💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › bandele-revolutionary-communities-1.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 08:05:29. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Revolutionary Communities
Author: Bandele
Date: August 17, 2021
Language: en
Topics: anarchism, community building, prefigurative politics, Social Anarchism, horizontal organizing, anarchist organization

Bandele

Revolutionary Communities

Contents

Section 1: Introduction

Introduction

Section 2: Community Building

Prefiguration and Community Resilience

The Importance of Community

Building a Radical Community

Section 3: Organization

Decision-Making

Consensus Organizing

Conflict Resolution

Mutual Aid

Section 4: Conclusion

Conclusion

List of definitions

Section 1: Introduction

Introduction

With societal and ecological erosion on the horizon, many have begun to

see the inadequate responses of governments. It has become evident that

these governments will only provide aid to capitalism and themselves

during dire situations. These governments will continue to delay and

ignore any chance to mitigate the harm caused by their exploitation. All

of their attempts to “solve” climate change rarely addresses the

problem, only being done as a means of performative appeasement. As

people become more desperate, these governments will use their most

reliable solution: subjugate their population in order to maintain

control. This behavior is not a byproduct of “bad leaders” or an

“incorrect” form of government, but an integral aspect of hierarchical

power structures and state control. History has proven that the state,

in all of its forms, has never had the people’s interests or demands in

mind. Even governments who have co-opted radical language of freedom or

liberation for the working-class have only ever led to the same forms of

oppression and violence that they have claimed to oppose. No matter how

liberatory one presents themselves, when given the control of the state

they will view those under them as subservient to their control. This

nature of the state makes the subjugation of the people it governs an

inseparable aspect of its function regardless of what language the

wielder or wielders of its power uses.

Many have found this reality to be paralyzing, causing inaction and

complacency. Others have responded with the hopes of reforming the

status quo, which has only ever ended in a constant cycle of empty

promises and co-opted movements. These pathways of inaction and placing

faith in state structures will always end in failure. It is now more

important than ever to build the foundations of a radical,

non-hierarchical, horizontal, and liberatory future. This proposed

future is achievable, and it all starts with prefiguration within our

communities. It is up to us to build a new world in the ashes of the

old, a world without kyriarchal oppressors and exploiters. In order to

build a future where the state’s oppression ceases to exist, we must

build horizontal power structures in order to prevent these hierarchies

from reforming. Humanity has not reached its full potential due to the

restraints of oppression, hierarchies, and the state. Our potential is

limitless as long as we undergo a constant struggle against all

hierarchies and state hegemony. When people are given the ability to

make decisions for themselves and their communities without the

overreach of a state, dictator, president, majority, or representative;

true liberation is possible. When people are free of the oppressive

structures that hold them back, the same systems that once tormented

them will fail to perpetuate themselves.

Section 2: Community Building

Prefiguration and Community Resilience

Some leftists believe that the continuous erosion of both the state and

capitalism will lead to an inevitable self-destruction of these systems.

Due to this, many believe that waiting for a collapse of these systems

will be sufficient for building revolutionary change. These beliefs are

partly fueled by the presumption that large-scale social erosion will

lead to a radical social movement that would participate in

revolutionary actions due to their current conditions. However, this

sentiment of relying on collapse in order to enact revolutionary change

rather than actively prefiguring radical change with community members

in the present will ultimately lead to a mindset of inaction and

stagnation. History has proven that these systems of oppression will

always evolve to fit their current conditions and will always seek their

own perpetuation regardless of external conditions. Preparing for a

proposed collapse of the state or revolution without any community

building disregards the necessity of radical community building.

