[ 7th  June 2013. Beursplein, Amsterdam ]

Solidarity with protesters in Turkey

For many days, Turkish people have been taking to the streets to fight for their future. For many years, they have been facing the brutal repression of undemocratic regimes. The Turkish people paid the price of the economic crisis in the beginning of the previous decade and the ‘recovery’ that followed. The well-known recipe of IMF was also imposed on Turkey bringing privatizations, massive lay-offs, abolition of workers’ rights, union-busting and increased everyday repression at workplaces. Lately, the so-called ‘urban transformation’ policies of the government lead to distraction of free spaces and growing problems in urban areas.

Contrary to what the governments of both countries are trying to convince us, Greeks and Turks share many social and historical traits.  The latest events bear evidence also to the fact that we share the suffering by similar policies driven by the effort of the political and economic elites to deprive people from their basic rights. Greek people suffer by the social and economic war that is waged against them by the government and the Troika (EU, IMF, ECB). They also suffer by repression as strikes and demonstrations are practically prohibited and any protest faces violent attacks by the police and their neo-Nazi friends of the extreme right party Golden Dawn.  Same as in Greece, Turkish people and Turkish government are two separate worlds and light years apart from each other.

The only thing we can do at this moment is to take wholeheartedly the side of the Turkish people in their struggle for their basic rights. We, Greek and Turkish people are not enemies. We stand on the same side fighting against governments and supranational institutions that do not represent us and policies that undermine our present and our future. We share the same problems, we share the same vision and the same targets.

Therefore, your struggle is our struggle!

We support you and we fight at the same side as you!

Nazim Hikmet, September 24th 1945

Political group of Greeks living in the Netherlands

http://www.reinform.nl/

https://www.facebook.com/ReInformNL

https://twitter.com/reinformnl

Gördüm – Bir Gezi Parkı Direnişi Belgesel Filmi / Documentary Film from R H on Vimeo.

It is the third day of occupation of Taksim Gezi Park in İstanbul. The protest camp started when construction vehicles entered the park and tried to pull out the trees.

Government wants to build a shopping mall at the location of the park. So, many people are camping in Taksim Gezi Park to defend the trees.

Early in the morning of May 30th, 2013, at around 5am, the police attacked the occupiers with tear gases and set some of the tents on fire. The cops didn’t let any people approach to the site for some hours, while three construction vehicles were working. They pulled out the trees that were planted by the demonstrators and threw them to a garbage truck.

However, protesters occupied the park again, and the occupation still continues.

More photos and info [in TR]

Taksim Gezi Parkı’na AVM projesine karşı iki gündür eylem yapan gruba 05.00′da polis müdahalede bulundu.

Gaz bombası ve tazyikli suyun kullanıldığı müdahalede, gazdan dolayı yaralananlar bulunuyor.

Bunun dışında, müdahale esnasında duvarın yıkılması sonucu da yaralananlar bulunuyor.

Anti-Kapitalist Müslümanlar grubundan Muharrem Şaşkın’ın yoğun bakımda olduğu belirtildi,

Gezi Parkı’na yapılan müdahaleden sonra belediye ekiplerince eylemcilerin çadırları yıkıldı ve toplatıldı.

Sonrasında ise, polis Harbiye Caddesi, Taksim Meydanı ve İstiklal Caddesi yönünde eylemcilere müdahalelerde bulunmaya devam etti.

İstiklal Caddesi’nde eylemcilerin barikat kurduğu gelen haberler arasında.

]]> http://www.reinform.info/?feed=rss2&p=5908 0 http://www.reinform.info/?p=3320 http://www.reinform.info/?p=3320#comments Mon, 01 Oct 2012 10:46:49 +0000 disorderisti http://www.reinform.nl/?p=3320

Anti-austerity rage intensified in Madrid, as protesters surrounded the parliament Tuesday night in a sign of mounting frustration towards the right-wing government. Their demands included the resignation of top officials with new elections, the halt to austerity measures, and the rewriting of the Spanish Constitution. The protesters charged the government with theft and criminal activity for implementing harsh austerity measures, hiking taxes, record unemployment and allowing mass evictions of unemployed families on a daily basis.

As thousands converged outside the gates of parliament, hundreds of police clashed with protesters, detaining and beating many. Organizers of the action were harassed and intimidated by the police weeks before September 25th. Activists were detained, assembly meetings broken up and a cultural center was raided and shut down.

The Spanish government, with help of the mainstream media, hyped the event as a possible coup d’etate. Nearly 2,000 police officers were deployed to prevent the protesters from reaching the parliament. Despite the main unions withdrawing their support, it’s estimated close to 10,000 people attended. The call to surround the congress brought out Spaniards from all walks of life despite police repression to prevent activists from mobilizing.

