one is white. Three are male, three female. None are from the ISO.
Of the five BSTWC delegates to the West Coast Conference, only one is kind of a member of the ISO. Two to four of the five were from "targeted communities" (depending on whether you include the South Asian and Latino communities). Three men, two women.
I'm not saying there's not anything that needs to be done in terms of taking our lead from the communities most affected by the war. But I'm just pointing out that all this is already happening within the current CSAW structure, and specifically within BSTWC, which has been multiracial from the beginning (which isn't to say there haven't been issues surrounding race and gender -- but we have discussed them openly and we have not just swept them under the carpet, which you seem to be implying we do).
I'm sorry to keep going on and on about the Berkeley Stop the War Coalition, but the allegations about ISO manipulation center on Berkeley; as one of hundreds of non-ISO members of BSTWC, I just want to say that from my personal experience, I find the allegations to be largely unfounded. If it is not true in Berkeley, it is likely not to be true elsewhere, as well.
But still, genuinely, good luck with the new group!!! Stay in touch.
In solidarity,
Jim Fung
Good luck to the new group, but as someone in the Berkeley Stop the War Coalition, I'd like to offer my services to clear up some misconceptions and just-plain inaccuracies.
The first conference Sept. 29th -- the CSAW founding conference -- was open to everyone just like the most recent West Coast conference.
However, at both conferences, each school was limited to 5 delegate votes in order to avoid the host school being able to outvote all the other schools. This was so that Berkeley wouldn't ride roughshod over everybody else.
You complain (legitimately) about Berkeley having hosted both the first two conferences, so you see some problem with different schools having different power -- yet you also complain at the attempts made to equalize the power.
As for many Berkeley activists not knowing how the conference was planned -- this is true, but mainly because not all of us are in the teach-in committee. The email list for the teach-in committee of the Berkleey Stop the War Coalition is "nowarteachin" on Yahoo! Groups. Check the archives.
There ARE legitimate transparency, power-sharing, process, democracy, and communications issues -- but many people from other schools are blowing these up into a conspiracy. If I wanted to see a conspiracy in this new group, I could -- e.g., "LIED about delegated nature of CSAW founding conference; ACTED UNDEMOCRATICALLY by walking out on a meeting; SPREAD UNSUBSTANTIATED RUMORS about Berkeley Stop the War Coalition -- but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt. Why won't you give us the same basic respect?
As for reaching out to youth in general, that is not something which is excluded in the present CSAW model. BSTWC has been forging links with SHRUB (the Berkeley High anti-war group) and the Solidarity Committee (predominantly activists of color against the war, with a strong youth element), for instance.
Perhaps also of interest, two of BSTWC's six elected spokespeople are Muslim/Middle Eastern, three more are other people of color, and only one is white. Three are male, three female. None are from the ISO.
Of the five BSTWC delegates to the West Coast Conference, only one is kind of a member of the ISO. Two to four of the five were from "targeted communities" (depending on whether you include the South Asian and Latino communities). Three men, two women.
I'm not saying there's not anything that needs to be done in terms of taking our lead from the communities most affected by the war. But I'm just pointing out that all this is already happening within the current CSAW structure, and specifically within BSTWC, which has been multiracial from the beginning (which isn't to say there haven't been issues surrounding race and gender -- but we have discussed them openly and we have not just swept them under the carpet, which you seem to be implying we do).
I'm sorry to keep going on and on about the Berkeley Stop the War Coalition, but the allegations about ISO manipulation center on Berkeley; as one of hundreds of non-ISO members of BSTWC, I just want to say that from my personal experience, I find the allegations to be largely unfounded. If it is not true in Berkeley, it is likely not to be true elsewhere, as well.
But still, genuinely, good luck with the new group!!! Stay in touch.
In solidarity,
Jim Fung
The first conference Sept. 29th -- the CSAW founding conference -- was open to everyone just like the most recent West Coast conference.
However, at both conferences, each school was limited to 5 delegate votes in order to avoid the host school being able to outvote all the other schools. This was so that Berkeley wouldn't ride roughshod over everybody else.
You complain (legitimately) about Berkeley having hosted both the first two conferences, so you see some problem with different schools having different power -- yet you also complain at the attempts made to equalize the power.
