Author: Slingshot Collective

A call for diversionary tactics

In the wake of the election, wingnuts – already teetering on the fringes of reality – have got our work cut out for us. If in fact we now face the prospect of a Christian fundamentalist assault on abortion, gays, birth control – probably alcohol, drugs and porn, too, if they get a chance – then it’s high time to begin a counter-offensive — the best defense is a good offense!

Folks on the extreme fringes have a crucial role right now — which is to be on the extreme fringe and keep the political spectrum as wide as possible. The right-wing would like to move the debate ever further to the right – so that fringe issues and in fact fringe reality doesn’t even exist. If this happens, what are now the moderate issues could become the far-out end of the political continuum.

For example, Bush is believed to have used the gay marriage issue to help him win the election. We have to keep in mind that gay marriage is essentially an attempt by the more mainstream wing of the gay movement to assimilate into the mainstream – to be entitled to everything “normal” people are entitled to. That is cool and a worthy goal – but on the fringes, we have to recognize that winning gay marriage isn’t the radical forefront – having polyamorous, gender traitorous orgies in the streets is more like it. Right now, mainstream civil rights groups are talking about how they’re going to avoid pressing demands for gay marriage for the moment, because the movement for gay marriage is creating a perfect wedge issue. That is a calculation by responsible folks – many of whom have “activist” jobs with non-profits. Out on the fringes, reality looks a little different – those Christians would be begging gays to have nice, monogamous, suburban lives if they realized the alternative options for queer chaos. If gay marriage is a threat to het marriage, doesn’t polyamorous sexual chaos represent an even greater threat?

If you want equal rights for gays to be “normal” people, then the offensive strategy is to fight for the freaks. If you want to stay on the defensive, then do what the moderates do – pull gay marriage off the table because it might offend the Christian right, and see if you can work on subtle changes to the tax code or whatever to provide more space for folks in civil unions.

The same theory works for most issues – Earth First! or the Earth Liberation Front define the fringes of the environmental movement while the Sierra Club engineers sensible compromises that usually leave the earth worse off. Playing defense is always going to get us the crumbs. The Christian right didn’t win the last election by playing defense – they fought for what they actually wanted. The fringe is always tiny and marginalized, and usually has influence far beyond its apparent marginalization. Those of us on the fringe have to remember that as millions of Kerry voters sink into a post-election depression — we have to avoid catching their negative energy.

Radicals in America have a lot to learn from the rebels in Iraq. When you’re battling an empire, a lot of times it’s not the best idea to launch a frontal assault on heavily armed troops. Instead, the guerrilla looks for weak spots, looks to distract the enemy from it’s main goal, looks to move in the shadows until the crucial moment. Being a radical in America, we share a common struggle with the rebels in Iraq – we reject the brutal American empire and its occupation of our homes. But conditions are not precisely the same — conditions are totally inappropriate for tiny bands of youth to “go underground” and take up small arms in the USA. That may sound romantic to a few people, but a romantic suicide doesn’t help anyone. However, the root of guerrilla tactics still apply – we need to pick fights that favor our spontaneity, flexibility, the element of surprise and our other strengths and avoid battles on terrain chosen by the rulers.

When a baby wants to play with a hot fire place poker, you try to distract the baby with something a little safer, like a rattle. The right wing wants to spend the next four years going after abortion, gays and women. The fringe has an opportunity to distract them and force them to waste their energy instead of using their time effectively. So like the guerrillas in Iraq, who launched an uprising in Mosul while US forces invaded Falluja, as wingnuts we ought to be figuring out diversionary attacks that we can mount against religious fundamentalists, rather than spending the next four years in a defensive mode trying to preserve a mainstream status quo.

I’ve been trying to think of actions designed to be so outrageous that the right-wing would be forced to drop what they want to do to stop them. Even if such actions don’t work as diversions, they can help keep the political field broad and let freaks everywhere know that we’re not alone, and we’re not going away!

But figuring out appropriate actions is hard when the stakes are high and your main strengths are humor and being a total freak — you don’t want to just have a really outrageous Sodomy in the Streets (SITS) party while the US empire is shooting civilians in Iraq. My friend thinks we could disrupt reality by going around the country planting marijuana seedballs so pot would start growing everywhere like the weed it is. Cute idea, but let’s be serious.

Another idea I had right after the election was to mount a campaign of Bible Burning. Remember a few years ago when the political establishment had to drop what it was doing to try to stop flag burning? For some reason this totally symbolic act by a tiny number of wingnuts drove the political establishment nuts. So I was thinking, if flag burning drives ‘em crazy, how about Bible burning? But I think this is probably not a great tactic for a few reasons: it’s scary and negative, evoking images of Nazi book burnings, it ignores the liberatory threads of some religious folks, and it only highlights what we’re against, not what we can be for. I do like it because it could be an insane diversionary tactic – wouldn’t it be great if church groups spent time banning bible burning instead of banning abortion? We need to be creative, but also be thoughtful and not allow our own fear and prejudices to lead us into our own intolerant actions. Intolerance is a far greater threat to the fringe than to the mainstream.

Because we’re in the belly of the beast here in the U$A, we have a crucial role – determination and even some discipline are in order. We have to use all means at hand in the struggle – a wide variety of tactics gives us the best chance to discover what will work.

After turning it over in my mind for the past few weeks, I have to admit that I have no idea what kind of actions we need to be up to, but I’m pretty sure we need to try some new things. The night after the election, the usual suspects gathered on Mission Street in San Francisco to protest, but this response seemed weak and somehow inappropriate. We shouldn’t stop protesting and resisting, of course, but couldn’t we be a little less ritualistic? If we have rallies and protests to lift our spirits, act in solidarity with peace and freedom loving people outside the USA, and show that there are alternatives to the grim drumbeat of war and capitalism, that is great. But our protests need to serve our own purposes — traditional protests seem less relevant at the moment.

I think the best hope is for lots of people all over to think of some new ideas and try some freak experiments — and then report the results to everyone else. Decentralization and diversity are strengths in uncertain times. Seize the moment and let your freak flag fly!

In order to create a bridge between self-determining individuals and community people need family. Whomever it’s comprised of; whether the ties are blood or choice, we are shaped and supported throughout our whole lives by family.

I struggle with the family aspect of being an anarchist precisely most of the family I have are not radicals. The people who would bail me out of jail or visit me everyday in the hospital or cook me dinner if I had a baby don’t understand anti-capitalist libertarianism. But I love them, and must somehow bridge myself into my community with this “foreign” family.

