[matilda] Social centres, funding and the PGA Hallmarks

[dan at aktivix.org]

Hi again,

The PGA Hallmarks have been discussed, at great length, for months, you say?  

That's what should happen, isn't it?

What I don't get is that it's only PGA-backers who are asking that it be adopted
wholesale.

What I, and a number of other people have said, repeatedly, is this:

MATILDA is too large and diffuse a project to adopt one single set of
principles.  What we wanted was some way of explaining what the project was to
people, i.e. something to put on posters at the parties.

So I am against adopting anything.  I'm *for* a diverse range of ideas, a
constant on-going conversation, argument even.

As Subcommandante Marcos says, the 21st century revolutionary should 'walk
asking'.

That's so true! We should walk asking - and that would mean that we don't *need*
a single set of principles.

But - again - that's coz I believe in the social forum principles of diversity
and open space.  That all adopting any single approach means is locking that
space down.  

I won't be able to take part also because I don't agree in a 'confrontational
stance' - a point that no-one's responded to.

I'm working with some people in Burngreave, on a community-led investigation
into what people want or think about Spital Hill.  There's a whole load of
issues there, and I've been speaking to the councillors and workers there about
the whole thing. 

I couldn't work from MATILDA on this, on the basis of the PGA, because a
'confrontational stance' against globalisation.... er, well, wouldn't get me or
anyone who might want to make locally-led change anywhere... although how
globalisation is affecting Spital Hill is entirely relevant, and confronting
global changes in the law that benefit large corporations and hurt local
traders is absolutely and entirely right - in my opinion.  But that's *very*
different from some vague *confrontational stance*...

So - I keep on trying to actually pass the PGA Hallmarks through a 'how will
this work on the ground' filter, and it doesn't.  So I can either:

1. Say 'Ah well, it's just a set of words anyway...'
or 
2. Actually argue that we can adapt it to local circumstance - take words
seriously.

Which we should be able to do because, as they say, we have autonomy - don't we?
The PGA Hallmarks aren't God Almighty.

I couldn't make it last night coz, for the first time in about 10 months, I'd
arranged to take my mum round someone else's house for food.  She doesn't get
out much, is pretty lonely most of the time, and so cancelling to talk about
the PGA would be pretty shitty.

So I sent an e-mail asking someone to represent my point of view - which, I
guess, no-one did. And I certainly didn't expect it to be the last chance to
argue for it.

Those who want the Hallmarks have been patient? They are also the only group
trying to impose a single set of principles on the group.  Everyone else is
happy with a diversity of opinions and principles, as far as I can see.

So the struggle isn't between the PGA and any other set of principles: it's
between the idea of a single set of principles, and the idea of a diversity
that can 'walk asking'.

If we stop walking and asking, what on Earth are we doing?

Well done for reading this far.

Dan
---


Quoting Chris <chris at aktivix.org>:

> Hi
> 
> On Thu 06-Oct-2005 at 10:07:43AM +0100, Chris wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu 06-Oct-2005 at 09:32:47AM +0100, dan at aktivix.org
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > So, anyway, maybe someone can tell me you're
> > > joking.... 
> > > 
> > > If not, it's been nice working with you, and I'll miss
> > > you, but I ain't working with any group with such
> > > authoritarian tendencies...
> > 
> > Um, so if you don't get you way you simply walk away...?
> 
> Of course that should have read:
> 
>   Um, so if you don't get *your* way you simply walk away...?
> 
> The people who have been pushing for the adoption of the
> PGA Hallmarks have been *very* paticient -- these were
> originally raised back in July and at *many* meetings it
> was decided that there wasn't time to discuss them. 
> 
> The people who were wanting to argue in favour of them
> being adopted have had to wait almost 4 months before they
> had a change to put their reasons forward as to why they
> should be adopted. During this 4 month period did any of
> these people walk away?
> 
> I hope that there is time to have further discussion about
> this on Monday -- I'm keen to have the oppertunity to try
> to convince any people that are unsure that it would be a
> good thing that we collectively agree to adopt them
> (though I'll be late due to child care committments...).
> 
> People pushing for the PGA hallmarks haven't issued any
> ultimatiums (that I'm aware of) -- Dan you seem to be the
> only person saying "Adopt the PGA hallmarks or I walk out"
> -- how does a position like this fit in with consensus
> decision making? 
> 
> Chris
>   
> -- 
> Aktivix -- Free Software for a Free World
> _______________________________________________
> matilda mailing list
> matilda at lists.aktivix.org
> http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/matilda
>