SqEK quesions and deliberations
Revisions:
20191023 stub <david
Table of Contents
¶*** PROTOCOLS
I propose to:
1) list and traverse the mailing list for past mails with suggestions and talking points
2) open it to the collective to try answering them here
I propose to:
1) list and traverse the mailing list for past mails with suggestions and talking points
2) open it to the collective to try answering them here
¶*** 20191008 | ANDRE
"""
But now, after some conflict/conflicts arose and became more clear and visible after the email of Galvao - maybe there is good time to evaluate and analyse how the things went, what went good and what went not so good or must definitely change.
"""
"""
But now, after some conflict/conflicts arose and became more clear and visible after the email of Galvao - maybe there is good time to evaluate and analyse how the things went, what went good and what went not so good or must definitely change.
"""
¶CODE OF CONDUCT / INCLUSIVITY ("How we discuss and debate")
many people are dropping out
how to determine, sync, respect conversation styles
"""Also I believe, we should accept the persons choice of medium, the way of the communication. """
______________
??? any specific cases
many people are dropping out
how to determine, sync, respect conversation styles
"""Also I believe, we should accept the persons choice of medium, the way of the communication. """
______________
??? any specific cases
¶how to address criticism? (Galvaos letters and responses)
what did he really claim?
"""Miguel wrote that people should address criticism private off-list. """
what did he really claim?
"""Miguel wrote that people should address criticism private off-list. """
¶!! How to run grants ("Experience with Movokeur")
-> whoever does work, will make mistakes
-> make protocols !
-> whoever does work, will make mistakes
-> make protocols !
¶!!! "The project had never a collective decision making process."
(this was already mentioned years before).
(this was already mentioned years before).
¶"academization of Sqek and his impacts and dynamics"
? what to make of this presentation
? how can a collective member "request" responses?
? other than "there and there" impressions and debates, what are other possible outcomes?:
* changing protocols, manifestos, statements
* "promotion" to collective research problems
* [...]
____________________
"""
The question is more how you define academic structures and how can you avoid reproducing such structures in your own network, organisation,
group etc. ?
And I have to admit that i am looking for alternatives to the academic way of learning, knowledge production, etc.
Therefore I participated in the Autonomous University Wendland – a self-organized approach of learning and knowledge ( https://autonomeuniversitaet.noblogs.org/)
"""
? what to make of this presentation
? how can a collective member "request" responses?
? other than "there and there" impressions and debates, what are other possible outcomes?:
* changing protocols, manifestos, statements
* "promotion" to collective research problems
* [...]
____________________
"""
The question is more how you define academic structures and how can you avoid reproducing such structures in your own network, organisation,
group etc. ?
And I have to admit that i am looking for alternatives to the academic way of learning, knowledge production, etc.
Therefore I participated in the Autonomous University Wendland – a self-organized approach of learning and knowledge ( https://autonomeuniversitaet.noblogs.org/)
"""
¶"collective authorship as editors instead of individual authorship"
tools can help here!
formalize tools, encourage their use.
tools can help here!
formalize tools, encourage their use.
¶!! "the actual use, out-come or benefit for the different movements (squatters, refugees or other movements)."
? where is this best reflected
? what is the "entry" texts
? where is this best reflected
? what is the "entry" texts
¶!!! how should SqEK organizing look like? (anti-CFP, deadlines, programme comittees, ...)
"""
It always irritates me a bit when we get invited with filling out forms, CfPs (Call for Papers) and deadlines ? Maybe it is just a question of style.
Also I think we should be more open for other proposals of debates or whatever as it was the case in other years.
The program seemed for me a bit too much predeterminated when it says:
"Please, submit your proposals according to these topics, although other subjects might be accepted too in case there are not sufficient contributions for the main one"
What does that mean might be accepted ? Who is deciding this ? When we are a DIY - network, as I assume, then we should give space and time for other proposals
and ideas - in my opinion.
"""
"""
It always irritates me a bit when we get invited with filling out forms, CfPs (Call for Papers) and deadlines ? Maybe it is just a question of style.
Also I think we should be more open for other proposals of debates or whatever as it was the case in other years.