On numerous occasions, the police pushed and shoved us as we tried to film. Other journalists were beaten and injured by rubber bullets.

Story produced by Jihan Hafiz and Jairo Vargas Martin.

19:00H, 25-09-2012, DAM SQUARE, AMSTERDAM

CONTEXT

The collective “Plataforma En Pie” (Stand Up Platform) made a calling through social media to force a new constitutive process in Spain, under the slogan “ On the 25th of September Occupy the Parliament”. The lack of clarity and transparency both in the objectives of the call and in the identity of the platform caused suspicion among 15M assemblies thus loosing their support. Nevertheless, this process shows the operability of the hundred of active assemblies in Spain. Moreover, it demonstrates their capacity to react and adopt a political position in relation to popular actions questioning the economic and social system. Thanks to this intense debate different 15M assemblies, some DRY (Real Democracy Now) nodes, social collectives and individuals, have integrated a state coordinator with a completely open horizontal working policy, based on the assembly system in order to generate consensus. This state coordinator has turned the action into “Rodea el Congreso” (Surround the Parliament), with a clear NON VIOLENT MANDATE. The access and exit of the parliamentarians will not be obstructed at any moment. The normal activity inside the Parliament will not be disturbed. Everything indicates that the 25S will be difficultly stopped. Also, part of the people inside15M seems to have assumed the challenge of turning this action into theirs, reformulating and opening it.

After this analysis of the context, background and 25S coordinator objectives among others, we have agreed to demonstrate in Amsterdam with the aim of giving the following approaches an international relevance:

“The 25^th of September the Spanish Parliament building will be surrounded as a symbol to rescue it from the kidnapping which has turned this institution into a useless organ. A kidnapping of the popular sovereignty by the Troika and by The Markets, executed under the blessing and collaboration of most of the political parties. Parties which have betrayed their electoral programs, their voters and the people in general, breaking their vows and contributing to people’s gradual pauperization.

A government chosen by the people that once it reaches the power operates on the opposite that the candidates promised, has no legitimacy. Winning an election does not give the government the right to make do as it wills, betraying the voters who elected it. The people, under these conditions, have the right to require the government to quit. The people have the right to have a government which governs according to the popular choices. This is the essence of democracy and popular sovereignty.

The Parliament will be surrounded by the 25S to tell those who unjustly govern us: we will disobey their unfair and illegitimate impositions to pay their debt. We will defend our collective rights: our houses, public education, public health system, employment, democratic participation and our decent life. We will initiate the process to stop the responsibles for this crisis. The arsonists who have caused our crisis will be judged instead of rewarded.

The demonstration on September 25^th around the Parliament takes place in order to recover our responsibility of our own future, rejecting impositions. We want to tell the ones who have kidnapped Democracy that it is their time to leave. We will require the resignation of this government, as a first step. Set it free. Let’s start anew our constitutive process: an open process with direct participation where we all determine together political institutions, participation tools, juridical and political mechanisms that we need to guarantee the efficiency of our collective decisions. A continuous constitutive process which collective definition starts, but does not end, on 25S”

From the Amsterdam and Zuid-Holland 15M assemblies we support, as we have been doing until now and as we will keep on doing in the future, every non-violent action, emerged into an open, horizontal and assembly process, which help the people to defend themselves from the attacks by an elite which impose us an unfair system and forces us to pay the consequences of a crisis that this elite generated and is still stimulating. This crisis is not just Spanish or European, but a globally systemic. So it can only be solved through an international collective action. For these reasons, we want to inform, in the country we are living now, The Netherlands, about the action “25S surround the Parliament” which will take place in Spain. Showing in this way the continuous questioning of the system and that there are alternatives. We will denounce any violent repression by the Spanish State. Always according to the non-violent and open spirit of the 25S Coordinator, and based on the following premisses:

-This is a non-violent action.

-It has been opened to everybody’s participation.

-The work developed during this year has been decisive and still is. This action must not compromise it, but reinforce it.

-The 25S action does not delegitimize at all the day by day and week by week work of the neighborhood assemblies. On the contrary, in the remote case an action success with the real starting of a constitutive process, this should lay on them.

