[Imc-uk-network] the uk indy "elite"?!

[melpomene]

hi,

IMHO:

On Wed, 2004-12-15 at 00:08, cc wrote:
>   currently there is a de facto imc "elite" who work on
>   national sites and the global site, who are not
>   necessarily finding much time to contribute to their
>   local imcs

Not everyone is blessed with a local website. In Lancaster, for
instance, there is *only* a screening collective (mainly because there
is a well functioning community website run by volunteers already), the
screenings are in their 4th year running, and we use the indy logo/idea
to spread the word, and some of us occasionally work on the
collaborative site as well as in physical IMCs in connection with
events.

The term "elite", by human beings conditioned to live in a
hierarchical/patriarchal society (that'd be us!), is sometimes
indiscriminately/unreflectively used to describe those who do things and
get on with it. This might be a misperception or envy - both of which
are aspects that thrive well in a capitalist society, but of course it
might be a real issue, leading to some essential questions:

Has anybody been turned away from IRC or features list (or other fora of
organisation??) by this "elite" - what exactly makes it an "elite"?? Is
the "elite" not welcoming initiatives, help and collaboration?

Importantly, the collaborative site was an attempt to counter the fact
that a small group (which wasn't an elite, but a small group in London,
who all knew each other) was running the site as a "national" project.
The network was established to overcome this weakness and to have a site
that was sustained by diverse and geographically disperse collectives -
this was understood to be more in tune with ideals of non-central
organisation, which in turn would make the Indy UK site less vulnerable
to repression, as well as more dynamic.

If this structure is not functioning well enough, to everyone's
satisfaction, it should be addressed, but to abandon ship just because
it isn't good enough is like running away form the problem rather than
confronting it.

However, remember that there are people who are involved who do not live
in a locality that has a site, and that therefore the idea that local
membership as a demand is an exclusive mechanism - a mechanism, that
potentially would prevent many people joining; and what about those who
are doing useful things and who are not in a local collective, - do they
have to be banned, forcefully???

mp - locally embedded, but no site, - speaking just for me