The program seemed for me a bit too much predeterminated when it says:
"Please, submit your proposals according to these topics, although other subjects might be accepted too in case there are not sufficient contributions for the main one"
What does that mean might be accepted ? Who is deciding this ? When we are a DIY - network, as I assume, then we should give space and time for other proposals
and ideas - in my opinion.
"""
¶Recording (notes, audio) : how?
„We will also ask for permission to record the debates and collective interviews to be held during the meeting.“
„We will also ask for permission to record the debates and collective interviews to be held during the meeting.“
¶"Extra Evaluation Meeting ?"
? should it be done
? how would it be run
? what should its results look like
_____________
gianni:
"""I know that a proposal has been launched for another place and another meeting where everyone discuss only on Sqek, and I am in favor of this proposal; but so far no one has proposed who, where and when organizing it, and so for now Madrid is the only opportunity for discussion."""
________________
d:
i support it
we need to either DEFINE or ADOPT a good mechanism / mechanism set
________________
? should it be done
? how would it be run
? what should its results look like
_____________
gianni:
"""I know that a proposal has been launched for another place and another meeting where everyone discuss only on Sqek, and I am in favor of this proposal; but so far no one has proposed who, where and when organizing it, and so for now Madrid is the only opportunity for discussion."""
________________
d:
i support it
we need to either DEFINE or ADOPT a good mechanism / mechanism set
________________
¶*** xxxxxxxx | EDWARD (via andre)
"And finally Edward named 3 more interesting issues which could be discussed or evaluated..."
"And finally Edward named 3 more interesting issues which could be discussed or evaluated..."
¶"we have failed to translate our works into more languages than English (despite having participants from all over)"
(here i remember that one book was translated into turkish - very good)
(here i remember that one book was translated into turkish - very good)
¶? CONFLICTS -- what belongs, does not belong on the list?
"""
First, I must say that discussing discordant or controversial points is absolutely necessary and can be very constructive. I completely agree. But depending on how things are put, it can also be immobilizing and simply exclude from the discussion people who choose not to engage in such combative dialogs. So this is a reason why, in my opinion, we should be careful about the words we choose when sending group messages.
"""
"""
First, I must say that discussing discordant or controversial points is absolutely necessary and can be very constructive. I completely agree. But depending on how things are put, it can also be immobilizing and simply exclude from the discussion people who choose not to engage in such combative dialogs. So this is a reason why, in my opinion, we should be careful about the words we choose when sending group messages.
"""
¶? how to be inclusive (in determining sqek)?
"""
There are many possible ways to do this, from:
A) asking the people with less traveling possibilities what they need and think of ways to help (as the possibilities presented for the future meeting in Madrid; or maybe in a more open way)
B) broadcasting online – even though the second example would certainly bring up the issue of recording the presentations and discussions.
"""
Anything else ???
"""
There are many possible ways to do this, from:
A) asking the people with less traveling possibilities what they need and think of ways to help (as the possibilities presented for the future meeting in Madrid; or maybe in a more open way)
B) broadcasting online – even though the second example would certainly bring up the issue of recording the presentations and discussions.
"""
Anything else ???
¶? have a meeting outside of EU
"""
Regarding any future meetings, and especially if it is about squatting everywhere, maybe it is about time to think of a meeting outside Europe. Has this been proposed before? I’d gladly help organize.
"""
"""
Regarding any future meetings, and especially if it is about squatting everywhere, maybe it is about time to think of a meeting outside Europe. Has this been proposed before? I’d gladly help organize.
"""
¶(expose on academics/scholars & activists)
"""
I am an "academic", although I do not like this term and prefer a scholar, because I teach at the university; I have been an activist and squatter for a long time and now I am an open supporter of the squatting movement. I have practically always collaborated with the students and activists / squatters of my city, and I have always had an excellent relationship of exchange and cooperation with them. As those who came last year in Catania for the meeting could have seen, considered by many to be successful thanks to the presence and collaboration of local activists / squatters. I have always considered myself a resource at their disposal, which has allowed them to have elements of knowledge, spaces and structures to self-manage without compromises or interfering with the political contents by the “Academy”.
