[Sdalliance] Agenda for our Sunday (2.26.17) Meeting & Self Defense Mtg at noon

Mon Feb 27 15:52:20 PST 2017

Hello All,

I'm just going to speak of my own limited experience with the possibility
that it might be of value to someone here.

The few times I've participated in this alliance, I've witnessed a bit of
power struggle, identity politics and pontificating the superiority one's
own moral stance.  It doesn't feel right to me...it doesn't feel like the
*radical* response I want for the shit happening in the world today.
Again, just speaking for myself.

Maybe the most radical/revolutionary thing each of us can do, is the thing
that it seems most of us are not doing (I suppose that could be a
definition of *radical* jejejeje).  That is  ~speaking from a place of
vulnerability (vs rightness)~~listening from a place openness (vs
judgement).  In my own relationships, this sort of orientation creates the
highest level of accountability with those that participate.  Conversely,
when most of my speech is dedicated to "you" (you did this, you said that),
I have abdicated the responsibility of sharing and investigating my own
actions/experience/thoughts/feelings.

A group that I think has really earned the title of *radical* is The
Radical Faeries.  They have a wonderfully simple practice called heart
circle, that I personally would love to adapt to this group.
https://www.albionfaeries.org.uk/heart-circles/

feel free to call me if anyone would like to discuss.