CHECK THE FULL DETAILS AND UPDATES AT:

http://dutchrevolution.blogspot.nl/

MORE INFORMATION (in Spanish):

-25S coordinator full manifesto: https://coordinadora25s.wordpress.com/manifiesto/

-List of the assemblies, organizations and collectives which support or take part into 25S:

https://coordinadora25s.wordpress.com/participan-2/

CONTACT:

ttszuidholland@gmail.com

International Solidarity versus Crisis, War & Capitalism 

Although they emerge from very different conditions, these movements – from the insurrections of the Arab Spring to the union battles in Wisconsin, from the student protests in Chile to those in the US and Europe, from the UK riots to the occupations of the Spanish indignados and the Greeks in Syntagma Square, and from Occupy Wall Street to the innumerable local forms of refusal across the world – share, first of all, a negative demand: Enough with the structures of neoliberalism! This common cry is not only an economic protest but also immediately a political one, against the false claims of representation. Neither Mubarak and Ben Ali nor Wall Street bankers, neither media elites nor even presidents, governors, members of parliament, and other elected officials – none of them represent us. The extraordinary force of refusal is very important, of course, but we should be careful not to lose track in the din of the demonstrations and conflicts of a central element that goes beyond protest and resistance. These movements also share the aspiration for a new kind of democracy, expressed in tentative and uncertain voices in some cases but explicitly and forcefully in others. The development of this aspiration is one of the threads we are most anxious to follow in 2012.

One source of antagonism that all of these movements will have to confront, even those that have just toppled dictators, is the insufficiency of modern democratic constitutions, particularly their regimes of labor, property, and representation. In these constitutions, first of all, waged labor is key to having access to income and the basic rights of citizenship, a relationship that has long functioned poorly for those outside the regular labor market, including the poor, the unemployed, unwaged female workers, immigrants, and others, but today all forms of labor are ever more precarious and insecure. Labor continues to be the source of wealth in capitalist society, of course, but increasingly outside the relationship with capital and often outside the stable wage relation. As a result, our social constitution continues to require waged labor for full rights and access in a society where such labor is less and less available.

Private property is a second fundamental pillar of the democratic constitutions, and social movements today contest not only national and global regimes of neoliberal governance but also the rule of property more generally. Property not only maintains social divisions and hierarchies but also generates some of the most powerful bonds (often perverse connections) that we share with each other and our societies. And yet contemporary social and economic production has an increasingly common character, which defies and exceeds the bounds of property. Capital’s ability to generate profit is declining since it is losing its entrepreneurial capacity and its power to administer social discipline and cooperation. Instead capital increasingly accumulates wealth primarily via forms of rent, most often organized through financial instruments, through which it captures value that is produced socially and relatively independent of its power. But every instance of private accumulation reduces the power and productivity of the common. Private property is thus becoming ever more not only a parasite but also an obstacle to social production and social welfare.

Finally, a third pillar of democratic constitutions, and object of increasing antagonism, as we said earlier, rests on the systems of representation and their false claims to establish democratic governance. Putting an end to the power of professional political representatives is one of the few slogans from the socialist tradition that we can affirm wholeheartedly in our contemporary condition. Professional politicians, along with corporate leaders and the media elite, operate only the weakest sort of representative function. The problem is not so much that politicians are corrupt (although in many cases this is also true) but rather that the constitutional structure isolates the mechanisms of political decision-making from the powers and desires of the multitude. Any real process of democratization in our societies has to attack the lack of representation and the false pretenses of representation at the core of the constitution.

Recognizing the rationality and necessity of revolt along these three axes and many others, which animate many struggles today, is, however, really only the first step, the point of departure. The heat of indignation and the spontaneity of revolt have to be organized in order to last over time and to construct new forms of life, alternative social formations.

The secrets to this next step are as rare as they are precious.

On the economic terrain we need to discover new social technologies for freely producing in common and for equitably distributing shared wealth. How can our productive energies and desires be engaged and increased in an economy not founded on private property? How can welfare and basic social resources be provided to all in a social structure not regulated and dominated by state property? We must construct the relations of production and exchange as well as the structures of social welfare that are composed of and adequate to the common.

The challenges on the political terrain are equally thorny. Some of the most inspiring and innovative events and revolts in the last decade have radicalized democratic thinking and practice by occupying and organizing a space, such as a public square, with open, participatory structures or assemblies, maintaining these new democratic forms for weeks or months. Indeed the internal organization of the movements themselves has been constantly subjected to processes of democratization, striving to create horizontal participatory network structures. The revolts against the dominant political system, its professional politicians, and its illegitimate structures of representation are thus not aimed at restoring some imagined legitimate representational system of the past but rather at experimenting with new democratic forms of expression: democracia real ya. How can we transform indignation and rebellion into a lasting constituent process? How can experiments in democracy become a constituent power, not only democratizing a public square or a neighborhood but also inventing an alternative society that is really democratic?

To confront these issues, we, along with many others, have proposed possible initial steps, such as establishing a guaranteed income, the right to global citizenship, and a process of the democratic reappropriation of the common. But we are under no illusion that we have all the answers. Instead we are encouraged by the fact that we are not alone asking the questions. We are confident, in fact, that those who are dissatisfied with the life offered by our contemporary neoliberal society, indignant about its injustices, rebellious against its powers of command and exploitation, and yearning for an alternative democratic form of life based on the common wealth we share – they, by posing these questions and pursuing their desires, will invent new solutions we cannot yet even imagine. Those are some of our best wishes for 2012.