How do I do this? I find more people within my community to take on those roles. I put more of myself into my affinity groups than just the work that needs to be done. I double up on role models, so that I have my grandfather of blood and my grandfather of radical faerie empowerment.

A century ago in the States, family was several generations thick, several degrees of cousins wide and capable of adopting orphans, “godchildren” and unmarried friends. With the rise of industrial labor, families changed as they moved to find work. Developers created single family housing for the masses, and the suburbs were born. From the fifties onward, media and the economy have impressed that the fam is just ma, pa, your siblings and the dog. Moral conservatives who fight for a return to “family values” are responding to this degeneration of support networks. They just offer alternatives unpalatable to many queer, open or radical people.

Anarchist family, for me, is the multigenerational network of people who support, teach, challenge, love, encourage, rely on and accompany us through parts or all of our lives. We make a family of our hearts when our blood kin–by death, distance or dysfunction–can’t be with us. In short, who would you cry with?

I have heard people lament over the imbalance of generations within anarchism, within every scene. People note that we lack a connected community of older (like, post-menopausal) radicals who can offer wisdom and tactics, as well as children with whom we practice our consensus and commitment to self-determination. Yes, radicals have kids and yes, radicals are grandparents but our movements are still youth centered. Communities of mature radicals won’t intersect completely with communities of younger radicals—socially or politically—so we must find other ground to meet on. We can appreciate the experience and company of people at a different stage of life without needing to be the same. If we generally lack role models and youth we foster, how are we to improve our practice of anarchism with each generation?

The healthiest forms of non blood anarchist family I’ve seen are collective houses that intentionally interweave their lives. Besides having physical space to gather, houses have the informal contact that make intimacy possible and support easier to ask for. It can be easier to break out of loneliness when you’ve only got to go downstairs to dinner.

Outside of houses, long-term collectives are the anarchist structure best suited to “family building.” We had a big transformation last year at Slingshot, when we finally spent more time hanging out than working on the paper. When life’s serious shit descended on several of us, it wasn’t awkward to ask for support. In fact, it would have been awkward not to ask for support. That was when I knew that my family had grown.

By no means do anarchists have a monopoly on chosen families. Churches, unions and social clubs have taken the place of blood family, especially in the twentieth century. A family can be created by any group with affinity, given that it satisfies certain needs. First, people must be held together by a purpose. In blood families, it can be as simple as obligation, but it can be complex. People must have incentive to care for one another, and the care must be reciprocal. Often, we are cared for by family in our youth and then return that love later on when the people who foster us get older. There must also be space and time for regular intersection and a culture to hand down. Families have stories of origin, and of the joys and sufferings shared, as well as a reason why they are unique and important. The stories may change, but they must be passed on.

The public debate on family doesn’t address our need for support in the face of economic or emotional privation. When the religious right talk about “family values” and “preserving family,” the overtones of sexism and heterosexism make debating that much more difficult. However, addressing the fears about love and support are simple. If a family is held together by patriarchy and guilt, it probably isn’t satisfying to be a part of. We can never be obliged to love and we can never regulate true family. We will find a way to be ourselves within our blood families or we will find families that love us as we are or we will do both. Maybe so many people pass through radical scenes but settle for boring jobs and weekends mowing the lawn because there is no family ready-made to be had around here, just the ingredients for one tailor-made. They fall prey to the mainstream narrative that family is a little nuclear clique. We must each choose (mutually) our mentors, our teachers, our sibling-peers and the people we will encourage in turn.

Let your redefinition of family be a step toward a more radical world. Invite fellow radicals closer, and share, in small ways at first, anarchism with your existing family. Think about what culture your families have given you and what you want to pass on. We need to hand different stories and values to the next generation, and first we must make them family.

I wanted to write about family because of my twelve cousins. We played and feasted together every Sunday until I was twelve. They taught me fun, cooperation, mischief, solidarity, and love. And though we now gather only once every few years, they are people who know me beneath the skin and love me still. It’s never hard to come back together. I find relief knowing that they are in the world, and hopefully it is mutual.

Slingshot is an independent, volunteer-run, more-often-than-quarterly radical newspaper published in the East Bay since 1988.

You’ll notice that this issue is slightly shorter than usual — only 12 pages. Slingshot has been publishing more often (every two months) and our distribution keeps improving, but one critical deficiency has been good articles to publish. We get a lot of submissions, but almost all of them are rants, which isn’t really what we’re looking for. What we need is hard-hitting, well researched and carefully reasoned articles that address the critical political situation we’re in. Between the war, the increasing tide of right-wing religious intolerance, prisons and the continuing environmental crisis, radical media like this paper are important. We want it to be as well written and relevant as possible. If you’re thinking of writing something, the article “Media that inspires action” on this page contains a few ideas about the kind of articles we would like to see. Send something or call us.

A lot of heavy shit is going on in the world right now, and while we were creating this issue, some of us felt a kind of personal/ political crisis because we couldn’t seem to figure out how to publish the kind of powerful, radical response to these events that we had hoped for. So this is our best shot. Given all the death and destruction going on right now — not to mention Bush’s reelection — you’ll probably join us in finding this issue a bit fluffy. But we’re happy that at least it isn’t negative or depressing. And some of the articles, after a lot of editing and revisions, are turning out really great.

Part of the reason this issue felt like a crisis to some of us is that creating Slingshot is a cathartic personal and political process. When scary political stuff happens — the war in Iraq, 9-11, domestic political crackdown — it is easy to feel totally powerless. But then we remember “oh yeah, at least we have a paper so we can respond!”

By writing our Slingshot articles, we try to work through the political situation in our minds and regain our sense of courage and pragmatic optimism. We spell out our vision for a different world. While we can’t always realize this vision right now, a lot of times putting it on paper makes it clear that we are living little pieces of that vision all the time without realizing it — that change is happening and that we’re participating in the struggle everyday. We recognize that we’re far from powerless and that we’re not alone. We hope you’ll join us in this process of searching, writing, inspiration and ultimately, action.

This issue marks the return of Spanish translation pages, which took a vacation last issue. A huge thanks to the numerous translators who made this possible on short notice and under stressful conditions. Including the Spanish translations is extremely challenging — we dream of having a more consistent and stable translation committee that could make the Spanish pages a routine part of our process, instead of a mini-crisis that gets repeated each issue.