As for many Berkeley activists not knowing how the conference was planned -- this is true, but mainly because not all of us are in the teach-in committee. The email list for the teach-in committee of the Berkleey Stop the War Coalition is "nowarteachin" on Yahoo! Groups. Check the archives.
There ARE legitimate transparency, power-sharing, process, democracy, and communications issues -- but many people from other schools are blowing these up into a conspiracy. If I wanted to see a conspiracy in this new group, I could -- e.g., "LIED about delegated nature of CSAW founding conference; ACTED UNDEMOCRATICALLY by walking out on a meeting; SPREAD UNSUBSTANTIATED RUMORS about Berkeley Stop the War Coalition -- but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt. Why won't you give us the same basic respect?
As for reaching out to youth in general, that is not something which is excluded in the present CSAW model. BSTWC has been forging links with SHRUB (the Berkeley High anti-war group) and the Solidarity Committee (predominantly activists of color against the war, with a strong youth element), for instance.
Perhaps also of interest, two of BSTWC's six elected spokespeople are Muslim/Middle Eastern, three more are other people of color, and only one is white. Three are male, three female. None are from the ISO.
Of the five BSTWC delegates to the West Coast Conference, only one is kind of a member of the ISO. Two to four of the five were from "targeted communities" (depending on whether you include the South Asian and Latino communities). Three men, two women.
I'm not saying there's not anything that needs to be done in terms of taking our lead from the communities most affected by the war. But I'm just pointing out that all this is already happening within the current CSAW structure, and specifically within BSTWC, which has been multiracial from the beginning (which isn't to say there haven't been issues surrounding race and gender -- but we have discussed them openly and we have not just swept them under the carpet, which you seem to be implying we do).
I'm sorry to keep going on and on about the Berkeley Stop the War Coalition, but the allegations about ISO manipulation center on Berkeley; as one of hundreds of non-ISO members of BSTWC, I just want to say that from my personal experience, I find the allegations to be largely unfounded. If it is not true in Berkeley, it is likely not to be true elsewhere, as well.
But still, genuinely, good luck with the new group!!! Stay in touch.
In solidarity,
Jim Fung
I wanted to say that I think there is a misconseption about what this post/proposal for new group is saying. I personally want to stay in the coalition and change it.
I too, had lots of beef with the conference, but I don't blame you or any of the hard working BSTWC folks, you did a good job. I think there's always room for improvement, but you tried to do the best you can and I give you major props for that.
The issue that I had, was that outside of the person who took time and stack and the persons house I stayed at, the BSTWC people were invisible in teh conference. All I could see was ISO facilitating, ISO making the major proposals like the steering committee and national conference, ISO arguing people who didn't agree, and ISO runnning the importnat committees that come out of the conference.
ONe thing that I think the BSTWC folks haven't heard about yet is that the same thing happened at everyother conference!!! THe ISO is acting in a national way to push themselves on this thing starting up. They have done the same thing in many other movements and coalitions and they will do it again this time. That's why everyone is really so mad, but some people are not putting all the pieces of the puzzle together.
PLease tell all the other coalition members you know, I want to work with all of you, 500 students together is awesome!! But if the ISO political party takes it over, they will only use it to recruit more people to them and it will go no where. Take these comments to heart please!
I too, had lots of beef with the conference, but I don't blame you or any of the hard working BSTWC folks, you did a good job. I think there's always room for improvement, but you tried to do the best you can and I give you major props for that.
The issue that I had, was that outside of the person who took time and stack and the persons house I stayed at, the BSTWC people were invisible in teh conference. All I could see was ISO facilitating, ISO making the major proposals like the steering committee and national conference, ISO arguing people who didn't agree, and ISO runnning the importnat committees that come out of the conference.
ONe thing that I think the BSTWC folks haven't heard about yet is that the same thing happened at everyother conference!!! THe ISO is acting in a national way to push themselves on this thing starting up. They have done the same thing in many other movements and coalitions and they will do it again this time. That's why everyone is really so mad, but some people are not putting all the pieces of the puzzle together.
PLease tell all the other coalition members you know, I want to work with all of you, 500 students together is awesome!! But if the ISO political party takes it over, they will only use it to recruit more people to them and it will go no where. Take these comments to heart please!
hmmm...
