Statement from collective.

This statement is being released in regards to recent events and allegations of racism within the Cleveland Food Not Bombs collective. While CEDNET and FNB are separate entities, we are both part of the larger activist community, and have some overlapping membership which is how these issues came into our view. CEDNET feels it is necessary to address instances of oppression within the activist community wherever they might happen.
At around the end of August some posts about racism were made to the FNB Google Group and were promptly removed by a moderator. The moderator - a white person - had banned posts by person of color, and made use of the phrase "race-baiting" to explain his action. Nothing particularly inflammatory was contained within the posts themselves. The posts in question were anti-racist resources for white people, by white people, and were posted with the intent of generating discussion around important issues in the radical community, and are attached at the end of this article for that purpose and to illustrate how uncontroversial they are. The posts were not addressed on the basis of their content, but rather were deleted in knee-jerk reaction to what the moderator perceived to be "baiting".
The various rationales for deleting the posts given were at first “race-baiting”, then spamming, irrelevance, and hate speech. The ridiculous nature of the first rationale is obvious, and only reveals the racist pre-conceptions of the moderator himself. The idea that only two posts, about activist topics, on an activist message are spam is similarly ridiculous. In making a case for irrelevance the moderator rationalized this by saying that racism is not a problem in FNB and that discussions of this nature don’t belong on the FNB board. We beg to differ. Racism is a problem in the United States in general, and in activist groups dynamics of racism and other inequalities are bound to reproduce themselves unless groups are deliberate and proactive about creating an anti-oppressive practice. FNB specifically has been criticized in the past for being an almost entirely white group that functions more like a charity than an activist group. In addition to this, all sorts of topics are posted on the FNB message board, not relating directly to FNB, and are not removed. Were either of the posts hate speech? The suggestion is so extraordinarily absurd as to not merit a response.
However, it seems that cluelessness on the part of some would demand that we do respond. Racist epithets, and arguments and ideas that rest on racist assumptions or allusions are hate speech. For instance, putting forward the proposition that a person of color asking for a discussion of racism in the activist community is “race-baiting”, is hate speech. It panders to the assumption held by many elite white people that people of color routinely bring up topics of race and racism to unfairly advantage themselves in arguments, society, etc. When white people – who are the beneficiaries of white privilege – use hate speech it is dangerous and warrants attention, because such speech carries a real threat of mass physical violence with it. Behind the hate speech of white people lies power. This isn’t to say that all white people are responsible for the creation and maintenance of white supremacy, but most white people do benefit from white privilege to one degree or another, the degree itself largely based on one’s class, gender, etc.
When people of color use derogatory language about white people it has the potential to hurt white people’s feelings, but the possibility of someone actually being killed is almost non-existent. It is also the understandable consequence of a long history of exploitation in which the exploiters were (and are) mostly white, and so should be understood as a natural part of a very justified anger.
In creating this statement CEDNET invited the input of many current and former FNB members. It seems that within FNB there is a history of oppressive and anti-democratic behavior going unchallenged. The very fact that someone would be able to unilaterally delete posts without the consensus of other collective members proves this. As a result of continuous lack of accountability to anti-oppressive and democratic structures FNB has seemingly degenerated into a charity run by a single person, rather than an activist group using consensus. CEDNET realizes that we are in no position to dictate terms to any other group, but with the help of FNB members and those who have been the victims of oppressive behavior within FNB we resolved to strongly suggest that FNB take immediate action.
We suggest that FNB go through a consensus workshop and adopt a formal consensus structure, to ensure a culture of democracy is created and sustained. In CEDNET, we have a written set of guidelines for member participation, which are posted at the end of this article. FNB could protect itself from future incidents were they to adopt something similar and make all participants aware of it. We further suggest that FNB hold anti-oppression workshops and trainings, and ensure there is continuous safe space for discussion. In addition to this, we recommend that the offending moderator submit himself to some formal process for conflict resolution and reparation. There is also an opportunity for FNB to actually make the connection between food distribution, activism, and anti-oppression in cooperation with another group. There is a relatively new Cleveland group called Oppressed Peoples’ Nation that has begun their own “Feed the Homeless Program”. This group has asked for help with this program and we believe that not only could FNB members bring their experience and resources to aide another group in the spirit of solidarity, but also that working with this group would be beneficial to Cleveland FNB. FNB can also make the effort to reach out and work with Cleveland ABC and APOC since those groups in particular were singled out for derision. We feel that in the future, with these changes in place, anyone who consistently oppresses others and refuses to make amends or change should be excluded. We have this policy in CEDNET as well. Again, keep in mind that these are suggestions, and are being delivered here in a spirit of solidarity, hoping we can all keep our eyes on the prize and make progress towards a totally liberated society.






