How does horizontalism or non-hierarchical organizing work, and what have we learned from attempts at it?: Difference between revisions
Line 136: | Line 136: | ||
<div class="wp-caption alignleft"><p class="wp-caption-text"><br></p></div> | <div class="wp-caption alignleft"><p class="wp-caption-text"><br></p></div> | ||
=== Digging deeper: examining occupy Montreal <ref>https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9789048525461-008/html?lang=en</ref> | === Digging deeper: examining occupy Montreal <ref>https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9789048525461-008/html?lang=en</ref> === | ||
{| class="wikitable" style="border-collapse: collapse; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); height: 166px;" | {| class="wikitable" style="border-collapse: collapse; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); height: 166px;" | ||
|- style="height: 23px;" | |- style="height: 23px;" | ||
| style="width: 235px; height: 23px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217);" | | | style="width: 235px; height: 23px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217);" | | ||
'''People participated as individuals rather than members of organizations.''' | '''People participated as individuals rather than members of organizations.''' | ||
| style="width: 951px; height: 23px;" | | | style="width: 951px; height: 23px;" | | ||
*The occupation of Victoria Square, in the financial district of Montreal, took place from 15 October to 25 November 2011. | *The occupation of Victoria Square, in the financial district of Montreal, took place from 15 October to 25 November 2011. | ||
*Occupy Montreal was not able to achieve a decentralized network, which would have entailed communication and coordination on the part of collectives that are already constituted (organizations, networks, and coalitions). | *Occupy Montreal was not able to achieve a decentralized network, which would have entailed communication and coordination on the part of collectives that are already constituted (organizations, networks, and coalitions). | ||
*Individual involvement fostered a more inclusive dynamic than if people were brought from existing organizations (most were mobilized through social media). Where decentralized networks can be described as ‘networks of networks’, using social media to mobilize generates more ‘crowds of individuals.’ The challenge with not achieving a decentralized network was '''fragmentation and a lack of sustainability.''' | *Individual involvement fostered a more inclusive dynamic than if people were brought from existing organizations (most were mobilized through social media). Where decentralized networks can be described as ‘networks of networks’, using social media to mobilize generates more ‘crowds of individuals.’ The challenge with not achieving a decentralized network was '''fragmentation and a lack of sustainability.''' | ||
|- style="height: 23px;" | |- style="height: 23px;" | ||
| style="width: 235px; height: 23px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217);" | | | style="width: 235px; height: 23px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217);" | | ||
'''Members took it upon themselves to make a major decision for the entire mass. ''' | '''Members took it upon themselves to make a major decision for the entire mass. ''' | ||
| style="width: 951px; height: 23px;" | | | style="width: 951px; height: 23px;" | | ||
<br>"''Members of the media committee of Occupy Montreal held a press conference and announced that they were leaving the camp. The statement had not been discussed at the GA (general assembly), but the media immediately announced the end of the occupation. This situation fostered even more tension and conflict in the GA. The media committee was asked to attend the GA the next day to explain its statement, and the GA decided to continue the occupation regardless of the media committee or pressure from public authorities. But on Friday 25 November at 8am, approximately 300 police carried out the eviction of the camp. A few hours later, there had been 14 arrests and the occupation was over.''" -Marcos Ancelovici <ref>https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9789048525461-008/html?lang=en</ref> | <br>"''Members of the media committee of Occupy Montreal held a press conference and announced that they were leaving the camp. The statement had not been discussed at the GA (general assembly), but the media immediately announced the end of the occupation. This situation fostered even more tension and conflict in the GA. The media committee was asked to attend the GA the next day to explain its statement, and the GA decided to continue the occupation regardless of the media committee or pressure from public authorities. But on Friday 25 November at 8am, approximately 300 police carried out the eviction of the camp. A few hours later, there had been 14 arrests and the occupation was over.''" -Marcos Ancelovici <ref>https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9789048525461-008/html?lang=en</ref> | ||
