'This is a proposal relating to Section 2 ('Relations between PGA and other political/activist organisations') of the minutes of the spokescouncil held at the end of the PGA conference in Belgrade on July 29th 2004. This can be found at http://www.pgaconference.org/_PGA2004reports/0729_PGAplanary.html
There is a worrying ambiguity to a comment from one of the 'spokes', so we would like to propose that the following statement be added after this section,
'The PGA Hallmarks clearly reject all forms of discrimination, including fascism and racism. However, the comment from one of the spokes of the meeting that '"In answer to the question about not being able to exclude members of fascist organisations, a fascist coming as an interested individual, respecting the hallmarks and whose behaviour during the conference was fine wouldn't be a problem" reads badly, and does not reflect the sentiment of the spokescouncil meeting. It could be interpreted wrongly, as it does not reflect the context in which it was made, which was to question the possibility that such 'openness' could be perceived to include fascists.
We are facing the long-term reality of the rise of racism and fascism in the world. This is a reality that needs to be confronted and challenged by the PGA network and the groups that are active within it.'
see also: A Dangerous Flirt at http://www.savanne.ch/right-left.html.en
Extract from the
-We would like to make point 5 in the text a concrete proposal:
(Editors note: this is point 5 of II. PGA relations with other political/activist organisations and structures such as NGOs, Trade Unions, Social Fora, Political Parties in the Spokes-Council Agenda)
- We agree with this but want people to reflect on how to deal with organised infiltration from hierarchical groups.
-Political parties may be coming here to influence the conference negatively.
-Does this mean we wouldn't be able to exclude people from fascist organisations?
[We go back to small groups to discuss the proposal]
-This is a good proposal, and we would like to combine it with point 7:
"It was emphasised that hierarchy plays different roles in different organisations eg trade unions exist to assist workers and use a hierarchical structure whereas organisations such as some political parties actually seek to impose their hierarchical structure on others - therefore different approaches are needed for different situations".
-This came from a working group where a trade unionist wanted to feel able to bring people to PGA events. The criteria by which we tend to judge organisations can be too wide - eg there's a big difference between a trade union and a political party.
-It's good to encourage grassroots participation, but we propose that the individual, at least, must respect the PGA hallmarks.
-We want it to be made explicit that such people can come to PGA events as interested individuals, not as an organisation.
-In answer to the question about not being able to exclude members of fascist organisations, a fascist coming as an interested individual, respecting the hallmarks and whose behaviour during the conference was fine wouldn't be a problem.
-Somebody could refer to this and say "you aren't allowed to exclude me". And "not situated within PGA hallmarks" allows for a lot of different organisations.
-Someone could say they agreed with the PGA hallmarks, but what if we didn't believe them?
-That's all taken care of in this proposal; we judge people by how they act in the PGA network and conferences.
-PGA process meetings should only be open to people who agree with the hallmarks.
-Perhaps if someone's behaviour becomes unacceptable we could use something like the harassment/violence procedure [suggested in section III].
-In Milan the SWP were all thrown out and everyone was happy enough with that.
-We should distinguish between representatives and grassroots militants. We want to include grassroots militants, but we don't want well-known leaders or representatives using PGA as a platform.
-Amend 'PGA does not allow people to become isolated...' to 'PGA should not allow...'.
-And we want to exclude the political leaders or representatives.
so, PROPOSAL:
"That PGA should not allow people to become isolated or excluded in the PGA process because they belong to certain organisations that may be less situated within PGA hallmarks, but put the emphasis on people's behaviour within the network and at conferences. However, people from such organisations can only participate as individuals, will not be allowed to promote their organisation through PGA, and must respect the PGA hallmarks when participating in PGA. Leaders and representatives of such organisations are not welcome in PGA, and PGA process meetings are only open to people who agree with the hallmarks."
http://www.pgaconference.org/_PGA2004reports/0729_PGAplanary.html#2nd