As always, editorial decisions are made by the Slingshot collective, but not all the articles reflect the opinions of collective members. We welcome debate, constructive criticism and discussion.

Hi there Sling Shot folks,

I’m eagerly awaiting my very own copy of the 2005 Slingshot Organizer. A friend of mine got an organizer early, and showed me the section on Emergency Contraception. I was really excited to see that you included this information, since it is one of my personal favorite medical topics. I did notice that some of your information was debatable if not inaccurate, and I wanted to let you know.

In the section on the pharmaceutical forms of emergency contraception (EC), there were two things that I noted:

• You state that EC prevents implantation of a fertilized egg. Actually, we don’t know exactly how EC works – it may prevent sperm from moving through the uterus to the tubes, it may prevent ovulation or fertilization directly, or it may prevent implantation. Some people take these distinctions very seriously – they make the difference between EC being an acceptable form of contraception, or an unacceptable form of early abortion. Because you only mention the prevention of implantation, some people may not use EC based on their political or religious beliefs.
• You state that anyone who has contraindications to using oral contraceptives should not use EC. Actually, since EC is only used once, and does not expose a woman to long-term hormones, the ONLY generally accepted contraindication to using EC is current pregnancy.
• Finally, there is a great EC resource available, at “1-888-not2late” – people can learn of health care providers in their area who will prescribe EC.

Thanks again for including EC info in the Slingshot Organizer – it is really important information that can make a huge difference in people’s lives. If you ever want/need a medical consultant or reviewer I’d be more than happy to help out. I am a family physician MD, newby herbalist and street medic. In solidarity, eowyn rieke

Slingshot response: We’re grateful for the update on ways to get EC and when you can take it. We believe that all forms of safe birth control are acceptable and that only a woman (with her doctor) can decide what’s right for her. All the ways EC may work prevent implantation, which is when an abortion becomes medically necessary. Thanks for your input!

A message on the Slingshot voicemail box . . .

hey who wrote the roadkill [inaudible – article?] The same people who drive the cars are the same people with eyeballs in their head that got their license because they’re eyeballs work and they’re the same people who are looking at the beast. You actually do computers and you don’t do cars? What the fuck is wrong with you people?! [phone slammed down]

Dear Slingshot:

I need to throw in an alternate response to the previous Slingshot article on road kill. I am a vegetarian and an animal lover and the idea that I could see a dead critter as my next pair of pants is too much. I have worked for years to buck myself up enough to remove sweet smashed and bloodied beings from the middle of the road, off the manmade surface — the death strip — back to the earth where they can decompose and go back into it, as the closed circle always does. It is hard but it’s an opportunity to apologize to them for my part, to pay respect to their sweet bunny souls, and to save other critters. Very often other animals will be killed because they are smelling or eating the critter in the road. It’s the very least I can do, being a human after all. But doing the very least just won’t do!

— Bunny lover

When you’re running a project, it’s good to re-think its purpose from time to time. The Slingshot collective spends a ton of time, energy and money to publish this paper every two months — there are already tons of folks publishing papers everywhere and lots of stuff to read on the internet — what is special about Slingshot that justifies all this work?

One big purpose of Slingshot is to go beyond just providing information and analysis about social issues and provide some inspiration. Every day the mainstream press is full of articles about problems. The alternative press is at its best when it goes beyond just talking about problems and instead points to solutions — areas available for struggle, the development of new and creative tactics, hopeful stories about people who are changing things. Lets face it — a lot of people know we’re facing problems, but usually, this awareness just makes people feel hopeless and trapped — paralyzed. “Well, if the world situation is fucked, I may as well forget about it and enjoy myself while I still can.” The most important thing alternative press can do is figure out how to move people from disempowerment and resignation to action!

In figuring out how to inspire and motivate, the alternative media needs to figure out who to talk to, how to talk to them, what to say and how to say it — what is the audience? Slingshot has no formal “party line” on these questions or any others, but generally, the most important audience is not people who are already inspired and motivated to act — it’s folks who could potentially be sympathetic and active, but haven’t yet made the step from critique to action. Folks who were active at one point, but who’ve become discouraged or withdrawn is another important audience. Politically, the most crucial audience are folks who are concerned about single issues or skeptical about the social direction, but who haven’t developed ideas about answers — what could be done, what would a new society look like, how can people organize to create change? Radical media can point out connections between seemingly distinct issues and social problems — a lot of problems and solutions come down to a critique of authority, hierarchy, power, dehumanizing structures, economic and technological systems. Folks who were raised as liberals — with some faith in the government and the system — but who are realizing the flaws in these systems should be a key audience for radical alternative media.

How to address an audience, what to say, and how to say it are crucial questions. For me, an ideal radical article contains four parts. First, it ought to contain an analysis of a particular aspect of social reality that looks at the problem or phenomenon from a new angle or in a way that goes beyond “common wisdom” about the issue. Second, the article should suggest solutions, not just point out how fucked up things are. Third, the article should inspire folks to actually do something. Just understanding an issue and knowing a theoretical solution is not enough. Each of us has numerous opportunities during our lives to change, grow and struggle. A great article will connect solutions to these opportunities. Finally, the best articles have heart and are personal. Increasingly, this society is functioning like a huge computer in which each of our lives is harnessed to perform limited operations within the machine — going to work, consuming, reproducing, playing by the rules. We need media that goes beyond an academic, cold discourse and touches what is really human, precious and unique about each of our lives.

It is so disappointing when alternative media attempts to use the master’s tools of rhetoric and style. We can never smash an inhuman system by conforming our lives, ideas, or language to its standards. The society we seek is one in which people do it ourselves — full of art and chaos. Media that is so computerized that you have to read it carefully to see that it is talking about revolution doesn’t feel very revolutionary. Some activists want our media to look professional, clean and orderly, but a professional, clean orderly world is what we seek to smash. People feel inspired when they see a fully human, messy, chaotic world represented on paper. Alternative media at its best, and hopefully Slingshot, help provide such inspiration in these scary times.

The Childcare Collective and Social Movement

If our children despise us, our movement will end.