|- style="height: 23px;" | |- style="height: 23px;" | ||
| style="width: 235px; height: 23px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217);" | | | style="width: 235px; height: 23px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217);" | | ||
'''Organized around the general assembly, and a series of working committees''' | '''Organized around the general assembly, and a series of working committees''' | ||
| style="width: 951px; height: 23px;" | | | style="width: 951px; height: 23px;" | | ||
*Working committees functioned like affinity groups who were accountable to the general assembly. | *Working committees functioned like affinity groups who were accountable to the general assembly. | ||
*There were committees for facilitation, media, food, philosophy, security, alliances etc. Each committee was relatively autonomous, with information circulating between the assembly and committees. | *There were committees for facilitation, media, food, philosophy, security, alliances etc. Each committee was relatively autonomous, with information circulating between the assembly and committees. | ||
Line 163: | Line 161: | ||
|- style="height: 97px;" | |- style="height: 97px;" | ||
| style="width: 235px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217); height: 97px;" | '''Lessons on autonomous working groups''' | | style="width: 235px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217); height: 97px;" | '''Lessons on autonomous working groups''' | ||
| style="width: 951px; height: 97px;" | | | style="width: 951px; height: 97px;" | | ||
''"Consensus process only works if it is combined with a principle of radical decentralization. […] It’s always better, if possible, to '''make decisions in smaller groups''': working groups, affinity groups, collectives. […] One should not feel one needs authorization from anyone, even the General Assembly (which is everyone), unless it would be in some way harmful to proceed without. […]"'' - Graeber, 2013 <ref>https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9789048525461-008/html?lang=en</ref> | |||
* | *As a general rule of thumb: decisions should be made on the smallest scale, the lowest level, possible. '''Do not ask for higher approval unless there’s a pressing need to'''.<br> | ||
|- | |||
|- | |||
| style="width: 235px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217);" | '''Three sets of leading tasks (where power can be identified)''' | | style="width: 235px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217);" | '''Three sets of leading tasks (where power can be identified)''' | ||
| style="width: 951px;" | | | style="width: 951px;" | | ||
*Three sets of leading tasks stand out according to Marcos Ancelovici: assembly facilitation (intra-politics), communication/media (extra-politics), and camp maintenance (infrastructure). | *Three sets of leading tasks stand out according to Marcos Ancelovici: assembly facilitation (intra-politics), communication/media (extra-politics), and camp maintenance (infrastructure). | ||
|- | |- | ||
| style="width: 235px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217);" | '''Horizontalism is an ongoing process of trial and error. ''' | | style="width: 235px; background-color: rgb(153, 225, 217);" | '''Horizontalism is an ongoing process of trial and error. ''' | ||
| style="width: 951px;" | | | style="width: 951px;" | | ||
*Balancing inclusion and encouraging autonomous action, building trust, identifying power and how to share it, and overall avoiding replicating the vertical structures of decision making we're socialized into. | *Balancing inclusion and encouraging autonomous action, building trust, identifying power and how to share it, and overall avoiding replicating the vertical structures of decision making we're socialized into. | ||
*Ultimately, any attempt to build non-hierarcheal, inclusive structures that meet one another's needs outside of the state is a welcomed opportunity for learning. | *Ultimately, any attempt to build non-hierarcheal, inclusive structures that meet one another's needs outside of the state is a welcomed opportunity for learning. |
Revision as of 14:45, 8 September 2022
The following responds to a question received during the learning circle held on how to occupy spaces to advance your cause. The contents of this page include insight from academic analyses of the use of horizontality in social movements, movement organizers, and thinkers who developed and expanded upon the concept deep democracy.
What is horizontality?
