[Peace-discussion] My response to Phil,just making sure you all are o.k. with what I'm writing...

[Joni LeViness]

Wow Phil, very well thought out and respectfully put. As Usual!
Thank you, perhaps we can get somewhere, because frankly I've been baffled.
As someone who joined the GP kind of all at once it's been an anomally that
I think is beginnning to make sense, to me in any case...I'd like to
intersperse my thoughts below preceeded by *'s,
Thanks again,
Peace and Perseverance,
Joni LeViness
Gpax secretary

 

-----Original Message-----
From: natlcomvotes-bounces@green.gpus.org
[mailto:natlcomvotes-bounces@green.gpus.org] On Behalf Of Phil Huckelberry
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 10:46 PM
To: usgp-coo@gp-us.org
Subject: Re: [usgp-nc] [GPUS-PAX] Re: GP-US Committees making endorsements

Joni LeViness writes:
>What it comes down to each time tho is How are Committees Defined in 
>GPUS bylaws? Frankly What are the parameters of an Action Committee? If 
>those aren't clear we come through frustrations, such as th 10% you 
>read on this list and the 90% that we at GPAX have been dealing with 
>with a flux of individuals *brave and active Activists looking for a home
with our party.
>My Question: How do we resolve this?

Joni, I think one of the things that eludes many of us is a comprehension of
what makes a particular committee an "action committee" as opposed to
something else.  The opposite of "action" is "inaction",
*I don't see gpax or eco action being in direct opposite to each other, some
committees such as anmc is Very Much an Action committee, this is where I
came in, by proposing to the anmc and then working with them.  

 and while I grant that there are some inactive committees (!), committees
which are _active_ certainly seem to be _taking action_ to me.  The nature
of the action might be different, but if so, how are the differences
defined?
*I see the differences defined in GPAX, and perhaps Eco Action can answer
for themselves, but we as an active committee with a presence at many of the
Nat'l protests organized, have been approached by our committee members to
endorse actions that come up, we always discuss as a committee if there's
any question of this NOT being congruent with our 10 kv's, frankly for the
most part our members in the past have been very savvy with what's brought
forward for a gpax endorsement.
I'm unsure of any other committees or caucus's approached in this manner,
but as I say my involvement has been anmc and gpax along with gpok delegate
functions. 

It seems to me that what some people are essentially arguing for is for GPAX
to be allowed to take *independent action*; that, rather than being an
"action" committee, it be allowed to be an **autonomous** committee. 
*I agree with your evaluation, it certainly does seem this way. Tho neither
gpax Or anmc are autonomous from gpus interests and are compiled of gpus
members and delegates.

 I'm not saying this as a criticism.  It is an honest, dispassionate
evaluation of what I see some people trying to accomplish.  I furthermore
feel that some people have a clearer concept of this quest for autonomy than
others, and that some of these people are within GPAX and working for such
autonomy, and others are outside of GPAX and questioning the efficacy of
such autonomy, while many (most?) other people - perhaps even many people
within GPAX - have not seen the tension as such, and have had a hard time
understanding why there would be tension at all.
* that would be me!

While I believe that some people are vying for "action committees" to have
greater degrees of "autonomy", I personally do not know why such autonomy is
being sought or why it would be of benefit to the Green Party as a whole for
these committees to operate more autonomously. 
* I see the benefit being timely endorsements and ability to plan to have a
greater presence at rallies and protests. Also it speaks volumes to
activists out there spreading the word of gpus through gpax that the
committee is treated with trust and respect untill and unless that has been
disrespected by GPAX. If the gpus wishes to have active committees we need
to be trusted to be active.

 At the same time, I feel that there have been a number of issues in the
party regarding accountability and transparency, and see the quest for
greater autonomy as opposed to maintaining basic practices of accountability
and transparency.
*Here I agree. We need to be more transparent, all I can say with this is it
has more to do with us not being very organized in getting a monthly report
out there.

It is hard for me to understand why it has been so difficult for GPAX to
come up with a relatively simple system when it comes to "endorsements".  I
mentioned the Media Committee's handling of press releases as a model
earlier; it seems to me that it would take all of about 15 minutes to write
up solid language along those lines.

*15 minutes that I will have to try to find, I'll put this on for our next
conf. call agenda.


  The NC hears that there has been some sort of great collaborative effort
to draft clearer rules, but does not hear what the issues are or why
something that seems so simple on the surface would be so complicated in
practice.
*I tried to explain that in a previous e mail of which I'm Swimming in at
the moment...

I would suggest that one of the simplest ways to resolve the tension is for
GPAX to actually explain the conflict.  Is there disagreement within the
committee about how much autonomy the committee needs? Is there disagreement
about what sorts of actions should be taken?  Remember, Joni, that you have
frequently made mention of the uplifting, positive work environment you have
experienced within GPAX.  With that as context, it becomes even harder to
imagine what internal conflict there actually is.
*The only internal conflict that I can see is what's been there from the
beginning which is lack of resources and people on the committee including
me, being spread too thin, we gain an inch here and there and it moves
forward slowly, we see it move forward, but the NC does not.

I do not really understand what GPAX does, or what GPAX wishes it could do.
I assumed that GPAX would endeavor to create materials to disseminate to
state parties, materials that local groups could use at local anti-war
rallies, things like that.
*that is one thing, we've been trying to gain traction on this aspect as
well as wanting to gain a forum for our candidates for the 2008 pres.
Election to invite the r & d and others to debate on issues from Peace to
Poverty. We've also been trying to work on a number of great ideas that
members come up with, but find that tho we're Not short on ideas, we Are
short on resources, including active members with time to do this.

  Instead it seems that GPAX has put more time into things like drafting
statements and trying to establish a presence for itself at larger rallies.
Instead of being a group that provides resources, it has seemed more like
GPAX has made an effort to become a known entity unto itself, and I don't
think most of the NC understands why this would be so.  I for one can't
figure out why there should be a "GPAX presence" at any event.  If there is
a need for a Green presence, it should be a GPUS presence and/or a
state/local party presence, should it not?  What does it mean for an
internal committee to have a presence in an external event?
*GPAX as the Peace Action Committee of GPUS shouldn't have a presence? Now
I'm really confused...

Obviously, Joni, neither you nor anyone else is going to be able to take all
of the questions here and answer them one by one.  But a couple of general
themes pervade, and I think it is up to GPAX to figure out how to articulate
to the NC what it actually wants to do and why the NC should agree with
that. 
*Let's Try! GPAXer's


 Right or wrong, I think several people on the NC have come to regard GPAX
as  trying to gain power to take autonomous actions so as to avoid having to
get NC/SC approval when such approval might not be readily forthcoming, and
so the overall debate is drenched in a cloud of suspicion.  GPAX has the
ability to disarm this, and I think it would really brighten GPAX's spirits
to do so. *I agree! I'll ask.
Peace,
joni

Phil Huckelberry
Illinois Green Party

_______________________________________________
Natlcomvotes mailing list
To send a message to the list, write to:
Natlcomvotes@green.gpus.org
To unsubscribe or change your list options, go to:
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/natlcomvotes

If your state delegation changes, please see:
http://gp.org/committees/nc/documents/delegate_change.html

For other information about the Coordinating Committee, see:
http://gp.org/committees/nc/