Original Deleted Posts



Video posts from Cleveland ABC at www.youtube.com/user/clevelandabc





From: (banned list member)

To: clefnb@googlegroups .com
Subject: RACISM 101 FOR CLUELESS WHITE PEOPLE PLEASE TO SDS TRAINERS
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:55:06 -0400

My objective is for people whomever to be introspective, often times i picked artilces from well-known anti-racist like michael novick.
The reason i do this europeans who doing the work know them selve and their own all to well if they're painfully honest.
nobodys perfect but must all begin the painful process of looking at ourselves including me.
Being kneejerk or defensive or overly senstive could a facet of clinical projection or clinical denial.
Many think or act as if we have the answers although nothing could be further from the truth.
My goal is to have the confidence in people in reference to critical thinking skills and reading skills in reference to INFERENCE.
The author irony or humor to me was light the load on such heavy topic.
I HAVE TO GIVE YOU CREDIT OF COURAGE TO ASK QUESTIONS AND NOT FUELED REACTION OR EMOTION CAREFULLY PROBING LOOKING FOR THE ESSENCE NOT VALICATED FORMS.

IN SOLIDARITY

wonder where to start when they join the fight against racism

This is a guest post by Robin F, who lives in Toronto. She writes at Dragon Life, and offers the following in the hopes of helping white anti-racist newbies, and of relieving PoC from the burden of said newbies. Since Robin chooses to write about what she knows and the only countries she's lived in are the United States and Canada, this is written from a North American point of view, but in general, the principles also apply to other countries such as the U.K., Australia, etc. As this guide is a work in progress, she asks that you please offer any suggestions and thoughts you may have. The original post is here and that's the version that will be updated on an ongoing basis.

Racism 101 for Clueless White People, Written by a Slightly Less Clueless White Person

People of Color (PoC) encounter the following on a regular basis: they're online or in real life and suddenly a white person, who barely understands privilege or racism, is demanding that they educate them regarding the topic. The white person says, in essence, "Hi! What can I do to help fix racism?" or "Hi! Can you explain racism to me?" or "Hi! What's this 'privilege' stuff?"

Understandably, the PoC says, "Google. You know how to use it." They say this because they're real people, who have real lives and commitments and other things they need to do, and they weren't born to go around educating white people who want to sit on their ass and have an education handed to them on a silver platter.

And then the white person gets butt-hurt because all they want to do is learn and they're trying to educate themselves and that PoC is being so mean to them! And then they sulk about it and often post about how they're trying to learn and become better people but damn it, PoC are so hostile, all that does is teach whites to shut up and sit down! And the white person fails to understand that the PoC wasn't saying, "You're a moron, shut up and sit down," they were saying, "Look, I don't have time to teach you. It's not my responsibility to give you Racism 101. Go educate yourself, the resources are out there."

(Of course even if a PoC says the latter, the white person often will respond with, "But it's such a big subject! I don't even know where to begin looking!" PoC just can't win in these discussions. )

Anyway, I'm familiar with this scenario because I was once That White Person myself, and I've since come across it repeated over and over and over. So, I have decided to make a Guide to Racism 101 for Clueless White People, written by a Slightly Less Clueless White Person


1. Put some cream on your butt and get over the hurt. The PoC weren't angry at *you* per se; they're frustrated because you're the thousandth person who has made the same demand on their time. They're tired of being seen as objects that exist for the edification of whites, and even if you didn't realize that's how your question came across, the fact is that that's how your question came across.