Michael Hardt is an American political philosopher and literary theorist. Antonio Negri is an Italian Marxist philosopher. In the late 1970s Negri was accused of being the mastermind behind the left-wing terrorist group the Red Brigades. Negri emigrated to France where he taught in Paris along with Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze. Hardt and Negri have published four important critiques of late capitalism and globalization: Labor of Dionysus: A Critique of the State-Form (1994), Empire (2000), Multitude (2004) and Commonwealth (2009). These four works have been highly praised by contemporary activists. Empire, for example, has been hailed as “nothing less than a rewriting of The Communist Manifesto for our time” by the Lacanian philosopher Slavoj Žižek.v

Assembly of Open Assemblies

The last 3 years, no matter where we live, our lives are strongly influenced by the crisis. This crisis broke out in 2008 and transformed itself to a sovereign-debt crisis particularly in the EU-periphery. This crisis was not created by the people. The bankers and the financial institutions with the support of the governments are responsible for it.
Today the people are asked to pay this crisis by European-wide austerity measures. This recipe has been implemented repeatedly in the past by the IMF and always resulted in increasing the inequalities, the unemployment and the poverty among the people.
In this background, in the last 5 months, an alternative movement in the squares of many countries has emerged. This movement was the genuine reaction of the people against the way that the governments have chosen to deal with the crisis. People have started to gather in public spaces and occupy the squares to protest against the policies of the governments. The most optimistic element of this movement was that people stopped being passive and began to discuss about their lives and their problems making efforts to define a better society. This better society can only materialize with the collective struggle of the people. The ‘Take the Square’ movement that was based on the principles of real democracy, contributed at this.
Particularly in the Netherlands, since last May, open assemblies are taking place in several cities. These assemblies, are part of the ‘Take the Square’ movement and have organized actions of various scale with a twofold aim: firstly, the aim is to show their solidarity to the Spanish and Greek people that initiated this movement in Europe but are also the primary victims of austerity measures that are coordinated by the EU. Secondly, the aim is to react against the unjustified budget cuts that are implemented in the Netherlands that is a rich country that has been mildly affected by the crisis.
Since the beginning of the assemblies in the Netherlands, the necessity of coordination and communications among the assemblies in the Netherlands was more than obvious. Following the worldwide or pan-European actions for occupying the squares every Sunday is clearly not enough. A deeper and permanent coordination is necessary in order to increase the political awareness of the movement in the Netherlands and to achieve our goals.
For all these reasons we call for a countrywide assembly of all the local assemblies in the Netherlands on October 2nd in Amsterdam. It will be the first general and countrywide assembly and as such, we think that this is a very important event. The presence of all of us, the ‘everyday’ man and woman who participated in the ‘Take the Square’ movement, is more than necessary! For this reason, we invite everybody to join and participate in the ‘Assembly of Assemblies’.
Safeguarding the rule that the “agenda” of this assembly is open to be completed with topics that every participant may suggest, we propose some initial issues that we would like discuss and decide upon in this assembly:
1. Review and evaluation of local assemblies.
2. Ways of improving the coordination of our struggle mainly at the country level.
3. Organizing the protest in 15th October in Brussels
4. Other future actions and events.
5. Creating a new pan-Dutch countrywide website of all the open assemblies.

We invite you all in Amsterdam, 2nd of October 2011, 14.00, at the newly created social center “De Valreep” for the “Assembly of the Open Assemblies”

Address:
op de Valreep
Polderweg 620
Amstedam

http://valreep.wordpress.com/

Directions:
Tram 9, Bus 41 & 357: stop at Pretoriusstraat
Train stations:
Amsterdam Centraal and then tram or bus
Walking distance from station Amsterdam-Muiderpoort

OPEN ASSEMBLY OF AMSTERDAM, 22.9.2011
OPEN ASSEMBLY OF GRONINGEN, 23.9.2011
TAKE THE SQUARES AMSTERDAM 25.9.2011
TAKE THE SQUARES UTRECHT 25.9.2011
TAKE THE SQUARES ZUID HOLLAND 25.9.2011
TAKE THE SQUARES NETHERLANDS 25.9.2011