"Horizontality refers to the active creation of nonhierarchical relations through decision-making processes. Rather than assuming that equality can be declared or created through a centralized authority that is legitimated to rule by 'the people', movement practices of horizontality rest on the assumption that inequality will always permeate every social interaction. This shift in assumptions results in an acknowledgement that these inequalities always exist and that each person is responsible for continuously challenging these inequalities at every step of a decision-making process." -Marianne Maeckelbergh [1]
As Marianne Maeckelbergh explains [2] horizontal decision-making can be described as an alternative form of global network-based democracy. Its main arguments are:
1) Equality must be continuously created and worked on. Equality cannot occur naturally, based on existing hierarchies in our society for gender, sex, rase, class, education, skill interpersonal power dynamics, etc.
2) Diversity is the goal of decision making, rather than unity. Diversity support the creation of the best solution that is enforced on everyone.
Differences are used to form solutions as part of the decision-making process. People also have the option to act autonomously. This means that if they don’t agree with a decision taken, they don’t have to join the group as part of it and they can do something else.
History of horizontalism [3] [4]
The form that horizontal decision-making is taking today (i.e. by the Occupy movement) has a history that can be traced back at least into the 1960s. |
|
The term “horizontalism,” from the Spanish horizontalidad, was first used in Argentina after the 2001 popular rebellion. |
|
Occupy sprung up in response to a lack of democracy, and not feeling represented by governments |
|
Lessons on Implementing Horizontality [5]
Marianne Maeckelbergh suggests 3 main challenges arose from Occupy that caused tension, and steered groups away from horizontality:
1) Believing that resources are scarce |
Focusing on financial resources and the chase of fame in the Occupy Wall Street movement caused problems. In the anti-summit mobilizations, money was treated as secondary—first the group decided what it wanted to achieve politically, and then the group could see how much money was needed and where it could come from. The idea that you can only act when you have money, suggests money is where power comes from. Lacking financial resources has rarely impeded people from taking action historically. In Oakland, political discussions were separated from financial ones. First, a discussion on pros and cons would be had about whether to, and/or how to, take an action. Separate meetings were held to submit proposals to fund the chosen actions, without pro/con discussions. |
2) Believing we need to compete to be heard or get what we want |
Treating resources as scarce leads to competition. Diversity is central to the functioning of horizontality. If those participating in the horizontal process perceive their ability to get funds for their activities to be threatened by your request for funds, they will vote against it, rather than thinking about the value of an activity itself. The aim of horizontal decision-making should be to look for ways to make all activities possible with or without funds so that this attitude of competition does not arise. |
3) Claiming domains of activity or knowledge as something someone is in privileged position to know or act upon, excluding others. |
"A nation-state is a political structure based on the delineation of a geographical area within which everyone must share some aspects of national identity and within which everyone is subject to the same legal rights and responsibilities. This may seem inevitable within a polity, but within a network, there is no clear beginning or end and as a result also no clearly delineated group of people who are subject to the remit of decisions taken—even by the general assembly. Although this can seem ‘out-of-control’ sometimes, this is actually the strength of horizontal decision-making. Networks can multiply and split without creating divisions." -Marianne Maeckelbergh |
Using decentralized networks and general assembies [6] [7]
Decentralized network coalitions |
|
General assemblies |
|
No consensus on the appropriate manner to organize collectively |
|
Critiques of Occupy movement's attempts at horizontality [8]
Participatory democratic processes may fail to provide an alternative to capitalism, |
|
Mistakenly acted as if power and control come from centralized, closed authority only. |
|
Those who could not show up in person could not participate. |
|
The People's mic |
|
Openly and horizontal decision making did not translate in practice
|
|
Some decisions don't need general assembly consensus
|
|
"The strength of Occupy comes from a political logic completely counter to the consensus process. Occupiers made the decision to take up the name “Occupy” not because they agreed with it, but because they knew “Occupy” represented something they believed in, something they had already seen at work. When people joined, they were joining not because of a process, but because of an idea. They were committing, in other words,'' not to talk to one another until they all agreed but to join a struggle together with others with whom they might not necessarily agree."''' - 'Not an Alternative [9]
Digging deeper: examining occupy Montreal [10]
People participated as individuals rather than members of organizations. |
|
Members took it upon themselves to make a major decision for the entire mass. |
|
Organized around the general assembly, and a series of working committees |
|
Lessons on autonomous working groups |
"Consensus process only works if it is combined with a principle of radical decentralization. […] It’s always better, if possible, to make decisions in smaller groups: working groups, affinity groups, collectives. […] One should not feel one needs authorization from anyone, even the General Assembly (which is everyone), unless it would be in some way harmful to proceed without. […]" - Graeber, 2013 [12]
|
Three sets of leading tasks (where power can be identified) |
|
Horizontalism is an ongoing process of trial and error. |
|
What is deep democracy?
