Anarchist Free University Visioning Workshop

Location:

• Centre for Social Innovation
  1. Spadina Ave., 4th Floor Toronto, ON

Date:

• 9 June 2007

The Day's Itinerary:

Past

• 10:00-10:45 History of the AFU
• 10:45-11:00 Break

Present

• 11:00-12:00 Why are we here?
• 12:00-12:45 Lunch Break

Future

• 12:45-2:45 Diversifying the AFU
• 2:45-3:00 Break
• 3:00-5:00 Where Do We Go from Here?

10:00-10:45 History of the AFU: History Panel

Long term and former members of the collective were invited to speak about the formation of the AFU and present on any aspect of its history, development or organizational practice that they feel is important. Eric Stewart (Possum), Christian Whittall, Rob Teixeira and Alan O'Connor were invited to speak.

Christian Whittall (provided this summary):

My first experience with the AFU was Chris Smith's Experimental Literature class which kind of informed the nature of my future involvement with the school. Since then I've facilitated four (five if you count the one I'm doing currently) classes: Psychedelic literature, comic book literature, Samuel Beckett and the Yoga-sutras. Over the course of that time I've tried to build on Alan's original concept of the AFU as something very similar in quality and content to a conventional university but cost-free, by experimenting with class format and pedagogy beyond what tuitioned education could allow. My idea is that the radical form of the university naturally opens up countless new possibilities for content in terms of subject matter, methodology and production.

Alan O'Connor

Alan expressed the idea that the collective has a responsibility to provide a high quality educational experiment. Foundational discussions at the AFU addressed issues such as the level of course difficulty and the structure of the course design. There was disagreement over the style of schooling and level of difficulty and structure. Some felt that the format of the course should mimic the courses available at mainstream universities equivalent to first or second year university courses. He discussed the fact that a member of the collective who had practiced a more nomadic way of life opposed such practices that mimicked the kind of educational structure that he was trying to get away from. An alternative would be a kind of educational experiment that was radically open to very different educational models, practices and levels of difficulty.

The practice of consensus decision making was also a topic of our discussions in the summer of 2003. We felt that a model that was similar to the Quaker model was one that was widely adopted within anarchist and other radical collectives historically. Consensus decision making has a considerable history and presence within radical organizations and the model is fairly open to experimentation and modifications to suit the needs of particular projects and collective structures. Alan discussed one peculiar practice that the AFU has adopted since the founding meetings. A person who is proposing a course is asked to leave the room after her presentation in order to allow the rest of the collective the opportunity to discuss her proposal in her absence. Alan mentioned that this practice was commonly employed by the Body Politic Collective of which he was a member in the early 1980s.[1]

Rob Teixeira

Rob discussed how he came to participate in the school and what this reveals about how folks hook into activist space and how activist spaces sustain participation. For Rob, queer activist friendship networks were pivotal in sustaining his involvement in the early years of the AFU organizing. Rob came to the AFU with the desire to offer critical courses on sexuality and gender issues. His sense, having been involved in a range of activist projects over the years, is that there is less attention paid to these issues in activist organizing and radical practice. Rob discussed how his interest in radical spaces is engaged by thinking through issues of access and boundaries, and the everyday practices that govern collectives. Rob talked about how we are producing a space in which we are governing each other and ourselves albeit differently, democratically and oppositionally. The attraction of radical spaces and collective organizations for him is the opportunity it offers to think through our everyday practices, power relations, and norms to create spaces that are more participatory and democratic. It's about thinking through the practices we adopt, and the meanings we invest them with. Given the idea that how we do things is just as important (or more) than the course content, our social imaginings enable us to collaboratively evaluate our practices and pursue other ways of thinking and acting as an ongoing process.

12:45-2:45

Anti-Oppression Workshop

• Facilitator:
• Sharmeen Khan
• (sharmeen@resist.ca)

Anti-Oppression and the AFU

This workshop can help us to develop paradigms for thinking through some of the issues. The idea is to develop strategies and practices as an ongoing process. It is unrealistic to assume that this workshop will "solve" the problems of collective organizing.

Three main aspects of anti-oppression practices that can help us think through relevant issues:

1. Inclusion & Exclusion

• perspectives on power, identities, etc. Why is the composition of the AFU such?

• Reflecting diversity of the city.
• developing practices like radical childcare spaces, etc.
• diversity of generations
• is there a tacit assumption that we need more diversity; if we have the right structure then the diversity will come? Are we making the assumption that there is something wrong? Is there something wrong? This strikes to the heart of the assumptions of anti-oppression organizing.

• diversity of thought; how we all participate in the insidiousness of dominant culture and also how we also create self-determination and self- empowerment practices and thinking.

• another person doesn't think there is a dominant culture and thinks that the diversity of thought is important.

• Diversity as problematic$-1òôoften seen as add people to the mix and serves to detract from issues of power, inequalities etc.

• Idea is to put an action plan into place$-1òôhave other meetings to think through what comes up.

• our school, indeed, all our practices are framed by the greater situation of capitalist colonialism and the historical legacy of these dominant practices.

2. Power and prestige

What are problems at the university:

• white boys club; assumption of anarchism; punk?
• academic cliques
• communication between members who are familiar with each other$-1òôconversations with some and not others.

• recognize emotional dimensions of community building and practice. Practices of exclusion, even non-overt ones, are alienating and emotionally taxing

• how does power exist through the cliques or at general meetings? How to circumvent the process of freezing out.