I’ve been volunteering with the Childcare Collective for the past five months and every so often my phone rings or I get an e-mail saying, ‘here are some childcare opportunities…’ It’s kind of like being a spy, “Your mission, should you choose to accept it…” I never know quite what to expect when I do a childcare gig, but I always look forward to that rewarding feeling I know will be there when I’m done. But, I’ve started to realize that there’s a lot more going on than free, volunteer based childcare. I’m starting to understand the bigger picture. I’ve been doing childcare in some form on and off for the past six years. When I moved to the Bay Area I hoped to keep doing so; that’s when I found the Childcare Collective. I thought, ‘Great, here’s a chance to keep working with kids.’ I didn’t think about the political aspect or how it might serve a social movement, which comes solely from the people. I just wanted to work with kids because I’ve always found it rewarding and fulfilling. But now, well, now I go to marches or rallies or events, and I see kids that I’ve worked with through the Collective. I say hi to them and they know my name. It feels like community; like I’m helping to build something strong.

In 2002, a group of folks, working in San Francisco with the Women’s Collective of the San Francisco Day Labor Program, was inspired by the importance of quality childcare and the obvious lack thereof. Using the original model of the School of Unity and Liberation (SOUL)–a training program for aspiring organizers and activists–they came together to form the Childcare Collective in the Bay Area. The vision was to provide free, conscientious, and stable childcare to those who need it the most. But who exactly is that? The obvious answer is, of course, parents. But in today’s oppressive regime, there are so many parents who need childcare but simply can’t afford it. While I firmly believe that children grow and flourish the best within a community of involved participants, it would be wonderful if every parent could personally provide for all of their children’s needs—from food, to education, to emotional support. It’s an ideal world where parents are allowed to raise their children with the utmost attention and care as opposed to being forced out of the home to run the gauntlet of commercialism. If a parent can provide unquestionable, immutable support to their children throughout their lives, they would have done their job as parents and they would have done it well. But, like I said, this is not the society we live in.

‘Family values’ is propaganda that gets thrown around a lot, but the truth of the matter is that capitalism (and the patriarchy, sexism, racism, and other oppressions that help to keep it running) puts no value in the family. We’ve moved that which is considered valuable out of the homes and the family and into the cockles of commerce. If money is not involved, it’s not worth your time. This is ideology, but practically speaking, the capitalist system has created this completely abstract thing that must be obtained before you can acquire the basic necessities of life. There’s little room to value the family when we have to spend well over forty hours a week chasing capital to support only the mere basics of what a family needs.

I grew up bouncing from one institution to another. Both my parents worked and so when I wasn’t in day care I was in school and when I wasn’t in school, I was in after-school care. Needless to say, like most children these days, I spent more time within childcare environments than I did within the home. Thus, the people who cared for me were as important of an influence in my formative years as the people who birthed me and shared my blood.

Though I have to say, there was no cohesion; there was no unifying ideology behind these various childcare providers that let me know there was meaning to what was going on. Don’t get me wrong, I learned so much from the individuals who took on the challenging and inspiring task of caring for children, things I wouldn’t have learned at home or from my family. I gained different perspectives and unfamiliar knowledge. If I had been left solely to my parents’ devices, I would probably be wearing a suit everyday and working in a small box, staring at a computer screen. But, what they were never able to give me was that all too important sense of continuity and belonging. That enriching sense of community.

I can’t imagine what life for a single, non-white, low income, non-english speaking mother is like in this country. And I certainly don’t want to presume. But I do know that life for any parent is tumultuous and difficult. My parents, as the children of immigrants, wanted nothing more than to give me and my sister a better world then they had in which to grow up. And I think this mentality is true of most parents, it’s why my grandparents immigrated to the states and why my parents worked non-stop at jobs they hated, and why I write articles for papers like Slingshot. I want my children to live in a better world than I do. But who has the time to fight for these improvements to the world? Go to work, take the kids to daycare and school, work overtime, maybe even a second job, pick the kids up, get them dinner, don’t forget to help them with their homework, and on and on? It’s already hard for parents to see their kids as much as they should, who wants to take more time away from them to go to meetings that may or may not help to improve the world we’re leaving behind for them. This is where the Child Care Collective steps up.

In their mission statement the Childcare Collective says firmly and with admirable conviction: “We are committed to providing grassroots organizations and movements composed of and led by immigrant women, low-income women, and women of color with trained, competent, patient and politicized childcare providers for one-time events or ongoing meetings.” The idea is simple: prioritize the leadership of the oppressed and the underrepresented. Support them in building movements that only they can lead by offering up one of the most basic necessities that would otherwise keep them from their all too important community building and organizing.

Here’s how it works: An organization like POWER (People Organized to Win Employment Rights) or the Women’s Collective or Critical Resistance (an anti-prison organization)—groups that deal with, are led by, and are comprised of immigrant women, low-income women and women of color–has regular meetings and/or events. These organizations usually have an Event Coordinator who contacts the Childcare Collective’s Core Committee. “The Core” as it is affectionately called, is a group within the collective that takes on the administrative responsibilities of fund-raising, recruiting, scheduling, etc.. To be on the Core one must first be a volunteer and complete the orientation as well as several training programs and, of course, have done repeated childcare for the collective. With some time and communication, a relationship is fostered between the Event Coordinator of an organization and the Core of the collective until the collective has a viable understanding of the organization’s childcare needs. The Core then contacts, usually via e-mail and phone banking, their volunteer childcare providers to fill the needs of the organization. The volunteers then sign up as they are available and show up to the meeting and/or event with bright faces and warm intentions, and…Voila! You’ve got free, quality childcare.

The mission statement also reads, “We see childcare as a political act…In order for any movement to succeed, its ideas must be passed on from generation to generation. The Childcare Collective works to make sure that children are enjoying themselves and are informed about the work that the parents are
doing. We hope to help children situate themselves as valuable and important members of a community and a movement.” Whoa, imagine that! A bunch of politicized volunteers helping to build multi-generational communities and movements. And I’ve really started to see it. I see inspiring, organized women of color doing important work and I get to interact with their strong and independent children. And I wonder what these children will get out of our interactions. I dream about them taking up their parents’ struggles or their own and moving forward. And I’m grateful that I played a role, however small, in their and the movement’s development. There have been times when one of the kids I’m working with will start to feel a little antsy, they’ll say, “When’s my mom gonna come? I want to go home.” And even though these words are always a little painful for a childcare provider to hear, I cherish the opportunity to say, “I know you want to go home, but your mom is helping to make all of our lives a little bit better, it takes time. Here let’s play a game.”