Arnold Mindell coined the concept of Deep Democracy. It is defined as an attitude and a principle.
Attitude |
"Deep Democracy is an attitude that focuses on the awareness of voices that are both central and marginal. This type of awareness can be focused on groups, organizations, one’s own inner experiences, people in conflict, etc. Allowing oneself to take seriously seemingly unimportant events and feelings can often bring unexpected solutions to both group and inner conflicts." -The International Association of Practitioners of Process Oriented Psychology [13] |
Principle |
"Unlike 'classical' democracy, which focuses on majority rule, Deep Democracy suggests that all voices, states of awareness, and frameworks of reality are important. Deep Democracy also suggests that the information carried within these voices, awarenesses, and frameworks are all needed to understand the complete process of the system. The meaning of this information appears, when the various frameworks and voices are relating to each other. Deep Democracy is a process of relationship, not a state-oriented still picture, or a set of policies." -The International Association of Practitioners of Process Oriented Psychology [14] |
Steps of deep democracy [15]
The Lewis Method of Deep Democracy aims to work with the rational and emotional aspects of decision-making processes. It was developed by Myrna and Greg Lewis, psychologists asked by one of South Africa’s main electricity companies to transform a department with a racist hierarchy to a department where people work together on an equal level.
5 steps of The Lewis Method [16] :
1. Collect all perspectives (even those opposing your own) |
2. Actively look for the alternative voices (does anybody think something completely different?) |
3. Spread the alternative (who shares this opinion?) |
4. Add the wisdom of the minority to the decision of the majority (what do you need to go along with the decision of the majority?) |
5. Dive into the unconscious |
Deep Democracy welcomes differences in opinion and seeks out divergent opinions by embracing 'no.' It aims to give people tools for tough conversations and to achieve resolution.
Levels of deep democracy [17]
According to deep democracy, there are 3 levels and dimensions of experience.
Consensus reality level |
|
Dreamland level |
|
Essence level |
|
If you have any suggested revisions or additional resources to share related to the above content, please email them to kenzie@lehub.ca.
- ↑ Maeckelberg, Marianne. Horizontal Democracy Now: from the Alterglobalization Movement. 2012. 4 (1). Pg 207-234. http://www.interfacejournal.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Interface-4-1-Maeckelbergh.pdf
- ↑ https://www.stirtoaction.com/magazine-issues/issue-03
- ↑ https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/horizontalism-and-the-occupy-movements
- ↑ https://www.stirtoaction.com/magazine-issues/issue-03
- ↑ https://www.stirtoaction.com/magazine-issues/issue-03
- ↑ https://www.stirtoaction.com/magazine-issues/issue-03
- ↑ Maeckelberg, Marianne. Horizontal Democracy Now: from the Alterglobalization Movement. 2012. 4 (1). Pg 207-234. http://www.interfacejournal.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Interface-4-1-Maeckelbergh.pdf
- ↑ https://roarmag.org/essays/counter-power-as-common-power/
- ↑ https://roarmag.org/essays/counter-power-as-common-power/
- ↑ https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9789048525461-008/html?lang=en
- ↑ https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9789048525461-008/html?lang=en
- ↑ https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9789048525461-008/html?lang=en
- ↑ https://iapop.com/deep-democracy/
- ↑ https://iapop.com/deep-democracy/
- ↑ https://perspectivity.org/
- ↑ https://perspectivity.org/
- ↑ http://www.aamindell.net/worldwork-animated-film/