If there is to be meaningful revolutionary change, then it can only

occur through prefiguration. Waiting on a radical society to

spontaneously emerge during times of societal collapse not only wastes

potential of building robust networks and organizations, but also risks

lacking the required resources to sustain any lasting impact. A

spontaneous movement without the existence of horizontal organizations

at its foundations can easily lead to a vacuum for co-option by

authoritarians and opportunists rather than a continuous movement for a

decentralized and non-hierarchical society. Actively building community

resilience and autonomy in the present will not only build the necessary

foundations for radical social change, but will also lay the grounds for

a truly revolutionary movement. Revolutions are not sustained by weapons

and tactics alone, but require the support and organization of

communities in order to have any level of success. In order to remove

the hegemony of the state, community building is one of the most

important ways of prefiguring radical social structure in opposition to

the ones that exist today.

The Importance of Community

Community building is the foundation of any prefigurative movement.

However, without a baseline relationship with community members; there

cannot be any meaningful chance of community organization. Capitalism

and the many kyriarchal structures that exist have alienated people from

their communities. Many have become idle or unaware of this isolation

between their community. For this reason, it is important to understand

the importance of building the foundations of meaningful relationships

with community members. Many of those within one’s community will

inevitably face varying amounts of apprehension or hostility from

community members. However, with a better understanding of what is

expected of community organizing and the challenges that might be faced,

taking the necessary actions is the next step of the process. Starting

with simple ways of connecting like one-on-one conversations, potlucks,

book clubs, and community meetings with neighbors are foundational steps

for building the connections between a community. Not only do these

actions help connect with community members, but also will help gauge

the level of effort required to start further steps. If a stronger level

of trust and communication is formed within a community, then more

advanced steps can be taken. Organizing community councils, community

libraries, babysitting programs, community gardens, community

composting, and forming tenants unions are some of the many options for

building the further levels of trust and cooperation. Whether it is a

neighborhood, an apartment complex, a dormitory, or a small town; these

actions will facilitate the process of prefiguration within a community.

Building a Radical Community

With the formation of community connections, a radical social

environment must be prefigured. Individuals within a community are

subjected to various personal, systemic, and cultural forms of

oppression. Many within the current system knowingly or unknowingly

perpetuate many harmful actions against others, including members of

their own communities. Due to this, fostering an understanding of

radical intersectionality with community members and building a system

of accountability is vital for the continuation of a prefigurative

process. Intersectionality is the understanding of the various aspects

of a person's social and political identities combine to create

different modes of discrimination and privilege. Without an

understanding of intersectionality, one cannot build a meaningful

community free from hierarchy. In order to ensure that all community

members agree to a system of accountability. When members of the

community hold themselves responsible for self and community

accountability for harmful actions against another, hierarchical forms

of oppression and abuse have lower chances of perpetuating themselves.

Section 3: Organization

Decision-Making

Individuals within a community face different personal, systemic, and

cultural struggles. This factor has a significant impact on the ways a

community can make decisions. When people organize using only democratic

methods of decision-making, they run the risk of ignoring or dismissing

community members who are the minority. The rigidity of democratic, or

even direct-democratic, voting structures faces the lack of ability to

make decisions that can benefit the whole community, not just the

majority. Majoritarianism removes the freedom to find creative and

mutually beneficial solutions to problems that could have been expressed

by the minority of the community. This lack of alteration during

decision-making can have negative outcomes in a community by

discouraging some members to make decisions that could affect them,

while also encouraging those who have majority to enact decisions that

only benefit them. If these majority decisions affect members of a

community that come from historically marginalized backgrounds, then

majority decision-making runs the risk of perpetuating hierarchies.

Understanding, addressing, and solving the needs and concerns of the

community members that would usually be ignored should be a high

priority for the prefigurative process. If a community with the aims of

removing hierarchical structures and centralized control is the goal,

then preventing the mistakes that can be caused by majority and

representative decision-making is fundamental. This problem can be

solved by looking at alternative ways of organizing community

decision-making. One model that shows the most potential to facilitate

meaningful decision making in a community is called consensus. Consensus

decision-making models have existed in numerous communities, groups, and

organizations. Its potential for creating a radical community dynamic

makes this system a more preferable model of community organization.