2. If you're a LiveJournal user, go join racism_101. Read the articles and posts linked to from within the userinfo and then start reading through the entries. It's an excellent starter-level community. Even if you don't have a LiveJournal account, you can still view all the public entries on the community.

3. Make sure you understand the definitions of the terms that are going to be used. The first thing you really need to understand is that the definition of racism that you probably have (which is the colloquial definition: "racism is prejudice against someone based on their skin color or ethnicity") is NOT the definition that's commonly used in anti-racist circles.

The definition used in anti-racist circles is the accepted sociological definition (which is commonly used in academic research, and has been used for more than a decade now): "racism is prejudice plus power". What this means, in easy language:

A. Anyone can hold "racial prejudice" -- that is, they can carry positive or negative stereotypes of others based on racial characteristics. For example, a white person thinking all Asians are smart, or all black people are criminals; or a Chinese person thinking Japanese people are untrustworthy; or what-have-you. ANYONE, of any race, can have racial prejudices.

B. People of any race can commit acts of violence, mistreatment, ostracizing, etc., based on their racial prejudices. A black kid can beat up a white kid because he doesn't like white kids. An Indian person can refuse to associate with Asians. Whatever, you get the idea.

C. However, to be racist (rather than simply prejudiced) requires having institutional power. In North America, white people have the institutional power. In large part we head the corporations; we make up the largest proportion of lawmakers and judges; we have the money; we make the decisions. In short, we control the systems that matter. "White" is presented as normal, the default. Because we have institutional power, when we think differently about people based on their race or act on our racial prejudices, we are being racist. Only white people can be racist, because only white people have institutional power.

D. People of color can be prejudiced, but they cannot be racist, because they don't have the institutional power. (However, some people refer to intra-PoC prejudice as "lateral racism". You may also hear the term "colorism", which refers to lighter-skinned PoC being prejudiced toward darker-skinned PoC.) However, that situation can be different in other countries; for example, a Japanese person in Japan can be racist against others, because the Japanese have the institutional power there. But in North America, Japanese people can't be racist because they don't hold the institutional power.

E. If you're in an area of your city/state/province that is predominantly populated by PoC and, as a white person, you get harassed because of your skin color, it's still not racism, even though you're in a PoC-dominated area The fact is, even though they're the majority population in that area, they still lack the institutional power. They don't have their own special PoC-dominated police force for that area. They don't have their own special PoC-dominated courts in that area. The state/province and national media are still not dominated by PoC. Even though they have a large population in that particular area, they still lack the institutional power overall.

F. So that's the definition of racism that you're likely to encounter. If you start talking about "reverse racism" you're going to either get insulted or laughed at, because it isn't possible under that definition; PoC don't have the power in North America, so by definition, they can't be racist. Crying "reverse racism!" is like waving a Clueless White Person Badge around.

G. If you go into an anti-racist discussion and start trying to claim the colloquial definition that "racism is simply viewing or treating others differently based on race", you're going to get a negative reaction. Stick to "racism = prejudice + power". Anti-racists aren't going to take it well if you wander in halfway through the debate and start trying to make them abide by your definition rather than the commonly accepted "prejudice + power". Imagine if everyone in a classroom was chatting about a particular subject and then someone walked in and said, "No! You're all doing it wrong! The REAL definition is ABC and I don't care that all the rest of you think it's XYZ!" -- do you think that would go over well? Of course it wouldn't; the newcomer would be considered rude. (Also, making an appeal to Dictionary.com is not going to work. Pointing out that the colloquial definition is how Webster's Dictionary defines racism is not going to make anti-racists suddenly say, "Wow, you know what? You're right! I never realized it, but now that Webster's has backed you up, I see that you're totally right and racism really is just judging people based on their skin color!" Actually, they may say that, but they'd be saying it sarcastically. )

