In this page we will be posting class notes. We also can continue discussions in the comments.
Reading anarchism, class notes from 6/23
group adopted the proposal from erin that an example of a feminist praxis used by facilitators to ensure that structural oppression does not leak into our reading group. This example of the feminist praxis will be sent out over the list sometime during the course of the week.
We also decided by consensus that we will attempt to have as many different people facilitate as possible.
Bakunin article summary
-The author systematically and rationally analyzes capitalism and the capitalistic system. He systemtically refutes the arguments for capitalism through a method of debate that is very formulaic.
-1881 is the year in which Bakunin wrote this piece. Essentially he is analyzing a system of slavery. Has the system changed/evolved to the point of making this analysis outdated?
-Members of the group responded by thinking about the relationship between the capitalism of bakunin’s era and our current context. The wage system still very much exists. The capitalists have the advantage and influence to drive down the price of our labor; the only alternative to selling our labor is, more or less, to starve.
-a shift occurred during the 1900’s in which the working class was targeted as yet another market for the consumption of products and by-products of capitalistic production. i.e. henry ford publically states it as a goal to pay workers not only enough to get by but also so that they may buy a ford.
-bakunin lambastes the myth of democratic equality; there cannot be political equality wthin a system of economic inequality. “there is no disequality greater than false equality”
-the credit card debt system was brought up as another way in which the system ensnares us in the cyclical muck of the wage system
-the credit card was not offered to the working class until after the great depression; loans and credit buying were offered to the middle class in the final decades of the 19th century.
-capital that is not used is wasted thus all capitalists have it in their interest to loan there money so that a gain can be made on interest.
“origins of mayday’ article summary
-“anarchists did not create the labor movement but it was the anarchists within the movement that propelled it to have anarchist ideals”; the popular struggle that is commemorated on mayday is remembered as the fight for the 8 hour day.
-a part of the movement (the more radical elements) was concerned that even with the 8 hour day the system of wage slavery still existed
-the direct action proposed by many anarchists was adopted as a response to the ineffectiveness of socialists/radicals being elected into office but being held in check by the beauracracy of the system.
-when did “we” lose the core argument that the wage system is the root of suffering and needs to be focused upon to be destroyed?
-there is the contradiction between immediate goals and long term destruction of the capitalistic system>>it is important to focus on the struggles that build the revolutionary movement
-**anti-capitalists have a tremendous amount of power because of our labor; why are we all not positioned ourselves within the working class in order to push forward stronger, revolutionary ideals?**
‘marx and the anrachists’
-thomas appears to critcize anarchists because of their mono-focus on the state; group members disagreed with this assessment and brought up the idea that anarchists are actually focused on the oppression that reproduces and supports
-author reduced anarchists to being anti-state which is simply false; the state is only an apparatus that supports all forms of oppression within society
-author connects anarchism to locke and hobbes that are now looked to by neo-liberal super capitalists that have the largest influence over the current model of globalization
>>the struggle between lifestyle anarchism and hardcore anarchism was brought up by a member of the group
-there is a contradiction inherent within Thomas’ analysis of anarchists as strictly negative, in his own article he talks of the creation of communal groups by anarchists
-the contunity between anarchism and liberal ideals; capitalistic individualism is simply a fraud because it is only individualism of the rich
-there is more focus by anarchists on the process of how we organize where as Marxists are categorized to be more willing to sacrifice the means for the ends
-thomas talks about the anarchist’s focus of ‘starting out from zero’; and how does this compare with neo-liberal ideals of ‘starting from zero’ such as the case with bombing iraq back to the stone age and building its state anew?
From this point onward we departed from talking about any reading in particular but group members were inspired to talk about ways that we as anti-capitalists/radicals/anarchists can be more effective in the fight against capitalism
The idea of primitivism or a natural state of being was brought up and discussed; it was generally thought of as a dangerous world to delve into; again the idea was put forward that the origins of anarchism have their roots in the response to capitalism and thus it must confront that economic system and look to cause a radical shift in the economic base of our society
Perhaps it is also dangerous to dismiss any anarchist tradition that is not involved in the labor movement; maybe something like a temporary autonomous zone can be looked to as an example of how we can organize ourselves in a future society
**laura and connor will facilitate next session**
Feminist Process
Background
One of the most fundamental ideas of feminism is that we don’t all have equal access to power in this society, and feminist process is one way of beginning to address and redress that disparity. Feminist process is a way of structuring debate and action to include more people and to encourage people who usually follow to learn to lead, and vice-versa.
The most important part of feminist process is not a set of guidelines but of a constant awareness of the whole. That means waiting to let other people speak if you’ve been talking a lot; responding to the discussion rather than looking for an opportunity to make your point; being aware of how much other people are taking on and recognizing that everyone needs to do her or his part, though not all of our parts are necessarily equal all the time; taking risks by volunteering to lead if you’ve always followed or to follow if you’ve always led, and being supportive of other people who are taking those risks.
Principles
- Speaking in meetings: A stack is used to encourage discussion. A stack is a list of people who wish to speak on a given topic. The facilitator usually keeps the stack. The facilitator should feel free to put her or himself on the stack.
-Facilitation: The facilitator should not assume gender identities of those in the group and should rotate so that everyone gets a chance to both lead and follow. If you have a lot to say in a given meeting, it is probably not a good idea to facilitate. If the facilitator feels comfortable using certain tools or techniques or consensus process such as “sparkly fingers” or the appointment of a “vibe watcher,” the facilitator needs to briefly explain any technique that may be utilized in the meeting in plain language at the very beginning of the process. Just as facilitators need to be sure not to assume gender or other identities of group participants, facilitators need to make sure not to assume that all participants are familiar with consensus process jargon like “block,” “stand aside,” or “abstention.”
-Representation: recognizes that there are voices that are not heard in the group. This doesn’t mean that we try to speak for those that are not present, but that we acknowledge that not everyone is represented and consider how what we are doing affects other people.
-Decision-making: We strive for consensus. This encourages us to seek compromise which incorporates everyone’s ideas. However, we should be careful about not coercing people to agree to something simply for the sake of consensus. When consensus seems impossible, the group can agree to take a vote or use some other means of decision-making.
-Evaluations: come at the end of each meeting to give each person a chance to comment on the process, but not the content of the meeting. If your point has already been made or you don’t want to evaluate, you can pass. Since it is an evaluation of process, it is helpful not to respond to other evaluations but simply to assess the dynamics of the meeting, i.e. the meeting discussion was intimidating or uncomfortable, the facilitation could have been better, etc.
-Post-mortems: are evaluations of work on a particular project and are usually more loosely structured than meeting evaluations. Discussion usually includes whether the project accomplished the purpose, how the work was divided, and what may have been done better.