"""
"""
For example, just a few days ago, we organized UNICOMICS, a festival of political comics, in which we had facilities and funds from the university without any interference from the academy. On the last day, for example, we organized a meeting on Rojava, which was attended by a former YPJ fighter and hundreds of people, who then left the university and carried out an unauthorized spontaneous demonstration in the streets in solidarity with the Kurdish people. I've never been accused of exploiting activists to make an academic career, and I don't think I've done it. Indeed, my research work (not only mine, of course, but also others by Sqek) have been read, discussed and used by activists; as in the case of the evening assembly of the Sqek meeting in Catania, in which the activists prepared the story and the timeline of the squatting in Catania based on my research work.
"""
"""
I tell you this not to claim merit, but to affirm that I believe in the possibility of a relationship between activists and committed academics that is rich, fruitful and useful for both, and I reject the idea that this relationship is impossible or that this must inevitably lead to an academicization and exploitation of activists. This is why I immediately adhered to Sqek's project, which would make no sense without this co-presence of two different types of actors, but which often overlap: many are activists and academics at the same time, and those who are no longer, they were before. This is the richness and originality that allows, or should allow, to be able to look at and act from different but closely interconnected angles and points of view. A Sqek made up only of activists would be a political collective like many others, just as it was only made up of academics it would be a network of scholars like many others. Sqek has been different and if, as I hope it will continue, perhaps evolving from what it has become, it will always be something else.
I cannot deny, however, that the relationship between academics and activists has always been problematic, or at least lived as such by some sqekkers, almost from the beginning, and that this has worsened in recent years and that there are underlying reasons. It is not an invention but a never-ending story that has reached its moment of greatest tension, after the accusations made against Miguel on the mailing list this summer. I knew that there had been tensions and even heated discussions in previous years, but I didn't sincerely think up to the point of talking about the end of Sqek.
"""
"""
I am an "academic", although I do not like this term and prefer a scholar, because I teach at the university; I have been an activist and squatter for a long time and now I am an open supporter of the squatting movement. I have practically always collaborated with the students and activists / squatters of my city, and I have always had an excellent relationship of exchange and cooperation with them. As those who came last year in Catania for the meeting could have seen, considered by many to be successful thanks to the presence and collaboration of local activists / squatters. I have always considered myself a resource at their disposal, which has allowed them to have elements of knowledge, spaces and structures to self-manage without compromises or interfering with the political contents by the “Academy”.
"""
"""
For example, just a few days ago, we organized UNICOMICS, a festival of political comics, in which we had facilities and funds from the university without any interference from the academy. On the last day, for example, we organized a meeting on Rojava, which was attended by a former YPJ fighter and hundreds of people, who then left the university and carried out an unauthorized spontaneous demonstration in the streets in solidarity with the Kurdish people. I've never been accused of exploiting activists to make an academic career, and I don't think I've done it. Indeed, my research work (not only mine, of course, but also others by Sqek) have been read, discussed and used by activists; as in the case of the evening assembly of the Sqek meeting in Catania, in which the activists prepared the story and the timeline of the squatting in Catania based on my research work.
"""
"""
I tell you this not to claim merit, but to affirm that I believe in the possibility of a relationship between activists and committed academics that is rich, fruitful and useful for both, and I reject the idea that this relationship is impossible or that this must inevitably lead to an academicization and exploitation of activists. This is why I immediately adhered to Sqek's project, which would make no sense without this co-presence of two different types of actors, but which often overlap: many are activists and academics at the same time, and those who are no longer, they were before. This is the richness and originality that allows, or should allow, to be able to look at and act from different but closely interconnected angles and points of view. A Sqek made up only of activists would be a political collective like many others, just as it was only made up of academics it would be a network of scholars like many others. Sqek has been different and if, as I hope it will continue, perhaps evolving from what it has become, it will always be something else.
I cannot deny, however, that the relationship between academics and activists has always been problematic, or at least lived as such by some sqekkers, almost from the beginning, and that this has worsened in recent years and that there are underlying reasons. It is not an invention but a never-ending story that has reached its moment of greatest tension, after the accusations made against Miguel on the mailing list this summer. I knew that there had been tensions and even heated discussions in previous years, but I didn't sincerely think up to the point of talking about the end of Sqek.