H. I'm under the impression there are a number of different reasons why anti-racists use the sociological definition as versus the colloquial one, but the major reason I'm aware of is that anti-racists aren't just focusing on individual acts of racism; they're looking at racism as an entrenched system that pervades every layer of our society. The colloquial definition reduces racism to an individual level; the sociological definition focuses on the systemic level. The systemic level is actually more important, because even as individual/obvious acts of racism become less socially acceptable, the systemic effects of institutionalized racism continue to work quietly, efficiently, and powerfully. Think of it like a body; it's easy to find a cancerous lesion on the skin and remove it, and then you'd look like you were cancer-free. But even as you looked fine on the surface, the real cancer would be inside your body, spreading from lymph node to lymph node, and invading your bones and organs. Individual and overt acts of racism are the lesions on the surface; the invisible cancer is the systemic racism. Unless you're addressing the underlying disease, eradicating surface symptoms isn't going to accomplish much. But that's enough about the definition of racism for now; let's continue.


4. Start learning about privilege. You need to understand what it is, and how it works. Read Peggy McIntosh's essay, Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack. (If that link is no longer good at some point, just Google it.) Acknowledge that you have privilege, through no fault or worth of your own; it was accorded to you at birth, and there's no way to get rid of it. It just is, under the current system of institutionalized racism.

If you feel like doing so, spend a little time coming up with your own list of the ways that privilege works in your life; this will give you a greater understanding of the disadvantages that PoC face. Understanding your privilege will help you learn how to:

A) use it for good when possible (for example, when I write this I am taking advantage of part of my white privilege, which is that whites tend to listen to other whites and afford them more credibility than they extend to PoC), and

B) not use it to hurt PoC inadvertently (for example, by going into a PoC "safe space" and taking over the conversation) .


5. Put down that strawman! Nobody's asking you to feel guilty over having privilege. Guilt doesn't get us anywhere. We just want you to be aware of it. Just acknowledge it and be aware of it and move on, for now.


6. Next, learn about derailing. "Derailing" refers to the many ways that white people take a conversation about racism and privilege and, well, derail it -- make it all about them, rather than the PoC. This is almost always an unconscious act. Learning about how derailing works will help you learn how to avoid making the common derailing mistakes. Derailing for Dummies is a great resource. (Notice that the first two entries in Derailing for Dummies actually address the whole "educate me, PoC!" concept. It's THAT prevalent.) Then go read this post: The Art of Defending Racism. (You will also notice both the article and the post are written with a heavy dose of sarcasm. Sometimes it feels like you have to laugh so you don't cry, and sarcasm is a defense mechanism. Some people find sarcasm to be upsetting, but even if it bothers you, don't allow the tone to keep you from absorbing what's being said. It's important stuff.)


7. Do not make the mistake of believing that because you have a lack of privilege in one or more ways (examples: "I was/am poor", "I'm gay", "I'm female", etc), this means you understand what PoC go through.

A. We're all privileged in some ways and have lack of privilege in other ways. A straight black man has straight privilege and male privilege, but lacks white privilege. A gay white woman has white privilege, and lacks straight privilege and male privilege. (A straight white cisgendered male with no handicaps, born to wealthy parents, has all sorts of privilege.)

B. By saying that "you have white privilege", they're not saying "you don't know what it's like to be oppressed" -- they're saying "you don't know what it's like to experience racial oppression". You will not win points by saying, "But I'm gay/female/handicap ped/etc, so I totally know where you're coming from!" Nor will it win you points to say, "But I live in an area of town dominated by [insert PoC group here] and people are always threatening me because I'm white, so I know what it's like to experience racism!" You don't. If that's your situation then you know what it's like to be on the brunt end of racial-based acts of prejudice, but you still don't know what it's like to live in a racist system day in and day out. (If you haven't yet read Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack as linked above, go do it now.)

C. To use an example of how racial privilege and class privilege are different: If you (as a white person) were obviously poor and at a country club, people would assume you’re a server. But if you were obviously rich and at a country club, nobody’s going to assume you’re a server. But if you’re a person of color and you’re at a country club, even if you’re obviously rich and dressed just as well as all the white people there, there’s still going to be some patrons assuming you’re a server and asking where their drinks are. Even if a PoC has ‘class privilege’ -- which means they’re rich or at least upper-middle- class -- that still never erases their lack of white privilege. They will always be seen first and foremost as a PoC. You, on the other hand, get to bypass that; people may judge you on your clothes or other visible markers of wealth, but they’re not going to judge you on the color of your skin en masse. That’s part of your white privilege.