There’s a lot of work to be done but the Childcare Collective is up to the challenge. They are trying to establish a stronger presence in the East Bay. They have recently started to help out with the Mandela Arts Center and Critical Resistance—both in Oakland. However, new and dedicated volunteers are a must! To become a Collective member, a volunteer must agree to:

-perform childcare at least once each month

-keep the Collective supplied with your current contact information

-return ALL phone calls to the Collective

-attend one orientation

-attend quarterly volunteer in-services and trainings

But the first and most important step is to contact the Collective. If you are interested in volunteering or your organization is in need of childcare, please call the Childcare Collective at 415.541.5039 or e-mail them at childcarecollective@lycos.com

“The Childcare Collective hopes to play a part in building a movement that recognizes and prioritizes the voices and political agendas of women and mothers, especially women of color, low-income women, and immigrants. The needs of parents have traditionally not been recognized and parents’ access to quality childcare is sporadic at best.” The important thing to remember is that the Childcare Collective is not the movement. For the most part, the collective is comprised of younger educated people who come from some form of privilege. The beauty of it, though, is that these people have found a place for themselves and their talents in people of color led movements. But it’s important not to idealize the position of the Childcare Collective. They realize that these movements belong to the women of color who are leading them. We’re just here to watch the kids.

Palestinian freedom fighter Marwan Barghouti is Arafat’s likely popular successor. But due to intense political pressure, he is standing aside in upcoming elections and urging support of moderate candidate Mahmoud Abbas — favorite of Sharon and the US.

Marwan Barghouti has been Fatah Secretary-General since 1994 and played a key role on the street in both the first Intifada and the present Intifadat al-Aqsa. Marwan sits in Nafha prison in the al-Naqab/Negev desert, sentenced last June 6 and now serving five life terms plus 40 years on trumped-up charges of multiple murder.

At the present critical juncture, anti-authoritarians should be part of a broad international movement to ensure the emergence of a new Palestinian leadership with strong ties to the Palestinian masses — a leadership that isn’t a compliant puppet of the Israeli ruling class and the West, overseeing a vassal state totally controlled by Israel.

Freedom Now!

Elections for the Palestinian president to succeed Arafat have been called for January 9, 2005. In the name of Palestine Liberation Organization unity, Barghouti has, apparently under great pressure from the PLO old guard, decided not to enter the fray as an independent and has called on supporters in the PLO new guard — and in effect on the Palestinian masses in the West Bank and Gaza — to support the PLO moderate candidate Mahmoud Abbas. That decision — which came after various ‘informed’ reports that Barghouti had indeed opted for making a presidential bid from his prison cell — may help keep the PLO externally unified over the months to come, masking what is already a fierce power struggle for authentic directions within.

Yet it is widely acknowledged in the Palestinian street, where Marwan earned his credentials as the leader of the Intifada, that he is Abu Ammar’s popular successor. He is probably also the only man who can end the Intifada. It is also clear that Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas), whatever his stature as a senior PLO leader, is the candidate of choice of Sharon, his cabal and the Euro-Atlantic power axis — a man whom they hope to wind around their political finger in any future ‘negotiated’ settlement.

Marwan’s decision takes him out of what would have been intense international limelight, returning him to the limbo of his cell in the desert. At this crucial conjuncture, Israeli and international progressives should raise two demands: for Barghouti’s immediate release from prison and for his safety. There is a definite danger the Israeli government may decide — before or after the election — to liquidate him if they think he is the true popular choice of the Palestinian masses. They have him in custody; his assassination, or a staged fatal ‘accident,’ would be child’s play.

When sentenced last June, Barghouti stressed: “The continuation of the intifada is the only path to independence. No matter how many they arrest or kill, they will not break the determination of the Palestinian people. I don’t care whether I am sentenced to one life sentence, or 10 or 50; my day of liberty is the day the occupation ends. […] The Israeli courts are a partner to the Israeli occupation. The judges are just like pilots who fly planes and drop bombs.” During his trial, the Israeli peace bloc Gush Shalom protested demanding: “Barghouti to the negotiating table, not to jail!”

In an article in the Washington Post in January 2002, Marwan stressed: “I am not a terrorist, but neither am I a pacifist. I am simply a regular guy from the Palestinian street advocating only what every other oppressed person has advocated — the right to help myself in the absence of help from anywhere else.”

Marwan was apprehended by the Israeli army in Ramallah on April 15, 2002, and has been illegally held in Israeli jails since then. He is kept in solitary confinement, separated from all other prisoners in Nafha, many of them Palestinian freedom fighters like himself. Marwan has repeatedly denied any involvement whatsoever with the deaths he has been charged with. During the proceedings against him, which began in 2003, he denounced the “show trial” as illegal, the Israeli court without any right to try him.

Permanent State of Emergency

Many Palestinians believe Barghouti is the only man who can end the Intifada. But key figures inside the Israeli political-military elite may fear precisely that: they do not want to see an end to the violence and actively scheme to engineer its repeated ‘churning,’ provoking militant groups. They may well want a weak president who will be increasingly discredited in the eyes of the Palestinian masses, thus strengthening the hand of Hamas, the Aqsa Brigades and other militant organizations. As Giorgio Agamben has written: “How could we not think that a system that can no longer function at all except on the basis of emergency would not also be interested in preserving such an emergency at any price?”

That permanent state of emergency is the subterfuge under which to continue the expansion of existing settlements, the demoralization of the Palestinian masses, and the incessant expropriation of ever more of their land in the West Bank.

Election Doomed From the Start?

The poll itself can easily turn out to be a sham. We have no example of a supposedly democratic election under the extraordinary conditions of a massive and oppressive Occupation. The West Bank today is a mazeway of road blocks and checkpoints that have earned the Occupation the name in Arabic Ihtilal, the Suffocation.

The Israeli short-term strategy will be to pressure Mahmoud Abbas toward a set of compromises that will in effect produce what Arafat refused to agree to: an Israel-dominated Palestinian Bantustan, an archipelago of enclaves, behind a Great Wall and a high Gaza fence: the 0.5-state solution. The Palestinian refugees will continue to rot in their camps, half a nation in limbo with nowhere to go.