"""
¶(criticize privately on email, directly in internal public)
"""
In any case, I think that personal issues, even if they concern behaviors related to the life of Sqek (not only personal), must be better addressed directly and not via email. Also because those who accuse someone may not always feel above suspicion, a "hard and pure, spotless and fearless". For example, I remember criticizing face-to-face at the Rotterdam meeting, directly and not via email, [...]
"""
"""
In any case, I think that personal issues, even if they concern behaviors related to the life of Sqek (not only personal), must be better addressed directly and not via email. Also because those who accuse someone may not always feel above suspicion, a "hard and pure, spotless and fearless". For example, I remember criticizing face-to-face at the Rotterdam meeting, directly and not via email, [...]
"""
¶how to make academic vs acivist dynamic better
"""
In any case, I think the issue should be discussed in general terms, setting rules of behavior deemed fair, both as activists and academics and which we should stick to them. I think that putting the question in general terms like Andrè did is correct, even if I didn't share some of his statements. The points he raised are real and deserve to be addressed, although I can perceive some differently. I think that if the balance between activism and academia has shifted too far on this last side, we need to balance it again: in other words, if we have become too academized, then we must think of ways of working together in which activism and the political dimension have a greater weight.
For example, in meetings we could devote less space to "academic" research presentations and more to political discussions and initiatives. Or slowing down the pace of academic publications and increase those for activists, along with the activities of meeting, dissemination and political discussion of our work. "Publish or perish" was never my rule of life and work, and it certainly must not be for Sqek. We may prefer collective authorship rather than individual in edited books. We can focus more on the work of dissemination by translating our work (such as the popular book) into other languages, more accessible to activists. However, eliminating one dimension at the expense of the other means transforming Sqek into something profoundly different that does not interest me. Other proposal: extending the management of the mailing list and of the sqek.net site to other sqekkers. As far as I know, Miguel manages the mailing list and Edward the site so far (I don't know who else). Knowing the bad relationships between the two I think it's hard to find an agreement, but both the mailing list and the site are not private properties of who manages them materially; they are collective goods (never say "commons" ;-) of all those who have written to it and have contributed to filling it with the contents.
"""
"""
In any case, I think the issue should be discussed in general terms, setting rules of behavior deemed fair, both as activists and academics and which we should stick to them. I think that putting the question in general terms like Andrè did is correct, even if I didn't share some of his statements. The points he raised are real and deserve to be addressed, although I can perceive some differently. I think that if the balance between activism and academia has shifted too far on this last side, we need to balance it again: in other words, if we have become too academized, then we must think of ways of working together in which activism and the political dimension have a greater weight.
For example, in meetings we could devote less space to "academic" research presentations and more to political discussions and initiatives. Or slowing down the pace of academic publications and increase those for activists, along with the activities of meeting, dissemination and political discussion of our work. "Publish or perish" was never my rule of life and work, and it certainly must not be for Sqek. We may prefer collective authorship rather than individual in edited books. We can focus more on the work of dissemination by translating our work (such as the popular book) into other languages, more accessible to activists. However, eliminating one dimension at the expense of the other means transforming Sqek into something profoundly different that does not interest me. Other proposal: extending the management of the mailing list and of the sqek.net site to other sqekkers. As far as I know, Miguel manages the mailing list and Edward the site so far (I don't know who else). Knowing the bad relationships between the two I think it's hard to find an agreement, but both the mailing list and the site are not private properties of who manages them materially; they are collective goods (never say "commons" ;-) of all those who have written to it and have contributed to filling it with the contents.
"""
¶sqek must go on, but on re-reflected grounds
"""
However, it is necessary that the end of Sqek is not taken for granted, as some have done, assuming that the history is now over and that we must separate, or that we are already separated and cannot be done otherwise. I think instead that we meet to discuss on the basis of concrete proposals to solve problems, already at the Madrid meeting, but thinking of another specific meeting where we can all be present
"""
"""
However, it is necessary that the end of Sqek is not taken for granted, as some have done, assuming that the history is now over and that we must separate, or that we are already separated and cannot be done otherwise. I think instead that we meet to discuss on the basis of concrete proposals to solve problems, already at the Madrid meeting, but thinking of another specific meeting where we can all be present
"""