pdf-en

The purpose of this Quick Guide is to facilitate and encourage the development of the different Popular Assemblies which have been created since the beginning of the 15th May Movement. This Quick Guide will be periodically revised and updated. On no account is it to be considered a closed model which cannot be adapted through consensus by any given Assembly. From the Commission for Group Dynamics in Assemblies of the Puerta del Sol Protest Camp we invite our friends and comrades to attend and take part in the meetings, work plans and internal Assemblies of this Commission, which are open to anyone who wants to come to them and actively participate in maintaining, perfecting and developing them.
Open Reflection on Collective Thinking
While we would like to share our impressions so far, we encourage you to continue to reflect on and debate these impressions as we feel that Collective Thinking is an essential part of our movement.
To our understanding, Collective Thinking is diametrically opposed to the kind of thinking propounded by the present system. This makes it difficult to assimilate and apply. Time is needed, as it involves a long process. When faced with a decision, the normal response of two people with differing opinions tends to be confrontational. They each defend their opinions with the aim of convincing their opponent, until their opinion has won or, at most, a compromise has been reached.
The aim of Collective Thinking, on the other hand, is to construct. That is to say, two people with differing ideas work together to build something new. The onus is therefore not on my idea or yours; rather it is the notion that two ideas together will produce something new, something that neither of us had envisaged beforehand. This focus requires of us that we actively listen, rather than merely be preoccupied with preparing our response.
Collective Thinking is born when we understand that all opinions, be these opinions our own or others’, need to be considered when generating consensus and that an idea, once it has been constructed indirectly, can transform us.
Do not be discouraged: we are learning; we’ll get there: all that’s needed is time.
>>THE BASICS

What is a People’s Assembly? It is a participatory decision-making body which works towards consensus. The Assembly looks for the best arguments to take a decision that reflects every opinion – not positions at odds with each other as what happens when votes are taken. It must be pacific, respecting all opinions: prejudice and ideology must left at home. An Assembly should not be centred around an ideological discourse; instead it should deal with practical questions: What do we need? How can we get it? The Assembly is based on free association – if you are not in agreement with what has been decided, you are not obliged to carry it out. Every person is free to do what they wish – the Assembly tries to produce collective intelligence, and shared lines of thought and action. It encourages dialogue and getting to know one another.
What types of Assembly have we used so far? Working Group Assemblies, Commission Assemblies, Local Assemblies (in neighbourhoods, villages and towns), General Assemblies of the Puerta de Sol Protest Camp and General Assemblies of Madrid (Puerta de Sol plus neighbourhoods, villages and towns). These latter (General) Assemblies are the final deliberative or deciding bodies from which the consensuses are decided in order to articulate the different lines of Joint Action for the 15th May Movement in each city.
What is Consensus? It is the way that the assemblies make a final decision over each specific proposal. Consensus is reached when there is no outright opposition in the assembly against the proposal. The following format must be applied to each proposal: 1) What is being proposed? 2) Why is it being proposed? 3) How can we carry out the Proposal if a consensus is reached? To sum up: What? Why? How?
What is Direct Consensus? A Consensus that is directly reached without opinions against it: Proposal > Consensus.
What is Indirect Consensus? A Consensus that is reached after debating different opinions on a proposal which did not reach a Direct Consensus. The following steps are taken to reach an Indirect Consensus: 1) What? Why? How? 2) After the moderator asks ‘Are there any strongly opposed opinions?’, and if there are, a queue for floor time is prepared. The Floor Time Team and Coordinator(s) open the first round of debate. Three arguments for and three arguments against are allowed. After that, the Assembly is asked to show its opinion again through Gestures. If consensus is still not reached when asking if there are opinions against, the Moderator will ask the Assembly to discuss the issue for three to five minutes in small groups where they are sitting. After this small break a second round of interventions consisting of Proposals for Consensus takes place. If a consensus is still not reached after these two rounds, the following takes place: a) If the Proposal comes from a Commission or Working Group, it is returned in order to be reworked, b) If the Proposal comes from an individual, it will be taken to the competent Commission or Working Group so it can reach a consensus on its usefulness and present a reworked version of it in the next Assembly, where it will once again go through the same procedure. And so on until a Real Consensus is reached.
>> THE ROLES AND FUNCTIONS INVOLVED IN A MASS ASSEMBLY:

It is vital to remember to control our gestures and body language so that our own emotions do not confuse matters, and to remember also that a smile is hugely effective in moments of tension or in an apparent dead-end. Haste and tiredness are the enemies of consensus.
LOGISTICS TEAM: A minimum of three people who are responsible for the equipment of an Assembly. They draw a Map of the Site on the site itself, organising spaces and the corridors that run through these spaces, they are in charge of the megaphone, they provide seating for people with disabilities or who are very tired, they provide water and shade (parasols/umbrellas) if temperatures are high or the sunshine is direct, etc.
ASSEMBLY PARTICIPANTS: This includes all those people participating in an Assembly, including the Group Dynamics Teams and members of Commissions or Working Groups. Participants are the life blood and the raison d’être of an Assembly. We are all responsible for running and building the Assembly. Our functions are: listening to the different speakers; participating in matters that require debate in rounds of floor time, and making individual proposals or subjective evaluations (having requested the Floor-Time Team to do so) during the Any Other Business round (normally near the end of each Assembly).
FLOOR TIME TEAM: Two to four people (depending on the size of the Assembly) positioned amongst the participants and next to the corridors. They should wear a distinctive symbol in order to be identifiable easily and carry a card which says “TURNS FOR THE FLOOR” which they lift above their heads, particularly at the end of each intervention. Their main task is to note down the names of the participants who want to take a turn. When such a request takes place, they ask the participant:
1) Is your intervention related to what is being discussed? (Remind the participant of the issue being discussed). 2) Is it a direct reply to something that has been said? 3) If so,is it in agreement or disagreement? With this information the floor-time team member determines if the intervention should be passed to the Floor-Time Coordinator(s) or not. If the proposed intervention bears no direct relationship to the issue at hand, the person’s name is noted so that they may be called upon during the Any Other Business round. They will also tell the participant about other debate forums (speakers’ corners, working groups…). Members of this team should be conciliatory, positive, neutral and patient. They are also responsible for noting any request from the moderator(s) to be relieved. They should try and involve people who have not yet intervened in the debate. A common error is to omit announcing the end of the period for requesting floor time. The total amount of floor time should be limited using common sense in order not to allow each issue to drag on indefinitely.
COORDINATOR(S) OF THE FLOOR-TIME TEAM: Two people, in close coordination with the Floor-Time Team, whose task is to organise the requests to take the floor that are forwarded to them by this team before passing them on to the moderator(s). Should a heated debate be under way, their role includes both selecting speakers so that the same message is not repeated, as well as mediating between people with similar arguments with the aim of presenting a unified proposal for debate. The coordinators are a filter – they do not evaluative the content of each intervention. In order to assure that the interventions are relevant, they should remind speakers of the issue at hand and if this does not coincide with what the speaker wants to share, direct them to other forums (speakers’ corners, working groups…). Once the intervention has been coordinated, the floor-time coordinator informs the facilitator who informs the moderator so that they can call on the speaker to intervene in the right order.
FACILITATING TEAM: Two or three people who back up the moderator. They are the moderator’s “voice of conscience”. They are the only people in direct contact with the moderators in order to help them maintain their concentration and impartiality. The Facilitators should be positioned around the moderation space. They help the moderator synthesise and reformulate proposals in an objective and impartial way. They facilitate the flow of information between “Coordination” and the Moderator so that floor-time is fair and organised. They prevent assembly participants from distracting the moderator, help the moderator communicate with people who find it difficult to speak in public, make the moderator aware of any errors in their vocabulary or summaries, inform them of any last-minute announcements, help them stick to the agenda, etc. In large debates the figure of a “Direct Facilitator” may be created in order to even more closely help the moderator to follow the norms of the Assembly.
An important way of helping the Assembly to run smoothly is to incorporate one or two people who intervene when there are silences, over-heated discussions or serious digressions. Their main role is to remind assembly participants of the importance of Collective Thinking, Active Listening and the true meaning of Consensus.
ROTATING TEAM OF MODERATORS: One or more people (who rotate if the Assembly is large or there is a lot of tension). This rotation is decided upon by the whole team of moderators, with the greater good of the assembly in mind. The moderator can ask to be replaced. The moderator should help the Assembly to run smoothly, should bring together the general sense of the Assembly rather than follow a protocol, Ideally, this figure should not need to exist. (everybody should respect everybody) The moderator(s) are responsible for: welcoming the participants to the Assembly;explaining the nature and workings of the Assembly; presenting the group dynamic teams and their functions; moderating positively and conciliating distinct positions without aligning themselves personally with any of these; informing the Assembly of the positions for and against during the process of Indirect Consensus; summarising each intervention during the rounds of debate should it be needed; and repeating the consensus as recorded in the minutes. The moderator also gives voice to gestures made should a speaker not have noticed (it is recommended that assembly participants wait for a speaker to finish their turn in order to express agreement or disagreement so as to avoid swaying the speaker). Furthermore, the moderator is responsible for ensuring an atmosphere propitious to the exchange of ideas and for establishing a positive tone. Should the need arise they might also release tension by reminding participants of the value that any debate adds to the 15th May Movement and by motivating participants in general. The moderator can also be replaced via consensus of the Assembly as a whole. Anything spoken off microphone should be relayed to the Assembly as a whole in order to foment transparency.
INTERPRETER TEAM: One or two people who translate oral interventions into sign language for the hard of hearing and vice versa. Their vision should not be impeded by standing in front of them. If the members of this team are in direct sunlight, the Logistics Team will assign two people to shade them with parasols.
MINUTES TEAM: Two people responsible for noting all interventions which do no have a script. In the case of consensus resolutions the minutes team can ask for any resolution to be repeated word by word and subsequently ratified by the Assembly. Normally one team member writes down interventions by hand whilst the other uses a computer in case what has been written needs to be cross-checked. If the members of this team are in direct sunlight, the Logistics Team will assign two people to shade them with parasols. At the end of the Assembly, the minutes taken by this team should be read out to avoid any confusion.
PROPOSAL – THE POSITION OF THE GROUP DYNAMICS TEAM IN EACH ASSEMBLY