Israel itself has probably already destroyed the geographic basis for any viable two-state arrangement. What exists de facto is indeed two states: Israel and its settler state exclave on the West Bank, with prospects for Gaza to become a fully quarantined isolate under Israeli spatial and economic control. This reality, culminating in the Great Wall of Palestine, reflects the radical separation of Jews and Arabs at all scales which has remained the fundamental principle of mainstream Zionist-nationalist policy since the earliest period of Jewish colonization in Palestine.

he Path Forward

The real need over the longer haul is to build a mass non-violent movement of Israelis and Palestinians toward a single democratic non-national state, a “politics from below,” forging bonds of ta’ayush (togetherness) in common struggle, and the return of refugees in massive numbers. Inside Israel, there remains the absolute necessity to move beyond the ‘ethnocracy’ of apartheid that Zionism has created for the 20 percent of its citizenry that is Palestinian [1], and the ‘decolonizing’ of the consciousness of the Jewish-Israeli masses. As historian Amnon Raz-Krakotzkin has stated: “Bi-nationalism, in the broad sense, is the question of the Arab-Jew, and its aim is to counter the Orientalist paradigm that pits one of these identities against the other […] As long as Israeli discourse is premised on the dichotomy Arab vs. Jew, it will be impossible to frame an alternative. Arab-Jew is, thus, a call for partnership based on the decolonization of Jewish identity in all senses and contexts” [2].

Direct democracy can only spring from mass and massive unity of purpose and action among Palestinians and Israelis in direct action. Working in stages over say 15 years: from two (or even 1.5) states to one state and on to ‘no state’ — forward to a Cooperative Socialist Commonwealth of Canaan in federation with a radically democratized Jordan [3].

Over the shorter term, I would argue pragmatism, or a kin
d of utopian realism: press now for the “best deal” option for a Palestinian statelet, recognizing that such a Palestinian 0.5-state inevitably controlled by Israeli nationalists, international Capital and its elites is a short-term compromise and not a solution. Yet its nominal creation holds out a desperately needed space for Palestinians in which to breathe inside the Ihtilal and its orchestrated nightmare.

1. See interview with Uri Davis: http://mumbai.indymedia.org/en/2004/10/209807.shtml

2. Quoted in Yael Lerer, “The Word in Times of Crisis,” http://oznik.com/words/041116.html

3. B. Templer, “Tanks & Ostriches,” The Dawn, August 2004, http://the-dawn.org/2004/08/ostriches.html

In thinking about Bush’s reelection, we have to be realistic about what it means and what it does not mean. In the days after the election, so many people were depressed – actually depressed – and you heard a lot of loose talk like “I’m going to move to Canada.” We have to have some perspective – no one is going to move to Canada. Hopefully, a lot of folks are going to redouble their efforts to create positive change and to struggle against the US empire.

For radicals, no matter what the election results were, the struggle for a new society would have continued, and so it shall. Election results to decide the new CEO of the US corporate empire aren’t totally irrelevant to efforts to radically alter the society, but they certainly operate on a different plane, since it isn’t who runs the US monster that is at issue, but that the monster is brought down.

But having said that, it’s a mistake to pretend that because we seek goals far beyond a change in US leadership, Bush’s victory wasn’t a very harsh blow. Not just because he won — but because the election had the highest voter turn-out ever and tens of millions of people voluntarily voted for Bush. Radicals need to stay connected to reality and try to understand this kind of mass popular opinion. The fact that almost as many people voted against Bush as voted for him doesn’t lessen the apparent extreme conservatism of one hell of a lot of people.

It is hard to know whether most of Bush’s supporters are arrogant, war-mongering, selfish, religious fanatics or whether there could be less discouraging explanations. For instance, some Bush voters appear to have voted based on a confused understanding of his policies and recent historical events — perhaps a lot of people got played by a sophisticated marketing job and the election result does not really represent a democratically approved return to the dark ages. We can hope that Bush voters are as internally contradictory, diverse and split as any group of tens of millions of people. The idea troubling radicals is that the election could have been a fundamental rejection of humanity, tolerance and decision making based on evidence — not religious belief.

While Bush’s agenda is in your face scary, Kerry’s version of reality was not ours – it was still one based on corporate control, US military domination and industrial exploitation of nature – just perhaps kinder and gentler on things like abortion and social welfare. We have to keep in mind that boring old daily life is still a more serious threat to human happiness and environmental sustainability than the particular leader of the empire. No matter who won, the next morning everyone was going to burn fossil fuels to take a shower, hop in their car, work their job, buy more shit; corporations were going to keep growing; the prison system would stay full; the polar ice caps were going to keep melting.

That neither possible election result would address the greatest social threats doesn’t mean there isn’t important, inspiring work to be done to build a new world. In fact, there are abundant opportunities for progress that are totally unrelated to the quadrennial electoral cycle. When the world goes crazy, its time to turn our energy to our local communities and neighborhoods; to focus on doing things ourselves and setting up alternatives to the mainstream economy and culture.

Perhaps the election results will move some folks who were hoping things would be “okay” if Kerry got elected to realize they have no alternative to getting active. Elections are ultimately about surrendering power to rulers; activism is about empowerment — regular people participating in creating society.

traduccion por Maneli, Ursula K y Chomskiss, y Cassandra

Estados Unidos no controla Iraq gracias a la arrolladora resistencia. Contrariamente a las afirmaciones de Estados Unidos, la insurgencia es primariamente Iraqí, disfruta un amplio apoyo de la sociedad, se extiende sobre las lineas étnicas y religiosas y solamente está creciendo más fuerte. Pero como los Iraqis luchan para finalizar la ocupación que es una llave en las venideras elecciones, la gente se pregunta si las elecciones asemejarán alguna cosa ligeramente democrática. Iraq es un desorden que Estados Unidos hizo, pero que no puede limpiar, Estados Unidos es el desorden.

Estados Unidos puede estar ganando batallas pero esta perdiendo la guerra. Cada vez que Estados Unidos destruye una ciudad—mezquitas, casas al azar, hospitales—más luchadores de la insurrección se levantan. Con la batalla de corazones y mentes perdido un tiempo atrás, estrategistas Estadounidenses quieren sobre extender tropas americanas para continuar con la destrucción y las matanzas al azar en busca de “terroristas”. Pero son comandos Estadounidenses quienes están cometiendo los crimenes de guerra. Los intereses de la clase gobernante que estimulan la guerra— el deseo para controlar no solo las reservas de petróleo sino tambien las economias Chinas y Europeas dependiente en la misma reserva van a abandonar. La estrategía de Estados Unidos para controlar funciona solo cuando todos juegan el mismo juego, capitalismo imperial. Las gente de Iraq no estan jugando este juego; ellos no estan siendo meras piezas de ajedrez, de hecho ellos estan empujando bombas improvisados en los culos de los E.U. La estragedia Estadounidense esta fallando.

