(no subject)
22 September 2019 11:12![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
haptalaonBut'm really liking how the Rebellion organises, using Self Organising Systems - it's a blend of totally decentralised and totally hierarchical organising.
We don't have leaders, but we do have facilitators who have a mandate to manage meetings. We have a shared set of values - the 10 Principles - and goals - the Three Demands. We're self reliant and take responsibility for ourselves: if we want to do something for the Rebellion, we just get on and do it - so long as it serves the demands and principles.
We have Working Groups, each one with a mandate to take care of a certain area: for example, Arts or Lobbying or Media. A mandate is a kind of job description, describing what they do - and if you have a mandate, you have complete responsibility for that area. No one takes it away from you or tells you you're doing it wrong; if you want to criticise Arts, you have to be part of the Arts group, or else you accept what has been done. Working Groups have an Internal and External coordinator , and these roles rotate every six months so no one takes ownership of them. Internal basically project manages the WG and External communicates with other Ext Coordinators so everyone is working across teams.
Everyone else is arranged into Affinity Groups. These are eight to twelve people, who sttend protests together. Specifically, they do direct action together: this is a kind of activism which might include hunger strikes, street performance, blocking a road, doing graffiti, or so on; or they attend attend protest together as, say, a samba band, or a first aid street medic team etc. Affinity Groups have trust and have shared values - for example, people willing to take very arrestable actions should be in AGs together, so they're on the same page. AGs have an External coordinator each, and someone from Central has their number so they can be deployed quickly. For example, if you need to set up a canteen at a protest site, you find an affinity group: a set of attendees who already work well together and have the numbers. The Ext Coord isn't the leader, they just pas messages between groups.
I believe in this system. It think it's brill, and makes the community work - focused (we don't have a leader, but we do have people with responsibilities for tasks)
And I feel it would work well for a Pagan community. Affinity Groups are about the size of a coven - you might have two or six or fifteen covens, each with their own flavour and history, attached through their Ext Coord to the local hub. They work autonomously, and yet can come together when required - and also cross promote. Affinity Groups are, at the end of the day, just are bunch of mates - and that's the reality of of a lot of Pagan groups, I think, too. In your community you might have some AGs who were pub buddy pagans, and others who were super hardcore technical magicians.
And then you have Working Groups for people willing to give a bit more time. What WGs would a Pagan community need? It's less clear. You'd probably want a Media one at the very least, for press releases; and maybe a Tech one for the website and social media. I think you'd set up a Teaching WG, who did a basic six month or twelve month "year and a day" standards, and that course might involve talks from the AGs introducing the different flavours of Paganism in the community, and that course would have pathways into more specific trainings done by any covens seeking members. You might want a music WG or a craftsman's WG, depending on your membership; possibly also one for magical skills, if there were members who were celebrants or so on. It would kind of depend on what the local group really "needed": if you had a site or building, you'd need a WG to manage it; if you had a library, you'd need a library WG; if you took subs, you'd need a Finance group and so on.
Some of the benefits include -
We don't have leaders, but we do have facilitators who have a mandate to manage meetings. We have a shared set of values - the 10 Principles - and goals - the Three Demands. We're self reliant and take responsibility for ourselves: if we want to do something for the Rebellion, we just get on and do it - so long as it serves the demands and principles.
We have Working Groups, each one with a mandate to take care of a certain area: for example, Arts or Lobbying or Media. A mandate is a kind of job description, describing what they do - and if you have a mandate, you have complete responsibility for that area. No one takes it away from you or tells you you're doing it wrong; if you want to criticise Arts, you have to be part of the Arts group, or else you accept what has been done. Working Groups have an Internal and External coordinator , and these roles rotate every six months so no one takes ownership of them. Internal basically project manages the WG and External communicates with other Ext Coordinators so everyone is working across teams.
Everyone else is arranged into Affinity Groups. These are eight to twelve people, who sttend protests together. Specifically, they do direct action together: this is a kind of activism which might include hunger strikes, street performance, blocking a road, doing graffiti, or so on; or they attend attend protest together as, say, a samba band, or a first aid street medic team etc. Affinity Groups have trust and have shared values - for example, people willing to take very arrestable actions should be in AGs together, so they're on the same page. AGs have an External coordinator each, and someone from Central has their number so they can be deployed quickly. For example, if you need to set up a canteen at a protest site, you find an affinity group: a set of attendees who already work well together and have the numbers. The Ext Coord isn't the leader, they just pas messages between groups.
I believe in this system. It think it's brill, and makes the community work - focused (we don't have a leader, but we do have people with responsibilities for tasks)
And I feel it would work well for a Pagan community. Affinity Groups are about the size of a coven - you might have two or six or fifteen covens, each with their own flavour and history, attached through their Ext Coord to the local hub. They work autonomously, and yet can come together when required - and also cross promote. Affinity Groups are, at the end of the day, just are bunch of mates - and that's the reality of of a lot of Pagan groups, I think, too. In your community you might have some AGs who were pub buddy pagans, and others who were super hardcore technical magicians.
And then you have Working Groups for people willing to give a bit more time. What WGs would a Pagan community need? It's less clear. You'd probably want a Media one at the very least, for press releases; and maybe a Tech one for the website and social media. I think you'd set up a Teaching WG, who did a basic six month or twelve month "year and a day" standards, and that course might involve talks from the AGs introducing the different flavours of Paganism in the community, and that course would have pathways into more specific trainings done by any covens seeking members. You might want a music WG or a craftsman's WG, depending on your membership; possibly also one for magical skills, if there were members who were celebrants or so on. It would kind of depend on what the local group really "needed": if you had a site or building, you'd need a WG to manage it; if you had a library, you'd need a library WG; if you took subs, you'd need a Finance group and so on.
Some of the benefits include -
- a wider community, which is connected together by values and friendship but not by practices.
- Some formalisation of the kinds of processes which exist in community anyway. But maybe that formalisation would help there be a more service minded and communal approach to each other, rather than an extractive or competitive one based around whose book sells or who has what title.
- The psychological benefits of having Joined Something - benefits to both the person and the community, benefits which are greater than merely following a Facebook page or other activities which give you no stake in the group's welfare.
- And if one fell out of a particular practice in this model represented by an Affinity Group, you'd still be part of the whole even if you joined a different one.
- You'd get the benefits of of a larger membership (more resources, more skills), but also of the small specialised units (individualism, quirky magic, expertise in niche areas)
- No Grand Poobah reduces pressure on an individual, and competition around who should be it; no power vaccum created by their absence.
- Flat system rather than hierarchical - you might move into around different Group or WG and learn *more* things or *different* things, but never *better* things