D. To use another class/race example, if you were driving a really nice car, it's highly unlikely you'd get randomly pulled over (unless you were breaking the law, speeding, whatever), even if you're young. On the other hand, if you were black and driving a really nice car, you may well get pulled over just so the cop can check that it's really your car (and not just something you presumably stole).

E. You're going to come across the term "intersectionality" . The definition is "intersectionality holds that the classical models of oppression within society, such as those based on race/ethnicity, gender, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, class, species or disability do not act independently of one another; instead, these forms of oppression interrelate, creating a system of oppression that reflects the 'intersection' of multiple forms of discrimination." In easier terms, this means that often different types of discrimination reinforce each other. Trying to tackle one system of oppression without dealing with other systems as well is going to leave some people in the cold. (This is a criticism often leveled at the current feminist movement; it's primarily working on issues that pertain to white women.)

F. For another way of thinking about how privilege works, here's an analogy. Imagine a racetrack with all those little divided aisles for people to run. Have a rich, white, cisgendered, straight male on the farthest aisle, and he has an aisle that only has a few hurdles. Have a rich, white, cisgendered, straight female on the next aisle, and she has a couple more hurdles. Have a rich, cisgendered, straight female of color on the next aisle, and she has a few more hurdles than the rich, cisgendered, straight white female. Keep going down the line, adding more and more hurdles as you add each form of lack of privilege. And if you've got a situation where intersectionality is often at work -- for example, a PoC who lives in poverty -- throw an additional few hurdles into their aisle beyond what they already had.

Now, let everyone run the race. It's likely that straight rich white guy is going to finish first. And as for everyone else -- well, many of them will still make it over their hurdles and get there too, but it's going to take some people a lot more effort than others. And some people have so many hurdles that they're going to be psychologically beaten from the get-go. No, being white didn't get you where you are now -- nobody showed up in a car and drove you to the end of the race simply because you're white. But being white made it easier to finish that race, even though you will have had additional hurdles from the other ways you may lack privilege (being gay, poor, etc). No matter how many hurdles you had, at least you didn't have the additional hurdles that the PoC faced.

Also, what's even more unfair is when that white guy finishes and says, "Well, I got here on my own two feet, so I don't know what you all are whining about! If I can do it, so can you!" That's the nature of privilege, both to discount the ways it helps us and to refuse to see the ways a lack of privilege makes it harder for others.

8. Read. Read read read read read. I suggest starting with these blogs: Angry Black Woman (www.theangryblackwoman.com), stuff white people do (stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/), and Resist Racism (resistracism.wordpress.com/). There's a lot of other amazing anti-racist journals too; try checking the blogrolls on those sites for links to other blogs. (If you're a LiveJournal user, there's syndicated feeds for the blogs I recommended: abwoman_feed and whitesdostuff and resist_racism .) Also, go read the public posts on the LiveJournal community debunkingwhite. (If anyone else has good resources to suggest, please do so.)

9. Accept that you will make mistakes and you will show your privileged ass and people will get upset at you about it. It doesn't feel good to have people upset at us; we're social animals and we don't like it when we hurt people and people get angry. But don't get defensive; relax, take a deep breath, and know that however upset you're feeling about being jumped on, the people on the other side of the exchange are probably even more upset about what you said. (If you're feeling very defensive and angry, the best option is not to respond right away; give yourself a little time to cool down and think things through. It's a natural reaction to want to dig our heels in and defend ourselves, but it's not the most productive path to take.) What you need to do now is accept that you screwed up, make a sincere apology, and figure out what you did wrong so you don't do it again. Making mistakes is part of the learning process and it won't kill you, so don't get butt-hurt about it. Just make a sincere apology, figure out your mistake, and keep learning. (If you don't know how to make a sincere apology, it goes like this: "I'm sorry I hurt you by saying XYZ." Statements like "I'm sorry I did XYZ, but [offer excuse here]" or "I'm sorry if I upset you" or "I'm sorry you found my statements offensive" are not sincere apologies and they won't help the situation.)