¿Quien es las resistencia? Un inventario de grupos del 19 de Septiembre del 2004 publicado en el periodico de Baghdad Al Zawra en la lista tres principales coaliciones Sunni, son milicias Shi’ite y nueve grupos tacticamente basados en secuestros. Cuatro. de los últimos estan especificamente asociados con Al-Qaeda, como la célula de Zarqawi que se ha convertido en el reciente terrorista favorito de la media Estadounidense. Los secuestros no disfrutan tanto apoyo popular como los otros grupos: “Sin ninguna evidencia, Bush, Blair y el presidente Iraqi Iyad Allawi’s regimen, vergonsózamente declaran que ellos estan solo persiguiendo el secuestrador Jordano, Zarqawi y otros “terroristas extranjeros,” escribe Sami Ramadani en Arab News de Saudi Arabia. La gente de Falluja, sus lideres, negociadores y insurrgentes siempre han denunciado a Zarqawi y sostenido que tales bandas han sido animo para debilitar la resistencia.

Apesar de que los medios de comunicación Norteamericanos repetidamente han dicho que la resistencia es trabajo del partido Ba’ath de Saddam, fuentes difieren la fuerza de estas conecciones. Varias de las pequeñas facciones Sunni son opuestos a Saddam, mientras grupos que son explicitamente Ba’athista reportidamente estan envolvidos en supliendo armas y financiando las operaciones en vez de la lucha actual. Grupos Sunni tienden a usar las tacticas offensiva de guerilla o atacando cuando el enemigo es débil y entonces escabullirse. Musulmanes Sunni, quienes comprenden 20% de la población Iraqí pero estaban en poder con Saddam, pueden perder significante influencia si un gobierno elejido refleja el 60% de la mayoria Shi’ite.

El brazo fuerte de la resistencia Shi’ite es la milicia de jovenes pobres de las comunidades urbanas de Muqtada al-Sadr. Los líderes Shi’ites, en particular el gran Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, por lo general no han atacado directamente a la ocupación, quizas porque como la secta mayoría ellos ganarían poder en las eleciones después de no tenerlo bajo el gobierno de Saddam. Al-Sadr criticó a la ocupación y su grupo fue atacado repetidamente por las fuerzas de E.U., empezando con el cierre de su periódico y culminando en una pelea violenta y alto al fuego en Najaf, la ciudad sagrada de los Shi’te al finales de Agosto.

Unificando la Resistencia

En un contexto donde las divisiones internas solamente sirven a ayudar a los EU, varios grupos están trabajando para unificar la resistencia. Los expertos musulmanes subrayaron la necesidad de evitar conflictos sectarias mientras que promulgaron un fatwa (edicto religioso) el 20 de noviembre, diciendo que la resistencia a las fuerzas armadas de la ocupación es un deber para todos los musulmanes. “El Irak de hoy es atacado por una conspiración real que quiere destruir su estructura social, aun si se quede intacto como estado. Lo haría por provocar conflictos sectarios y étnicos y acrecentar los puntos de desacuerdo. El deber nacional y religioso requiere la renuncias de diferencias como estas. Todos se deben unir para expulsar las fuerzas de la ocupación y hacer un irak unido para todo la población,” dijo una declaración de la Federación Internacional de los expertos musulmanes. Ellos condenaron el secuestro de rehénes, ataques a trabajadores humanitarios y de la prensa, y dijeron que los prisioneros de guerra deben ser bien tratados.

El Congreso de la Fundación Nacional Iraquí que disfruta de mucho apoyo, respalda las oraciones conjuntas de los Sunni-Shia, una practica importante en la revolución de 1920 que terminó con el control colonial de Gran Bretaña. Establecido en Julio de este año, el grupo, junta los Izquerdistas, Kurdos y Cristianos con Ba’athistes (pre-Saddam) y miembros de poderosas asociaciones cléricas de los Sunni y Shia. Aunque el congreso no rechaza a la resistencia armada, aboga por la resistencia pacífica en vez de milicias fudamentalistas como la de Al-Sadr. En una entrevista con La Guardian (Gran Bretaña), el portavoz del congreso Wamidh Nadhmi dijo que la division real en Irak no existe entre los Arabes y Kurdos, Sunni y Shia, ni seculares y religiosas sino entre “el terreno en pro de la ocupación y el terreno en contra.” Los que estan en pro son completamente afiliados a el EU, o a la Gran Bretaña, en efecto títeres, o no vieron otra manera de derrocar a Saddam sin ocupación. Desgraciadamente, los que estan en pro no suele distinguir entre la resistencia y el terrorismo, ni entre la sociedad civil que está en contra de la ocupación y los que usan la violencia.” El lider religioso Jawad al-Khalisi, secretario general del congreso, señala que, “el enfoque de los medios de comunicación en la violencia y en el positivo reportaje extranjero de los esfuerzos del nuevo gobierno de Ayad Allawi para derrotar a la insurgencia, han creado una impresión falsa de que los de la oposición al gobierno solamente usan la fuerza, y de los que apoyan a la paz apoyan al gobierno y también la ocupación.”

La resistencia no está limitada a los extremistas del margen de la sociedad como la sugerencia de la prensa estadounidense. Se incluye árabes nacionalistas, mujahideen musulmánes, e Iraqis de religiones varias que son “ultrajados viendo los recursos de su país robados, mientras que viven en favelas, toman agua contaminada con aguas negras y no tienen ningúna palabra en el proceso político,” escribe Haifa Zangana en The Guardian. Miles de personas manifestaron en todo Iraq en solidaridad con Falluja, una ciudad que nunca se sometió completemente a la dominación de los ingleses coloniales ni al régimen de Saddam.

“El pueblo Iraquí no está enfocando en si las cosas pudieron ser mejores si no hubiese pasado la invasión de los gringos. Lo que quieren saber es como y cuando el mundo tan inseguro que les enfrenta cada día va a cambiar. Hay un discurso constante sobre si las fuerzas extranjeras hacen las cosas mejores o peores,” dice Jonathan Steele en The Guardian.