LOGISTICS TEAM: Its purpose is to prepare and organise the Assembly area before it takes place in order to make it more efficient and functional. The logistics person(s) are in charge of agreeing on and marking out the area (within their possibilities) together with the other teams.
The Moderators’ Area is a rectangle marked out with chalk (or coloured tape stuck to the floor) in front of the assembly area like a type of ‘stage’. Between this area and the assembly area the Floor-Time Team is visibly placed and spread out amongst the participants. Within the Moderators’ Area, the Moderator and the Speaker (person who has the floor) will stand in the middle, flanked by the Interpreter(s) and Facilitator(s) who will normally be squatting or sitting on the floor when not taking part, and always within reach of the Rotating Team of Moderators and the Floor Coordinator(s).
To one side of the Moderators’ Area sit the Spokespeople of the Commissions and/or the Working Groups who will be intervening in the different parts of the Agenda; on the other side an area will be provided for the Floor Coordinator(s) who will always be within reach of the Facilitator(s) and as far as possible from the Minutes Team (who will always sit near the Moderators’ Area in order to be able to request a repetition, summary or text that has been presented) in order not to distract their attention from the conversations which take place before each turn to speak, making their job easier.
>>GESTURES USED TO EXPRESS COMMON OPINION OF THE ASSEMBLY