Consensus Organizing

When proposals that affect the entire community must be decided, all

members of the community should have a voice to outline their ideas or

concerns. The model of consensus decision-making is an ideal structure

for prefigurative organization. It allows members of a community who

would otherwise have their concerns overturned, ignored, or outvoted to

discuss their opinions. Consensus works when proposals for decisions are

given, and members can either raise concerns in order to modify the

proposal that best accommodates them. The consensus process starts with

the presentation of a proposal or issue. When proposals are presented,

they are explained in detail in order to ensure that all participants of

the consensus process fully understand the proposal. Proposals are then

tested for consensus. If consensus is not reached, then the proposal

goes through a process of discussion and revision. Participants who

disagree with the proposal then explain their problems and concerns. The

Proposal is then modified to address the previous concerns. Proposals

will not pass until all members of a group can agree. If proposals

cannot reach consensus, they can either be laid down for another meeting

or blocked if the proposal cannot be modified by any of the

participants. Participants who disagree with a proposal can also stand

aside if they are willing to let the group proceed with the proposal.

This structure allows for a much more fluid and egalitarian

decision-making process. Unlike majoritarian decision-making, consensus

has the flexibility to allow community members to propose new and unique

input that would otherwise be unaddressed.

The consensus model also benefits from being more open to rapid

modification of a proposal within a community. If community members

disagree with a proposal soon after it is passed, the proposal can be

modified. Unlike majoritarian voting systems, proposals can be

constantly revised and improved in order to meet the needs of all

community members rather than a majority. The consensus model ultimately

reinforces the prefigurative process by building a sense of unity and

collaboration between community members.

Conflict Resolution

Individuals within a community are subjected to a variety of

hierarchical forms of oppression. These forms of oppression can and

sometimes will cause conflict with the community. Even if these issues

do not occur within one’s community, community members can still be

subject to some form of conflict. Disagreements, personalities clashing,

altercations, and other forms of conflict can occur within a community.

Even more severe conflicts between community members can occur like

sexual assault, domestic abuse, verbal abuse, and physical abuse. In

order to prepare and build a prefigurative process that can be

restorative to community relationships, a grievance process structure

must be organized within a community. Building a grievance process

within a community is a complex process that takes planning and context

of a situation in order to properly address an issue. Although it is

important to create a grievance process specific to one’s community,

this section will offer a basic model of a grievance process. This model

functions on three levels of severity: Conflict, Harm, and Abuse.

Conflict: This category includes misunderstandings, disagreements,

friction between personalities or organizations, ongoing annoyance with

behavior, etc. These are situations which include reciprocal problems

which do not rise to the level of lasting harm or wherein harm was not

intentional.

Resolution: The involved parties should agree to a mediator and a

discussion should be had where either party is allowed to air their

grievances respectfully, seeking remediation. Neither party should enter

with preconditions and should agree to engage in good faith. The

mediator’s job in this occasion should be to resolve differences

amicably, to guide discussion by relating behavior to the guiding

principles of the group while respecting the need to encourage healthy

range of dispute

Harm: This category is for non-reciprocal damage to a person. One of the

parties has caused the problem at hand which has put the other party at

risk, caused them serious mental distress, or has placed them in way of

physical harm.

Resolution: The involved parties should try to agree to a mediator, but

if the two cannot agree, the party which has been harmed should be

allowed to choose the mediator. The person who is harmed should be asked

to set out what they would like the offending party to do in order to

remediate the situation and the offending party should be asked to give

an account of their actions. The mediator’s job is not to be neutral,

but to focus upon remediation of wrongdoing and thus should seek

concession from the party who has caused harm to the requests of the

victim. The needs and comfort-level of the victim should be taken into

account throughout the grievance process, and should allow

accommodations for the victim to delay or postpone the grievance process

if deemed necessary.

Abuse: This category is for serious violent behavior such as rape,

assault, or harassment.

