[matilda] Detilding Mafina

[Chris Malins]

Just a thought. An email a little while ago (I forget who from) 
suggested that although the World Bank claims 'Our dream is a world 
without poverty' and is manifestly not contributing to such a world, the 
existence of hypocrisy in the mission statements of other bodies is not 
a reason for Matilda not to have a mission statement. The PGA hallmarks 
are quite a profound statement of intent, which I find exciting but also 
am not convinced match the vision and future of Matilda.

We have to decide whether we are going to force the arch-capitalists 
like D amongst us into being part of the same type of hypocrisy we have 
decried in the World Bank - there has certainly been the implication 
that we should expect those who disagree with PGA to graciously accept 
it. Or alternatively, whether we are going to make our commitment to the 
PGA hallmarks a genuinely profound one, and start to really look at what 
Matilda is being used for, with an aim to cropping out such activities 
as are irrelevant or contrary to the PGA hallmarks. Personally, I think 
that if Matilda is to have a mission statement, it should be something 
that we act by, rather than a glossy cover note to put on the internet 
and impress the rest of the movement. But a genuinely meaningful 
statement of intent is bound to question the relationship between the 
artistic and radical intent of the building, and my understanding has 
always been that (although likely to be moderately self-selecting) there 
was no requirement on artists asking for space that their work or intent 
should coincide with other members' political aims.

The long and short of it is that we should ask ourselves, 'Will the PGA 
Hallmarks change how we act', and if we say no, then we are as 
hypocritical as the WB if we adopt them.

Chris

gavin at cyber-rights.net wrote:
> "No, exactly: my point was that, given the perceptions of direct 
> action withinand without the movement, we could do with 
> articulating what *our* vision of direct action is.  E.g. by saying 
> things like "it can include writing your own news stories, about 
> what's going on in your community.""
> 
> I hope my point about matilda BEING direct action goes some way 
> towards this. I think our presentation of 'what we are' should 
> include this kind of 'friendly' definition, but can do that by 
> saying matilda is direct action (maybe 'direct community action'?), 
> and then defining it in terms like I gave?
> 
> At the same time, I think it's important not to get too bound up 
> with responding to the mass media's sterotypes of the brick through 
> the window, otherwise they've got us playing their game...dancing 
> to their tune and obsessed with defending ourselves instead of just 
> SHOWING how we're not simply like that by acting positively in our 
> local community, which will have a greater effect in demonstrating 
> the essential human decency of direct action.
> 
> xxx
> 
> 
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 02:43:53 -0700 dan at aktivix.org wrote:
> 
>>Allo again
>>
>>
>>>>*What* Direct action? *What* civil disobedience? 
>>
>>>Well I agree there isn't much happening in Sheffield but
>>>what about the sit down protests on the anti-war and g8
>>>demos, what about things like 9 Ladies etc...
>>
>>All true - but I'm still a little puzzled by saying that direct 
>>action and civil
>>disobedience is the default MATILDA setting.  It sounds to me like 
> 
> 
>>saying we'll
>>always use a hammer, regardless of whether we're banging nails in 
> 
> 
>>or opening a
>>tin of beans.
>>
>>
>>>>.. contains two totally different strands, as far as I'm
>>>>concerned.  I don't want to intimidate, harrass or
>>>>sabotage. 
>>>
>>>Sure, me neither, but just because it says this on the
>>>Wikipedia it doesn't mean we have to do it does it! 
>>
>>No, exactly: my point was that, given the perceptions of direct 
>>action within
>>and without the movement, we could do with articulating what *our* 
> 
> 
>>vision of
>>direct action is.  E.g. by saying things like "it can include 
>>writing your own
>>news stories, about what's going on in your community."
>>
>>I don't think this is just nit-picking - it could make a profound 
>>difference to
>>how MATILDA is accepted within communities around Sheffield.  And 
>>*that* could
>>make or break any hopes we have of a long-term future, as well as 
>>be vital to
>>getting more people both involved, and accepting and understanding 
> 
> 
>>of where
>>we're coming from.  
>>
>>If we want the idea of doing for yourself to spread, we need to 
>>break the
>>association in people's minds between direct action and smashing 
>>McDonald's
>>windows.  That really, really, isn't going to get us anywhere.
>>
>>I agree with J's idea for MATILDA - it should be doing stuff out 
>>there: not just
>>inward-looking.  So we need to be able to convince others, through 
> 
> 
>>both our
>>actions and words.
>>
>>Maybe?
>>
>>Dan
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>matilda mailing list
>>matilda at lists.aktivix.org
>>http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/matilda
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get your free encrypted email at http://www.cyber-rights.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> matilda mailing list
> matilda at lists.aktivix.org
> http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/matilda
>