co-ordination HUB

HUB - a discussion document
social - political - collective
www.hub.org.uk


Introduction

There has been a lot of discussion recently around the idea of some kind of co-ordination mechanism for the extra-parliamentary opposition movements - the Anarchists, anti-Capitalists, progressive non-Party organisations and the grassroots Left (amongst others). We think this is a very interesting discussion, but what is vital is that it moves from being a discussion into a real network for real change: the fine words must be followed by action.

At this stage we think it’s extremely important to have no preconceptions about the form, purpose, content or political destination of this co-ordination hub. We must also make it clear that this discussion document is purely a set of suggestions to provoke other thoughts and ideas, and that the proposals here carry no more weight than anyone else’s that may follow.

We would like to stress that it is the relationships between:

• hub and periphery
• networks and their connections
• the collective and its participants

which we feel are fundamentally important, not the form any network takes – so, we don’t fetishise the World Wide Web but we do use it as a tool if that is the most effective way to do it. Right now it seems to be the way to move forward, so we’ll base this document around electronic media until such time as it ceases to be useful. This document will necessarily be incomplete: we have never believed we have all the answers, and we hope the discussion this document stimulates will produce all kinds of ideas that we never even dreamt of.

Whatever form any HUB takes, we will need to learn far more than any of us do at the moment - about acting collectively; organising without hierarchy; and accepting difference - and have the commitment to put those ways of working into practice.


A HUB - what’s it for?

There are both positive and negative reasons. There is a widespread fear that an encouraging increase in social activism is in danger of being eaten-up by the mainstream Leninist Left and their front organisations because the rest of us aren’t so visible or can’t get our act together. Anyone with sense is going to react to this by trying to be a more effective, more organised and more visible alternative so that people will choose to express their resistance in more useful ways than through joining a Left Party.

We recognise that much of the progressive/revolutionary Left in the UK, whilst sharing many aspects of politics and approach in common, is fragmented and racked with a tedious sectarianism which disrupts and hinders much of our activity. Many groups are also mired in self-referential activist chic and irrelevant dogma. We are all going to be in a better situation if we can find ways to work together, pool resources and share good ideas. Before we can fight back effectively, surely we need to stop fighting each other first. This doesn’t mean that we all have to agree on all issues: unity is not the answer to this question. It means we have to respect difference and value diversity. The HUB would be a mechanism to enable this.

Again, there are different purposes for such a HUB: internal and external. Internally, the HUB could be a tool to co-ordinate our activity, to organise collectively and horizontally, and to allow us to work together in our different ways. This must be democratic and transparent to all: we are not in the business of building a(nother) vanguard. Externally, the HUB could be an instrument to carry ideas out to ordinary people in our streets and workplaces, showing that the revolutionary organisations of tomorrow can be started today.

It could be a path for communication from the streets into the movement, so that we are always learning from the struggles of others. It could provide an access point for ideas that has resonance with those everyday struggles, and which are backed up by a multitude of organisations and individuals, as well as becoming an access process into the resistance movement for people currently on its fringes. It could welcome new organisations and currents to become an organic part of the collective whole. There could be hubs around hubs, with a host of overlapping connections and networks - regional, social, political - all feeding into wider networks of collective struggle and resistance, exchanging contacts, information and ideas, becoming networks of solidarity and empowerment.

Ultimately the HUB needs to be accessible to ordinary working class people on every level: physically, electronically, ideologically and practically. It exists to reflect and aid resistance.


A HUB - what does it do?

There are several layers of possibility for the HUB, in terms of a Web-based portal. But we think it’s important that this is not just another internet activist portal - it’s not just a series of websites or virtual networks, but that it is a real network of mutual aid and collective co-ordination. A process that is built on real co-ordination between groups, individuals, currents and movements. A genuine collective effort.

This will need considerable commitment of energy, resources and time, and a level of input from participants that many revolutionaries are not used to. What we could create, by working together, could be a very interesting and useful resource that could help to spread both ideas and resistance, but it will take a lot of effort to get there. It’s an idea filled with potential. We need to develop that potential, because it won’t happen by itself.

In terms of a website, or series of websites, there would need to be input on at least 3 levels:

• passive: resource bank - archives/libraries/information
• active: constantly updated news/co-ordination /updates /innovation
• rolling: programmes of analysis/comment/discussion/development

None of this is going to emerge overnight – it’s vital that the information is open to access by all (which will generate security issues), and that the content is not the responsibility of a select few: participation must be open, not just by default, but by active solicitation and encouragement. Without participation, there is no HUB. Input should be diverse and localised, as well as specific and global. What it cannot be is centralised.

The HUB should be able to draw in overlapping projects and developments for mutual reinforcement and benefit. There are many initiatives in progress (and in discussion) that may feed into the HUB idea: IT workshops, web portals, collective organisation workshops, community projects, consensus training, grassroots publishing projects, Rank and File networks, revolutionary conferences, even other hubs. The HUB is not a particularly original idea, but we don’t need to keep re-inventing the wheel - we need to build on what has gone before and on parallel initiatives and move forward together.


A HUB - how does it work?

Ideally there should be no freestanding organisation (and certainly no way for membership ideas to even function) so the HUB should purely be the sum of its parts, with collective input, organisation and control. It exists only in the collaboration between participants: in the network of practical and political support between us, and in the process of our collective effort. The flipside of this is that everyone understands that the HUB belongs to them, and that it is their responsibility to sort things out (rather than presuming someone else will). We need to learn to be collective and to act collectively.

Rather than try to force everyone into some kind of rigid ideological straitjacket (which would lead to horrible failure, even if it was remotely desirable) we need to explicitly accept difference: difference of priorities, focus, membership and agenda. If we cannot accept this, we can’t even start to move forward. The HUB cannot be a process of uniformity. The participants need to be able to act autonomously within the collective and for that autonomy to be respected. We need a simple framework of core ideas and mechanisms that we can use to work together, describing our motivation and our organisational principles. There are already useful frameworks in existence, like that used by Peoples’ Global Action (PGA), so we wouldn’t necessarily have to start from scratch.

We can use whatever forms of co-ordination we choose: delegate meetings, conference calls, Bulletin Boards, email lists, regional meetings, conferences, whatever works best. It’s the decision to begin the process which is most important: the form will emerge within our collective will. Whatever we decide now may not be useful in 6 months; we need to have the creativity to be flexible and dynamic, to look in new directions as well as taking what we need from the past.

The technology used for the HUB raises many questions. The form it takes needs to reflect how it will be used and how to keep it open and accessible. Technology is not neutral, and the use of computer systems will always raise issues. Like every other aspect of Capital, we can use it the way the bosses want us to, or we can use it against them. Every tool is a weapon if you use it right.

JB & EB
TACT1
07/05/03


This document is available online at  http://www.hub.org.uk

We welcome your comments (either positive or negative, so long as they’re constructive!), please circulate this document to anyone who may be interested. Copies can be downloaded from the website in PDF and Rich Text formats.

You can participate in the discussion about this project by emailing  mail@hub.org.uk or by posting a comment to the discussion board at the HUB website.