10. Once you reach a place where you are somewhat less clueless, start reaching out to other white people and trying to educate them about these issues. The weight of educating white people does not and should not rest on the shoulders of PoC; as a white person, you're in a good position to educate other whites. White people generally listen to other white people (who are seen as being "more rational" about the topic of race, but that's a whole other topic), and it's less frustrating/upsetting for us because we're choosing to educate others, rather than it being demanded/expected of us.

11. No, you can't erase your privilege, or dismantle racism. But you can do as much as you can. That's all any of us can do.

So there! Now you know how to start educating yourself on this topic, and the more education you get, the easier it will become for you to find ways to apply it. :)








From:

(banned list member)

Sent:
Tue 8/25/09 2:06 PM

To:
clefnb (at) googlegroups.com


A “safe space” for Whites to talk about race is unsafe for people of colour.
June 1, 2009 — Restructure!

Some individuals believe that a “safe space” is one in which people can talk about a sensitive topic without being criticized. When the topic is race, some white individuals expect that a “safe” anti-racist space is one that is safe for whites to talk about race. However, a safe space for whites is one that is unsafe for people of colour.
When discussing race, the greatest fear for whites is being “attacked” by being accused of racism. The greatest fear for people of colour is being attacked by racism itself. If people should be able to discuss issues of race without being criticized, in practice, the result is the silencing of people of colour, while leaving whites beyond reproach.
In a safe space for whites, people of colour are not allowed to call out the racism of white individuals; however, whites are allowed to make statements about people of colour and people of colour cannot respond.
The notion of facilitating a safe space for whites to discuss race assumes that the white person’s learning and enlightenment is the goal of anti-racism. According to this framework, if the white person does not have a non-threatening environment, then he will reject anti-racism, so we must make sure that anti-racism activities revolve around his needs and progress at the pace he desires. However, this setup reproduces white supremacy, as it gives the utmost importance to white comfort, white opinion, and white perspective. It reinforces the white person’s sense of white entitlement.
The white person’s learning and enlightenment is important only insofar as white allies may be useful in the eradication of racism; it should not be given priority over the dismantling of white supremacy, as this would defeat the purpose of anti-racism.

1 Votes





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: (banned list member)
To: (moderator)

Subject: RE: RACISM 101 FOR CLUELESS WHITE PEOPLE PLEASE TO SDS TRAINERS
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:47:15 -0400

Also we should have full confidence in people's critical thinking skills.
As ANTI-AUTHORIANS we should look to body for consultation and reflection.
If you are moderater you right in your concern about flaming listserves.
The BIG concern is abilty move past defensive cognitives towards open honest look at the writing.












Moderator’s Responses to Posts

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 14:25:20 -0400
> From: (moderator)
> To: (banned list member)
> Subject: Re: RACISM 101 FOR CLUELESS WHITE PEOPLE PLEASE TO SDS TRAINERS
>
> I personally regret that this got posted to our forum, because it has
> very little to do with cleFNB other than being a serious attempt at
> distraction. Racism and discrimination occurs in many contexts and the
> specific baiting that is occurring within this message purposely
> contains many negative racial vibes. (bold lettering added) I would appreciate if we did not
> have these APOC or related ABC attacks posted to our group until their
> relevance can be discussed further, if necessary in a group context of
> cleFNB members. This stuff is quite manipulative (bold lettering added) and by no means a
> upfront way of dealing with overall cultural or interpersonal issues.
> Please refain from posting them until we have had a discussion of
> whether or not they are an acceptable/reasonable manner to be
> communicating with another local issues group.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

