[imc-baghdad] Re: imc-baghdad mailing list

[blue.pi]

Hi everybody, 

Some words about the progress of IMC Bagdad and Petros letter.
I saw that Mike already set up a preview website. Nice, but again: Is that 
really such a good idea in Bagdad right now? Are people in Iraq really gonna 
use it? Who is going to administrate the site? If it’s people not in Bagdad, 
how is their Arabic? 

Our short experience here in Beirut (and we have much better internet access 
than in Iraq):
Many People read articles
Several people inside Lebanon write articles
Few people inside Lebanon write comments 

So far, pretty good, *but* a lot more people from outside of Lebanon write 
articles and comments.  Sometimes what they post is really interesting, 
stuff about Egypt or Palestine e.g., sometimes it has absolutly nothing to 
do with us. In any case, it creates the impression that people in Lebanon 
don’t write much, which is in my opinion absolutly not true, taken the fact 
that this is a small country with a small left and that there are no major 
events, demonstrations right now. This is kind of frustrating and can, I 
think, turn people of. We will discuss changing the editorial policy 
according to this experience. But the question I wanted to raise here is: 
Isn’t exactly that going to happen in Iraq just much worse? Even when people 
from outside Iraq post things about Iraq, it will not be their own. While I 
think, one of the most important aspects of indymedia is “Do it yourself”. 

Some questions to Petros email. We have gotten into some arguments in the 
past, because I think we have a very different approach. Some of our 
differences, I think, can’t be resolved, we simply totally diagree on 
certain issues and won’t find a compromise. 

But there are some other aspects in this letter, that I simply don’t know 
what you, Petros, are getting at. I know you have said these things before, 
but I guess I never really understood it. 

o - about the letter from Boud 


>* Boud wrote:
>"An IMC is primarily a *collective* of people who live
>locally and  are part of local grassroots activism, not

>just a web site. It's also being part of a global
>network, not a US-centred or even Euro-centred network
>- hopefully." These are wise words, and I guess we’ll
>have to keep repeating them over and over until we
>figure out ways to *actualize* them in our Indymedia
>policies. Our policies right now, are still going in
>the opposite direction. Most important, is the  phrase
>that imc is "not not a web site". Imc is an
>organization, built on political and social principles.

While I agree with boud’s definition, I am not sure if I agree with Petros’. 
What is meant by organization and how far go the political principles? In 
the Principles of Unity we state that indymedia can not be owned by one 
group. As much, do I believe that it should not become one political group 
with one political program. 

Indymedia is a media outlet for activists. It doesn’t have to be a website, 
it can be any form of media. And there must certainly be a group behind it 
that can sustain the character of indymedia as such a media outlet - so far 
I agree with boud. But this group should only be political in the sense that 
it is radically democratic. However, it may not be communist or socialist or 
anarchist or based on any other set of believes. Some of my fellow 
volunteers in germany even go so far to say that it is not leftist. I 
disagree with them because I think the Principles of Unity are clearly 
leftist, but don’t allow for any further definition. 

>Finances, equipment, and websites,  are
>only tools to help us actualise our politics.

That is correct. But I believe that they are the tool of a movement or call 
it grassroot activism (not of the indymedia group) and this movement is of 
course political. The indymedia group should be part of this movement, but 
as an indymedia group its purpose is, indeed, to make a website, a paper, 
radio etc. Otherwise you don’t need an indymedia group, you can have an 
anti-globalization group or whatever and discuss politics in there. And 
hopefully the individuals involved in the indymedia group are in such groups 
as well. 

Why I think it is really important that we stick with this definition of 
indymedia:
 - If we start to have a political program, indymedia will loose its open 
character.
 - We also run into the risk of imposing our political views on people who 
have a different approach in their country. e.g. many people, especially in 
the US, consider themselves anarchists and on several occasions I heard them 
refer to people in indymedia as to “we, as anarchists”. But the anarchism 
they have there is a very specific historical development, it is e.g 
different from the different anarchism we have in different European 
countries. So such definitions can be totally wrong in other countries or 
may lead to misunderstandings. If, here in Beirut, I would have given the 
impression that indymedia was an anarchist organization, we would not have 
an IMC here, because anarchism is not a strong current here at all and many 
people would be opposed to an anarchist organization (actually I would too). 

Concerning the political agenda for Iraq, I can only say, that I understand 
that people there have a very different view about the development than we 
do in Lebanon, and in Lebanon people have a very different view from people 
in Europe. If an Iraqi before the war said that he wants the Americans to 
invade, it is a completely different thing from an American or European 
saying the same thing. So this it is a good example for when it would 
probably be wrong to make a political agenda. 

I think the questions we ask in the process go exactly into the right 
direction, outreach, groups involved, decision making etc. Maybe we could 
specify them a bit.
Maybe we could ask about the make up of the group: inside/outside the 
country, locals, male/female, gays, minorities, political afiliation of 
group members, professions etc.
Maybe we could ask different people to write something. 

cheers,
blue 

btw. since petros mentioned it as well, what is wrong with the list server? 
Makes it really difficult to organize when emails generally arrive one day 
late.