what i've been most interested in is why, on a local level, the ways of organizing OWS were already "in the air" where I live - and I assume many other places. A lot of the concepts they've put in place such as general assemblies, working groups, spokescouncils, consensus and modified consensus d-making, are pretty much what any young person active politically or involved in community projects (advocacy, cultural, art, music) is someone who quite naturally gravitates toward these methods, uses them to resolve disputes, get things going, etc.
the answer, of course, is the huge influence of direct action networks.
all of this then connects back to my critique of radical cultural feminism which I undertook back in 2005-2007. Radical feminism has strong ties with anarcho-feminism. As a movement, in the 70s and 80s it went into defensive mode. They retreated from a lot of overt political activities given various economic an dpolitical developments, primarily the domination of liberal and power feminism in the public sphere.
Radical feminists, in defensive mode, just went to work: they built health clinics, communes, women-only spaces, rape crisis centers, alternative healthcare, birthing, mental health, and childcare centers, craftworks, farms, art collectives, etc. They got involved in local-based politics, and especially worked on issues related to sexuality, rape, prostitution, birth control, healthcare.
One place they rarely went: academia. Instead, what happened, as they simply defended themselves from the onslaught of hostile politics, was that they become involved in increasing numbers of people's lives, having a huge influence on what feminism meant to people. It touched their lives in daily kinds of ways. They learned its principles and tenets in alternative health clinics, in conflict resolution centers, at daycare co-ops and mental health clinics. It was something you encountered in any sort of radical politics such as the antiwar movement, the anti-nuke movments, prison abolition, green party politics, GLBTQ struggles, labor and environmental movements.
everywhere you turned, there were radical cultural feminists articulating its principles. Of course, popularized feminism is a watered down version of the radical cultural feminism of the sort I detailed on the list and at my blog for years. Still, the similarities are astonishing - to my mind.
The feminism that burrowed its home in academia - some variant of socialist or marxist or postmodern or primarily liberal or power feminism (MacKinnon = power feminism) - has very little influence outside academia. And when it comes up agaisnt the pull and influence of radical feminism its simply no match. (This, of course, is a very superficial gloss. I'm too lazy to find the post I wrote here years ago on this history)
I only got interested in this because radical cultural feminists have a self identity of being extremely marginalized and powerless. They portray all the other feminisms as dominant and trying to wedge them out of everything. They are especially irritated with academic feminists.
But how, I wondered, could radical feminist ideas be so dominatn, part of the drinking water. I mean, women at this list, who claim they aren't feminists otherwise articulate radical cultural feminist ideas as if they aren't debatable, simply are.
Well, the above gloss is an explanation. They burrowed in, like Marx's mole, and simply got busy at the local level and in creating alternative institutions to most everything else.
And that is precisely what the horrid horrid activistists have done in DAN. of course, if you read Direct Action, you learn that its laughable to see them as people who are allergic to theory. Quite the opposite in fact.
so, that's my 10 minute recap. Egg timer's done.
l8r
-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)