The following gestures have been agreed on in order to permit the expression of common opinion during assemblies:
1) APPLAUSE/AGREEMENT: Upraised, open hands moving from side to side.
2) DISAGREEMENT: Arms folded in cross above the head.
3) “THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SAID”/”GET TO THE POINT”: As if requesting a substitution in sport, revolving upraised hands.
4) “YOUR INTERVENTION IS TAKING UP TOO MUCH TIME”: Crossed arms. Forearms come together and move apart as if they were the hands of a clock so that palms touch above head.
5) “DIFFICULTY HEARING INTERVENTION”: Cupped hands to ears or hand moving up and down as if to indicate, “turn the volume up”.
It is advisable to remind participants of these signs at the beginning of each Assembly. It is also advisable to inform participants that is more useful to display disagreement once the person speaking has finished in order not to condition their intervention, whenever possible.
>>ORAL EXPRESSIONS RECOMMENDED FOR MODERATORS AND SPEAKERS
We use Positive Speech avoiding negative statements which close the door to constructive debate. It is a less aggressive and more conciliatory type of communication. It is useful to open a debate with the points that unite before dealing with the points that separate. Examples:
1) ‘Don’t touch that dog or it will bite you’ could be phrased as ‘Be careful with that dog because it could bite you and neither of us would like that.’
2) ‘If we don’t reach a consensus here all efforts will go to waste’ could be phrased as ‘It’s important we reach a consensus in this point or we could end up losing strength as a group and nobody wants that to happen.’
We use Inclusive Speech which makes no gender distinctions. It is clear that force of habit can be hard to break, but it is convenient that between all of us we mutually remind ourselves to remember this.
>>KEYS TO CREATING DYNAMIC AGENDAS
What is the Agenda of an Assembly? What is it for? The Agenda is a summary of the topics to be discussed during an Assembly. Its function is to make sure no important issue is left out, to establish an order in the type of interventions and to make it possible to calculate how much time each part of the Assembly should take. The agenda is drawn up by the Group Dynamics Team and the Moderator of any assembly should be familiar with it before opening an assembly as it is a basic guide to that assembly’s contents. The Group Dynamics Team does not have jurisdiction over the contents of the Agenda; its members merely organise the issues to be discussed as reflected in the consensus reached by the representatives of all participating commissions in preparatory meetings. The agenda contains an outline of what issues are to be discussed in the Assembly and as such should be read out loud at the beginning of the Assembly so that the all present are aware of what is going to take place. Experience will help improve the design and relevance of each Assembly agenda. We recommend setting time limits for each Assembly depending on the number of participants and the issues to be discussed, in order to avoid loss of concentration and unfruitful assemblies.
**Schematic, practical example of an Assembly Agenda**
1) Welcome and Positive Presentation. The Assembly is the effective celebration of the power of the people.
2) Summary of the consensuses reached in the previous Assembly and all outstanding issues.
3) Presentation of the Group Dynamics Team for the Assembly in question. The roles of each of its members.
4) Explanation of the concept “Assembly”. We do not “vote”, we reach consensus.
5) Explanation of the concept “Consensus” (direct and indirect). Explanation of the process used to reach an indirect consensus.
6) Examples of how the mechanics of the Floor-Time Team and Facilitators during an Assembly.
7) Reminder of the gestures used in an Assembly and suggestions of how to express oneself verbally in concordance with the 15th May Movement style, as approved by the General Assembly.
8) Reading the Agenda out loud.
9) The turn of the Commissions and Work Groups without specific proposals for the Assembly, only information which does not require consensus. It is advisable that a spokesperson from each Commission or Working Group attends the preparatory meeting for the Assembly in order to help organise the list of issues to be discussed.
10) The turn of the Commissions and Working Groups with specific proposals for the Assembly. If a direct consensus is not reached, the floor is opened to debate. Remember: there should be a maximum of two rounds of debate to defend each position (in groups of three speakers) and/or find a point of agreement. If the debate becomes heated, a period of common reflection can be opened and if after two rounds no consensus is reached the issue can be adjourned to the following Assembly. Opinion > Debate > Resolution or Adjournment.
11) IMPORTANT NOTICES. Citations, general interest information, latest news, etc.
12) ANY OTHER BUSINESS. During this round, there is no opportunity for debate. The information is not to be ratified at this point, rather taken up by the pertinent working group or commission. Important: if it is necessary to cut short this round because of lack of time or tiredness, announce this and tell those who have not had a chance to intervene in this round that the subjects they wanted to mention will have priority in the any-other-business round in the next Assembly.
13) Conclusions and notification of time and place of next Assembly.
14) Message of motivation and reminder of common purpose. Now is the time to use memorable words, which may be in verse, a piece of good news, a highly-charged quotation or a short text, etc.
15) Closure and acknowledgements.
(+ SHORT MOTIVATING MESSAGE. STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLE. ENCOURAGEMENT.)
AN OPEN DISCUSSION ON SOME THEORETICAL CONTENT
What is horizontal organisation?
It is a type of social organisation which implies equality for everyone participating in a group or society. There is no hierarchy and it is the opposite of vertical organisation in which some people make decisions and others obey them.
The method used to take decisions in a horizontally-organised group or society is through assemblies.
What is an Assembly?
An Assembly is a gathering place where people who have a common purpose can meet on equal footing. It can be for:
* Information: the participants share information of mutual interest. They do not debate the content of this information.
* Reflection: to jointly think through a subject, situation or problem. Information must be given, but there is no need to arrive at an immediate decision.
* Decisions: when the group must reach a joint conclusion or decision about a subject it has been involved in. To reach this, the two previous steps (having information and reflecting on it) must have been taken in order to build a consensus.
What do we understand by consensus?
A consensus is a collective construction of a solution to or a decision on a common interest.
It is not drawing up a proposal which includes each and every individual need, but is rather a the synthesis of all the individual opinions which give shape to the best way to achieve reach the group’s common interest.
It implies:
* Being very clear about the group’s common interest.
* Being aware that anything collective is the sum of all the individual knowledge and input; to this end, each individual’s opinions must have been be communicated, listened to and respected.
* Realising that it [consensus] is a commonly constructed end, rather than a function in itself.
*Realising that consensus involves a process and that time and the necessary steps must be provided for it.
The necessary steps are:
* Creating a relaxed group atmosphere which encourages participants to listen to, respect and support each other. climate which listens to, respects and has complicity amongst its members.
* Making sure that the task which will to be worked on is crystal clear.
* Sharing the information of each individual or sub-group so it can be properly taken into account.
* Considering all points carefully.
* Identifying and using points which are clearly fall on common ground in order to begin building the proposal.
* Gradually drafting the proposal through collective thinking.
* Celebrating your achievement.
What do we understand by collective thinking?
It is like a synthesis of individual talents and ideas, not an eclectic summary of what is best but rather a synthesis of all. Individual talents placed in the service of common good, creating through differences, understanding differences as elements which enrich our common vision or understanding.
It implies:
* Feeling that one is part of a whole.
* Letting oneself ‘blend into’ others.
* Not considering others to be opponents, but rather components of the whole group and in equal conditions.
* Respecting opinions not through obligation but rather through desire.
* Having a positive attitude to be able to see what unites, rather than what separates.
* Going for instead of going against.
* Thinking in advance that others’ contributions will enrich the process.
* Not reacting immediately, allowing what others say to sink in first.
This document is the result of the experiences of the Group Dynamics Commission for the Assemblies of the Puerta del Sol Protest Camp, and contains only suggestions. We encourage you to add to it, to improve it and to share it around so we can all learn to participate in an Assembly.

http://takethesquare.net/2011/07/31/quick-guide-on-group-dynamics-in-peoples-assemblies/