From: (banned list member)
Date: Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 2:26 PM
Subject: FBN PLEASE MAKE FOLDER FOR INFO WITH HELD
To: (FNB member), (FNB member 2)

this is effort and time to be introspective including myself.
this should consider not an attack but a chance to be self-reflective.
although you are correct it has nothing to do with cfnb for which gratful for work you do.
this post has more to do with are own unexamined issues regarding the aforemention.
I know hard it's to really ourselves including myself.
It's hope you would try to get the gist of posting
without being defensive.
The title could be taken to be hyberbolic depending who's the mindset.
The author is european please get beneath the veneer of sarcasm of author or parady.
all in all we must pro-active i hope you would use your inference reading skills.
in solidarity


_____________________________________________________________________________________

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 8:07 PM, (moderator) wrote:

Hey (FNB member), with (banned list member)posting anything and everything acidic under the sun I need to ask once again what does this have to do with FNB and how is it considerate of what we are trying to be about? Why is it going onto our list and nowhere else. Why is it going onto our list at all. C-ABC, C-APOC and C-SDS should have their own forums were they can spit venom...not on our list! This stuff that keeps getting posted is on the level of Larouche and RCP crap and red herrings. People that have signed onto our list are not going to understand what its all about or where it is coming from. I don't know what ABC wants to be in this day and age but it ain't what it used to be (everything is venomous and mean-spirited in the name of some sort of ultimate take-down of society anything). This stuff is not community building, not pacificism, not working with people or not activism as I know it and it not about progressive change. If this is what they want to focus on I truly question whether we can consider them even someone we could or want to work with...esp given their repeated implications questioning our beliefs and such. There's no room or need for it in FNB.

Seriously & sincerely...(moderator)

_____________________________________________________________________________________

(FNB member) wrote:

STOP DELETING SHIT UNTIL THE GROUP ADDRESSES IT.
THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

_____________________________________________________________________________________

From: (moderator)

Date: Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: good ole (banned list member)

To: (FNB member)

(FNB member), I have not deleted anything...you deleted "(banned list member)" postings not me and you didn't seem to want to inform (FNB member 2) that you had. She thought that I was the one deleting email which was completely untrue. I have banned (banned list member) for specific reasons which I gave in the email. You are in the midst of a staged conflict, in direct communication with some of the people who are sending it to us and want a conflict to happen plus you have not given us the full realm of information necessary to deal with it...only to fall directly into it.

These notions that you are going to drag me in front of some meeting and address this as a group applies to your personal actions also, you literally desire to bring up a conflict that you and your friends entertain right to the doorstep of FNB in a way that probably will trip us up. With regard to APOC or whoever is building up to this they need to be confronted by folks other than pacifist and Quakers we should not be their easy target....it's divisive bullshit. Nice way to totally fuck up other groups that you don't care about. When I said that I thought that this was all (racial)baiting I meant it! (bold lettering added)













Guidelines for participation in Cleveland Economic Democracy Network



1. No oppressive behavior, including but not limited to behaviors that are sexist, racist, homophobic, or anti-democratic, will be tolerated. Persons wishing to be collective members will be bound by this guideline inside and outside of collective activity. This guideline will be enforced by the collective as a whole. Any violation of this guideline will be regarded as a concern of the whole group. Resources for understanding oppression can be found at www.soaw.org/article.php
2. A security culture will be observed by collective members to the highest extent possible given the collective’s open membership policy. Persons who compromise the security of the collective will be expelled, and the collective as a whole reserves the right to expel persons who seem suspicious. The email address of the collective will always remain anonymous. Members should be familiar with types of communication that should only happen face-to-face, and not use email for such conversations. Resources on security culture can be found at www.crimethinc.com/texts/atoz/security.php www.crimethinc.com/blog/2009/06/24/towards-a-collective-security-culture/
3. This collective is not a dating service or a social club. It is understood by all members that the objective of abolishing capitalism supersedes any petty personal objectives we may have. So long as we are doing group work, we will not let social concerns interfere with that work.
4. Group emails are for agreed upon business only. No personal attacks, security risk conversations, or non-business conversations should take place through group email lists. Personal emails between individuals are, of course, acceptable between those who know one another, but unsolicited emails of a personal nature that take advantage of group email lists will be treated as guidelines violations and be deal with as such.