Resolution: The abused party should choose the mediator. The abused

party should set the agenda of the conversation and should be given the

right to decide how the interaction will continue. They may choose to

set conditions for remediation or ask that the abusive member be

expelled from the group. The mediator’s job is to provide a space that

is safe for the victim to air their grievance as they please to the

abuser. The mediator’s job in this occasion is not to provide defense to

the abuser, but to open the floor to the victim to propose the course of

action if they are to continue associating with the abuser. The needs

and comfort-level of the victim should be taken into account throughout

the grievance process, and should allow accommodations for the victim to

delay or postpone the grievance process if deemed necessary.

Mutual Aid

Mutual aid should be the foundation of a community’s distributive

organization. Mutual aid is the cooperation and reciprocal exchange of

resources between people or groups in an environment. This sort of

exchange gives people the opportunity to help and rely on others,

sharing knowledge and resources that could benefit the entire community

without the reliance on capitalism. Showing people that a society can

exist from the bottom up through mutual aid is a foundational step for

community building. The ability to show people that a system can work is

a much more powerful vector for change than merely telling. Teaching

others how mutual aid can operate in multiple facets within a community

will ultimately facilitate more opportunities for community resilience.

Establishing mutual aid networks like community food distribution

centers, really really free markets, community clothes distribution

sites, and tool libraries are foundational ways of prefiguring a mutual

aid network.

Section 4: Conclusion

Conclusion

Organizing communities with the examples and ideas provided is only the

first of many steps to build a truly free society. These tools lay the

foundations of every action moving forward. Building a new world in the

shell of the old is possible. Fighting for the present and the future

cannot be done alone, it requires the support of community members to

see it through. This guide is only the first of many. Providing people

with the tools to create a world free from the many oppressors and

hierarchies is now more important than ever. The societies that exist

today have never been equipped or designed truly to meet the needs of

the people or to maintain any sustainable relationship with the

environment. Prefiguring an environment where people can rely on each

other without a state, dictator, representative, or majority preventing

them from living a life free from struggle and misery is achievable. All

it requires is a community.

List of Definitions

The State – a political entity with a system of governance with a

monopoly on the use of force and violence.

Solidarity – an awareness of shared interests, objectives, standards,

and sympathies creating a psychological sense of unity of groups or

classes.

Hierarchy – an arrangement (particularly a social arrangement) that is

represented as being above or below one. A social structure where a

person or group of people are immediately superior to one's

subordinates.

Kyriarchy – is a social system or set of connecting social systems built

around domination, oppression, and submission. It is an intersectional

extension of the idea of patriarchy beyond gender. Kyriarchy encompasses

sexism, racism, ableism, ageism, religious discrimination, homophobia,

transphobia, classism, xenophobia, economic injustice, colonialism,

militarism, ethnocentrism, speciesism, and other forms of dominating

hierarchies in which the subordination of one person or group to another

is internalized and institutionalized.

Co-option – refers to the process by which one group gains converts from

another group by replicating some aspects of it without adopting the

full program or idea,

Decentralization – is the process by which the activities of an

organization, particularly those regarding planning and decision making,

are distributed or delegated away from a central, authoritative location

or group.

Prefiguration – the modes of organization and social relationships that

strive to build a society sought by a radical social group in order to

challenge and replace the existing society.

Tenants union – building, neighborhood or city-based organizations made

up of and led by renters themselves to fight for their collective

interests and rights. Tenants unions are generally made up of tenants

who live in the same building and/or have the same landlord.

Mutual Aid – a voluntary reciprocal exchange of resources and services

for mutual benefit. A term popularized by anarchist theorist Peter

Kropotkin.

Direct Democracy – a form of democracy in which the electorate decides

on policy initiatives without legislative representatives as proxies.

Majoritarianism – a traditional political philosophy or agenda that

asserts that a majority of a population is entitled to a certain degree

of primacy in society, and has the right to make decisions that affect

the society.

Consensus – a decision-making process in which participants develop and

decide on proposals with the aim, or requirement, of acceptance by all.