sincerely,
Benjamin
they/them/their
619-792-0925

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Bo Elder <belder76 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm on the Next Meeting Committee, and I think it will be uncontroversial
> (in fact, I may be restating points made by others at yesterday's meeting)
> to say that the Next Meeting Committee should put at least the following 2
> issues, which have generated controversy, on the agenda for discussion at
> the first Delegates Council Meeting:
>
> 1) internal communications (i.e. not public statements, but for example
> communication at meetings and over the listserv)
> 2) chartering and leadership of committees (including powers of chairs)
>
> I think these are important areas to address regardless of any of the
> individuals involved.  If anyone want to do anything beyond this to address
> controversies that have arisen I'm happy to try to help as best I can,
> though of course I can't promise I'll agree with anyone's particular
> perspective on any controversy.  It would probably be most productive to
> contact me offlist if anyone wishes to.
>
> I'm very much looking forward to our first Delegates Council Meeting.
> Many, many people have poured themselves into CRSD over the past several
> months, and I believe the upcoming Delegates Council Meeting is an
> important evolution of our work that should make us proud.
>
> Bo
>
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Anne Barron <anne at prcsd.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear Ryan,
>>
>> I am suggesting a restorative circle to continue the discussion about the
>> discord around the Self-Defense Committee, to restore balance after taking
>> everyone's perspective and respecting their right to speak out, to come to
>> a group consensus around the purpose/role/participants within this
>> committee.
>>
>> Yessie or Mickey, as chairs, can you pls post our Safe Space guide that
>> we read aloud at each meeting, so we can really make sure we are addressing
>> each other with respect.
>>
>> the tone of Ryan's email I felt was disrespectful, and ignored my own
>> experience.  The chair didn't talk about the situation or address me at all
>> during or after the meeting...this is disrespectful from my perspective.
>>
>> Ryan's email seems to suggest he felt disrespected from my email calling
>> for a meeting?
>> so I propose a restorative justice session to deal with our group
>> disagreement.
>>
>> For those of you who missed yesterday's meeting:  I learned that
>>
>>    - the Self-Defense committee is now a closed committee (no
>>    explanation that I heard),
>>    - that I was secretly booted off the very committee I called for at
>>    our second Collective Mass meeting (without contact),
>>    - that we don't know who is on the committee
>>    - that there are no guides for chairing a committee,
>>    - that the group didn't discuss the problems of closed
>>    committee/powerful chair system
>>    - that the Self-Defense committee has created a plan for El
>>    Cajon/Santee without input from those people most at risk in those
>>    communities (fyi- that includes women, for those of you not aware of the
>>    police sexual assualts in our communities & harrassment especially of young
>>    women)
>>    - that our mission now is to strive to prioritize the needs and
>>    issues of marginalized people within and without our collectivo,
>>
>> So from my perspective and my experience at the meetings I was able to
>> attend and the emails, Where did we ever say "chairs are omnipotent"?
>>
>> Communications temporarily banned one person for reasons of disrespect.
>> Why was I banned from the Self-Defense Committee, and only told at
>> yesterday's meeting?
>> ....although I requested & emailed members of the committee at least 2x
>> for a meeting, and asked for meetings, that I attended one meeting, that
>> another woman expressed that she also had emailed the chair several times
>> without a response.
>> so for me, this speaks to Chair's unilateral decision-making.
>> Why did the other members of the Self-Defense Committee went with this
>> decision without at least consulting those of us excluded?
>> so trust is out the door already.
>>
>> I also felt that the chairing of the meeting was heavily weighed in favor
>> of "keep to the agenda", "moving forward", "we need to get to work"
>> (quotes). I abstained on several votes because again the procedural rules
>> were unclear, and seemed arbitrarily enforced.  We are all learning for
>> sure.
>> I want to add some questions to the meeting committee & will share those
>> with you all too. Can we also clearly tell people what the rules are at the
>> beginning?  And a supportive process for disagreement to resolve
>> differences, or at least deal with them?  One that supports emotional
>> well-being as well as group solidarity?
>>
>> I was also surprised at how long it took us to agree that of course
>> people who are not delegates but are part of the CRSD are welcome to
>> delegate meetings...open meetings for me are an essential part of
>> power-sharing.
>> I completely support closed sessions when needed, but only when needed.
>>
>> I completely support our points of unity and now want practice in spirit
>> what we wrote.
>> Will decisions be inclusive, processes open, differences explained and
>> how we hold meetings incorporate various practices that include
>> time/space/ways for airing differences.
>>
>> One of the parts of this Colectivo I really loved was the long
>> meetings/social hour so we can get to know one another. I spoke glowingly
>> of it at another meeting on Saturday.
>>
>> Let's keep that spirit alive, by working through differences using proven
>> circles of support/reflection/empathy to resolve this conflict.
>>
>> Anne
>>
>> Peace Resource Center is hosting restorative peace circles for the March
>> saturdays 10am-noon, for those of us who need breathing spaces.
>>
>> It also has numerous resources on restorative practices, and
>> incorporating inclusive common ground guides for multi-ethnic, gender,
>> generational, differential abled, gatherings,
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Mickey Smith <mickey.h.smith at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> First off, that's a mischaracterization of the proposals being discussed
>>> at the meeting and of the summary of past business that was given. Second,
>>> everyone attending the meeting was to avoid discussing details on email
>>> because of the highly surveiled nature of email in general, as well as
>>> Google's enthusiastic support for the PRISM program going into a strong
>>> upsurge in reactionary violence. I strongly recommend people who intend on
>>> carrying out security work avoid talking so cavalierly about planned or
>>> unplanned activities, but that aside, ill ask you to refrain from speaking
>>> on matters you simply weren't present for.
>>>
>>> Ryan
>>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2017 9:59 AM, "Anne Barron" <anne at prcsd.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear intersectional friends,
>>>>
>>>> i see them pretty much inter-related, and that we need to think about
>>>> strategically matching fundraising, different types of community
>>>> self-defense (which I see in a much broader scope).
>>>>
>>>> I also want to check in with the larger Collective to see what/how we
>>>> as a group define community self-defense.  there was a lot of discussion at
>>>> the last Defense Committee about what the Collective meant by self-defense.
>>>>
>>>> I remember us talking about several layers of mutual self-defense.
>>>>
>>>> Our Teach-in discussion yesterday at the Peace Resource Center
>>>> reinforces this idea for me- that the system forces us to depend on it.  We
>>>> need to return to a village reality, where the village is the community
>>>> self-defense.
>>>>
>>>> so I will be there at noon, for anyone who wants to flesh out CRSD
>>>> community self-defense.  I just am seeing a bigger picture than stand-off
>>>> with local law enforcements during rallies/marches.
>>>>
>>>> best
>>>> Anne
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Bo Elder <belder76 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'll be there at 12noon tomorrow!
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm glad the fundraising was a success, and I think we should keep
>>>>> doing that sort of thing, but I agree with Ryan that that should be the
>>>>> purview of a fundraising committee.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 10:23 PM, Ryan Stray <ryanstraysd at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I see a lot of these proposals as being outside the scope of the
>>>>>> Defense Committee. While it's true that things like housing, bond, food,
>>>>>> etc are things that the Defense Committee could work on, there is already a
>>>>>> housing committee (or at least one proposed), a legal committee, and other
>>>>>> orgs involved in Defense and CR as a whole have overlapping projects along
>>>>>> these same lines as well. I'm opposed to mission creep in one committee at
>>>>>> the expense of others.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ryan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 25, 2017 8:42 PM, "Anne Barron" <anne at prcsd.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear comrades interested in self-defense & Rapid Response.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's meet at noon tomorrow before the CRSD general meeting to
>>>>>>> talk/review where we are...I am so in awe of Bo's use of GoFundMe to
>>>>>>> generate the needed funds to pay off the remaining bails from November 9th
>>>>>>> (and many thanks to those of you who contributed).
>>>>>>> So I would also like to add fundraising to our committee work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> see ya!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anne
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 2:50 PM, justin hewgill <jhewgill at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The next meeting committee adjusted the agenda based on folks feed
>>>>>>>> back.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here is the new agenda: https://docs.google.co
>>>>>>>> m/document/d/1cBSgbuXjO8YGUM8wHR8JMTUhag7GLewykLHVMqJxhjY/ed
>>>>>>>> it?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We will NOT be meeting this evening, given that we already got this
>>>>>>>> together.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Remember we are meeting at *1pm, this Sunday*.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information used in this e-mail is
>>>>>>>> confidential, may be legally privileged, and is only intended for the use
>>>>>>>> of the party named above.  If the reader of this is not the intended
>>>>>>>> recipient, you are advised that any dissemination, distribution, or copying
>>>>>>>> of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail in
>>>>>>>> error, please immediately notify me by telephone at 909 636-6861
>>>>>>>> <(909)%20636-6861> and destroy this e-mail.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Sdalliance mailing list
>>>>>>>> Sdalliance at lists.resist.ca
>>>>>>>> http://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sdalliance
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Sdalliance mailing list
>>>>>>> Sdalliance at lists.resist.ca
>>>>>>> http://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sdalliance
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Sdalliance mailing list
>>>>>> Sdalliance at lists.resist.ca
>>>>>> http://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sdalliance
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Sdalliance mailing list
>>>> Sdalliance at lists.resist.ca
>>>> http://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sdalliance
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sdalliance mailing list
> Sdalliance at lists.resist.ca
> http://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sdalliance
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/sdalliance/attachments/20170227/2a57bbca/attachment-0001.html>