Jim I feel where you are going and I know you have good intentions and all, but the BSTWC isn't really all that functional...and I have heard grips from many of the people that are on the coordinating committee or the teach-in committee that you are talking about in your email
yes people walk away from things like the BSTWC...and other folks can't realistically do as much as some of the more hard core "activists" such as ISO...And the BSTWC is coerced and manipulated in many different ways...Shit just look at the fact that it fucking meets on a Friday night and that there are curiously never teach-ins/meetings/or events that conflict with ISO's meetings(and Students for Justice in Palestines...but that is a different issue entirely)...
Point is...despite all the good things that the BSTWC has going for itself...it is entirely too frustrating to deal with particular people over and over again who recreate the same problems at conferences and in large coalitions(or movements)..that is why I was largely not present at the conference and that is why i am resisting going to the meetings to be "democratic" as you would put it and bring up my issues
sorry that i can not explain more but i should go get stuff done and try and study a little for school too...
in struggle - chuckE
ps - thanks for those who are engaging in constructive dialog...i try but i am tired of getting shouted down all the time or painted as some conspiracy theorist or red baiter...
pss - it will be nice to see some stuff develop that is not constantly bogged down with newspaper sales quotas or recruitment efforts...
Jim I feel where you are going and I know you have good intentions and all, but the BSTWC isn't really all that functional...and I have heard grips from many of the people that are on the coordinating committee or the teach-in committee that you are talking about in your email
yes people walk away from things like the BSTWC...and other folks can't realistically do as much as some of the more hard core "activists" such as ISO...And the BSTWC is coerced and manipulated in many different ways...Shit just look at the fact that it fucking meets on a Friday night and that there are curiously never teach-ins/meetings/or events that conflict with ISO's meetings(and Students for Justice in Palestines...but that is a different issue entirely)...
Point is...despite all the good things that the BSTWC has going for itself...it is entirely too frustrating to deal with particular people over and over again who recreate the same problems at conferences and in large coalitions(or movements)..that is why I was largely not present at the conference and that is why i am resisting going to the meetings to be "democratic" as you would put it and bring up my issues
sorry that i can not explain more but i should go get stuff done and try and study a little for school too...
in struggle - chuckE
ps - thanks for those who are engaging in constructive dialog...i try but i am tired of getting shouted down all the time or painted as some conspiracy theorist or red baiter...
pss - it will be nice to see some stuff develop that is not constantly bogged down with newspaper sales quotas or recruitment efforts...
I see problems already for your group if you call it "Progressive Radical Youth Against the War"-- you will be stuck with the acronym PRYAW, which sucks.
THE IMPORTANCE OF A SNAPPY ACRONYM CAN'T BE UNDERSTATED!!
You might think of changing your name to Progressive Radical Against Youth, in which case your acronym will be PRAY. If this is too religious, you could use the name Progressive Radical Everyone Yes!, in which case you will be PREY!, which is pretty groovy, but might not be proper for an anti-war group.
I think you are starting to get my point-- coming up with a good acronym is probably the single most important decision your group makes, which might be impossible to do with the participation of a group with a bad acronym like the ISO.
Good luck!
THE IMPORTANCE OF A SNAPPY ACRONYM CAN'T BE UNDERSTATED!!
You might think of changing your name to Progressive Radical Against Youth, in which case your acronym will be PRAY. If this is too religious, you could use the name Progressive Radical Everyone Yes!, in which case you will be PREY!, which is pretty groovy, but might not be proper for an anti-war group.
I think you are starting to get my point-- coming up with a good acronym is probably the single most important decision your group makes, which might be impossible to do with the participation of a group with a bad acronym like the ISO.
Good luck!
I know you hate hearing this but.... there is another student anti-war conference being planned on feb 1-2.
There will be an official announcement later on.
Everything will be done to make sure that it is no run by the ISO.
Every effort will be made to have as democratic as possible. Check chicago indymedia for more details.
We need an anarchist presence to make our voices heard. The anarchist "out" is being planned as well so that you will not feel that you wasted your ticket money.
I would like all the groups come together to help build an effective anti-war movement.
Come help!
There will be an official announcement later on.
Everything will be done to make sure that it is no run by the ISO.
Every effort will be made to have as democratic as possible. Check chicago indymedia for more details.
We need an anarchist presence to make our voices heard. The anarchist "out" is being planned as well so that you will not feel that you wasted your ticket money.
I would like all the groups come together to help build an effective anti-war movement.
Come help!
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$210.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network