• if the idea of anarchism is front and centre (as in our name), this may be one reason why it attracts a culture of white punky boys. There seems to be a ratio of 3:1 participation from men to women.

3. Who is here? Who isn't? Why? (thinking about voice and leadership)

• Our practices need to be made clearer for new members; how we actually function is not available for new members. Our practices are opaque for new members.

• why would people of colour (and others) not come if there are white boys? Is it a question of advertising?

• what do we mean by "leadership" in a collective structure?

• do our courses actually address anti-racist ideas, colonialism and immigration issues?

• idea to not only attract people but also sustain them here. What relevance do our courses and practices have to diverse communities?

• what are we doing that attract diverse communities of struggle?

What does diversity mean?

• diversity of ideas

• do we operate in a framework of anarchism? Enda proposes counter-pedagogy aimed at unraveling the manifold different forms of oppression that we are encountering. Courses that are actively facilitated by the members of the community--through practice they become part of the AFU. There would be an organic development of the communities and the involvement in the AFU.

• An example could be a Deaf person facilitating a course of deaf culture--this enables various communities to participate on their own terms and will also be an invitation for us to examine our own practices and change them.

We can think through some overall questions: Why do we want this diversity? What is the difference between diversity and social justice? Thinking through this can help us develop clear political goals. Important to think through how we link up with organizations and partnering with them to self- define goals, projects, etc. How do we maintain our own political goals and practices with other organization which may not subscribe to our way of organizing (i.e. anti-authoritarian, non-hierarchical).

Perhaps a written mandate would help alleviate some vague involvement. Goals and boundaries of the political project can be set out and made explicit.

Actionable Ideas:

The collective should think through its goals and the shape of its political boundaries.

Here are some questions that we may consider. We can develop timelines for our different goals.

Organizational questions:

How can organizational endurance be maintained without concretizing and codifying ideological boundaries, practices and the creation of hierarchies.

Does the name, "anarchist" create boundaries for participation?

We were concerned about the direction of the school but we are wary also of concretizing an "ideology" or political identity. This could create barriers for those who are participating in decision-making. We stressed the need to think through the continuity of our practices and our organizational longevity.

Facilitators:

• Expand our links to community-based initiatives and diversity with respect to social movements and issues. We discussed the pros and cons of the invitational approach to developing diversity on the collective.

• provide support for people who want to be facilitators: mentoring and support

• develop practices that can provide facilitator training and skills sharing collaboratively.

Students:

• provide orientation activities or meetings about the AFU and its organizational practices.

• developing culture and practice around discussions, consensus decision- making and our collective practices. Make our operational practices more transparent.

• provide orientation meetings for new members or have people meet with new members one-on-one initially. Hold events or socials with the aim of attracting specific communities.

• outreach to communities and other social movements.

Content:

• recognizing and developing strategies to boost confidence to be a facilitator

• develop strategies to invite new content and ideas

• we can have a mix of "apolitical" courses (i.e. Spanish lessons, Judo) and more recognizably political courses.

• develop meaningful partnerships with other groups, community-based collectives and social movements. We need to think carefully about how such links are made, developed and sustained.

• we can develop Action groups--a working group organized around different oppressions dedicated to thinking through and acting on approaches to equity, integrative and transformative strategies for the collective project.

• how do other groups' practices impact on how we partnership
• to what extent do we have the facilitator learn facilitation skills?

• do we expand to virtual courses, learning through the Internet? Our approach has usually stressed the importance of face-to-face collective learning.

• Allocating Resources:
• think through practical issues for participation: Childcare, TTC tickets, food, language diversity.

(Note: Women's centre has contacts for childcare--childcare subsidies for our members).

Moving forward

Tobie and Rachel facilitating

3 - 5 pm

Two Parts

Review list

How can we activate on these issues? What are we going to do?

Our name: Discuss another time: priorities? We don't need to spend too much time on this today.

Can we spend some time on defining ourselves in some way? What are our basis of our unity? What are our overall shared purpose?

Our meetings are very task oriented and we don't take time to think in larger terms, or to take account of other dynamics like our feelings...

Offer courses in facilitation, group consensus, anarchism 101 course, ground school in its political philosophy.

• thinking about our social aspect, having more parties. Potlucks around food during courses, field trips.

• advertizing, so we can be known far and wide.

Practical, theoretical, networking or social aspects of the university

Organizational Structure:

Is there a minimum number of people needed to make decisions: It depends on the importance of the decision.

To what extent do we codify course proposals? Proposal writing... Can non- reading courses be proposed without a written component, necessarily? i.e. judo, etc.

Transparency of process:

What is consensus? We have subscribed to a loose conception of consensus? Is consensus clear?

Develop consensus resources: have it on the website. Developing a kind of mentorship or ask people to come early.

5 roles: minute taker, minute bringer, gate-keeper, facilitator, time- keeper.

People should know that they have to What are the basis for accepting or rejecting courses?

Working Groups:

Outreach/Network

Mandate/Ideology/Basis of Unity & Principles

Process Group

Social and Promo Group

Web

Each group should report back on their progress in july or august.

---

[1] The Body Politic (1971-1987) was a Canadian radical queer liberation newspaper which eventually developed into the queer community tabloid, Xtra! For more information on its history and politics link to long-time gay activist Rick Bebout's website, and click, "The Origins of the Body Politic," www.rbebout.com.