On Tue, 18 Oct 2011, Doug Henwood wrote:
> Several audience members said that none of this is being discussed at
> Zuccotti. Everyone's too polite to fight. Anarchists are very much into
> manners.
FWIW, at least one working guide to anarchist democracy considers too much politeness a corruption of the process. The following is from _Come Hell Or High Water: A Handbook on Collective Process Gone Awry_, by Delfina Vannucci & Richard Singer, a short popular handbook put out by the anarchist A&K press (run by a collective, of course):
<quote>
THE PROBLEM WITH POLITENESS
Politeness, which should not be confused with respect, consideration and common decency (all good things), has always been used as a tool of oppression -- for instancd, to discredit political dissenters and protesters, who are characterized as unseemly and gauche by those against whom the loud slogans and street blockades are directed. The same tactic is employed wihtin collectives to silence dissenters.
Collectivism requires respect, which means honest listening and consideration for another's differences and feelings, but not conventional politeness, which is just a veneer of agreeableness, often used deceitfully to conceal ones' true opinions or motives. Politeness is anathema to building consensus.
The traditional Anglo-Saxon Protestant niceties, such as not saying anything if one doesn't have anything nice to say, never expressing negative criticism, and rushing to smooth over disagreements, are incompatible with working collectively. Conflict is absolutely essential to the process of hashing out concepts and plans. Ideas have to be thoroughly and honestly considered. Conversely, making nice when one doesn't really mean it only breeds mistrust....
An absence of conflict is almost always a sign that dissent, or even honest input, is being supressed, usually by an atmosphere that disapproves of making waves...
There is a misconception that because collectivism is based on honesty, equality and shared ideals, group dynamics will always be loving and supportive. The opposite is true. Collectivism actually allows people to give voice to their dissent, which can cometimes happen in ways that are not pretty.
<end excerpt>
Michael