El clérico radical islámico Al-Sadr ha ganado amplio apoyo no por sus perspectivas religiosas, sino por el hecho que ha sido amenazado por los EU. El alboroto continuo, está empujando la opinión pública hacia el fundamentalismo. Estudios en febrero reportaron que solamente 21% de
l pueblo Iraqi queria un estado islámico, el numero subió hasta 70% en agosto. Estos estudios no hacen la distinción importante entre un estado islámico radical o moderado, pero la tendencia está clara. Según Sheikh Khalidi, “El pueblo Iraqi está buscando la seguridad, y puede ser seducido por la esperanza. Dictaduras extremas siempre son nacidos en el contexto cuando naciones están buscando la seguridad. Pasó cuando el cha tomó poder en Iran, con Ataturk en Turquea, y Saddam Hussein aqui.”

Elecciones

Grupos como El Congreso de la Fundación Naciónal Iraqi quieren que las elecciones por los 275 miembros de la Asamblea Naciónal tengan el enfoque de terminar la ocupación. Jugadores claves representan muchos grupos étnicos y religiosos del pais, y la posibilidad de que una democrácia representativa existe. Pero la CIA metiendo el dedo, parece inminente. Ahmed Chelabi, el favorito del Pentágano ha estado haciendo amistades con la estructura de poder Shia y podia lograr un asiento en el nuevo gobierno aunque no tiene el respeto de mucha gente Iraqi.

“Bush y Blair están espantados del voto del pueblo Iraqi por lideres anti-ocupación. No aceptaran nada meno que su legitimación con elecciones corruptas supervisadas por autoridades de la ocupación con un régimen títere estilo Allawi,” escribe Sami Ramandani. “Cuanto más deberia ser sometido el pueblo Iraqi para que Bush y Blair tienen sus titeres escojidos ‘democraticamente’ y instalados en Baghdad?”

Una gran variedad de organizaciones Iraqi están llamando por un boicot de las elecciones, mientras que una gran variedad igual de grupos están promoviendo sus propias listas de candidatos. La prensa estadaunidense dice que el boicot es solamente representando el miedo de la minoridad Sunni que perderán poder a un gobierno dominado por Shias, pero grupos participando en el boicot dicen que una elección legítima es imposible bajo la ocupación de los E.U. Dos cléricos Sunni de alto nivel fueron asesinatos en Noviembre después que su organización hiciera la llamada para el boicot— una organización actualmente creada por las fuerzas encabezadas por el E.U. después de la caida de Saddam para llenar el vacío de poder Sunni, según al-Jazeera.

La solución es extremadamente complicada. Los Estados Unidos esperan, que los grupos con una historia de más de un siglo de conflicto, se unan y formen una “democracia representada” — con una masiva matanza comprometida por las tropas de los Estados Unidos creciendo en el fondo. Los Estados Unidos han creado una herida abierta en Iraq; la continuación de la presencia militar extranjera puede solo hacer la situación peor. Los Estados Unidos deberia retirse inmediatamente y dejar que los Iraqis recojan los pedazos de Saddam ellos mismos.

Aparentemente, E.U. se divierte contemplando el comiezo de la Cuarta Guerra Mundial, como el neo-conservativo Frank Gaffney (uno de los trabajadores del Projecto por Un Nuevo Siglo Americano) que crée mucho que otro porvenir es posible. ¿Qué otro porvenir es posible, cuando Bush habla de bombardear Irán? Al govierno de E.U. le gusta tener guerras todo el tiempo, porque es una grande excusa para todos tipos de libertades civiles y gastos de defensa. Porque la crisis estimula más capital. Pero la verdad, es que los Estados Unidos no tiene suficiente tropas para combatir en más de una guerra al mismo tiempo. Un reclutamiento official no es muy variable, inclinaciones imperiales y rumores a lado, el reclutamiento de pobres es suficientemente bueno. Un reclutamiento oficial traeria la guerra al hogar de las clases medias, potencialmente comenzando un movimiento anti-guerra de estilo de los sesenta que puedia terminar la guerra.

¿Que pasaria si hubiese una resistencia armada sobre tierra en los Estados Unidos como en Iraq? Los Iraqis quieren un final a la violencia; la mayoria de la gente ahí simplemente quieren seguir con sus vidas con algún nivel de seguridad y estabilidad. La gente en Los Estados Unidos, particularmente la clase media y la casi media, tienen la habilidad de seguir con sus vidas, incluso si el gobierno esta creando algun desastre en otras partes. En un reportaje reciente de la CNN/USA TODAY, se demostró que casi la mitad de la población en E.U. pensó que mandar tropas a Iraq fue un error. Que están haciendo esos 125 milliones de personas para parar la guerra?

La gente encontra de la guerra no pueden ser obstaculizados por la ocupación. No sabemos como parar al gobierno de E.U., pero ni siquiera ellos saben lo que hacen. Ellos no planearon la guerra bien y no saben como enfrentarse a la resistencia fuerte y creativa. Pero siguen adelante, dogmáticamente edictos del capitalismo para construir una democracia de marionetas en una fundación de cuerpos Iraqis muertos. No como los burócratas del govierno, nosotros no tenemos que pasar nuestros dias silenciosamente, porque nosotros tenemos millones de personas y millones de formas diferentes para resistir la guerra. Como no hay solo un grupo dirijiendo la resistencia en Iraq, no hay una imprimición azul por el movimiento anti-guerra aquí, entonces, deberíamos parar de mirar y empezar a seguir nuestros corazones y mentes. Si nosotros hacemos todo lo que podemos para parar la Ocupación con el contexto de nuestras vidas diarias, la resistecia aquí seria tan variada y impredecible que seria la definición de la inestabilidad politica.

Ultimamente, E.U. puede bombardear la mierda fuera de Iraq cuando quieran si sus tropas cooperan y si las cosas se mantienen estabilizadas—paralizadas—alejadas. Las tropas estan votando por su terreno; de 4,000 reservistas recientemente llamados al serivicio, 1,800 pusieron denuncias encontra de la milicia, y 700 simplemente no aparecieron. Un Guardia Nacional de unidad se refuso a su misión…entonces! Cuando nos despertaremos aqui?

traducido por denise y Maneli

Si nuestos hijos nos desprecian, nuestro movimiento terminará.

Hace cinco meses que hago trabajo voluntario con el Colectivo para el Cuidado de Niños, y cada vez que recibo un correo electrònico que anuncia “Oportunidades del Cuidado de Niños”, es como si fuese un espía que no conoce cual será su proxima aventura. Aunque no se que me espera, se que sentiré gratificación al fin. Sin embargo, me doy cuenta de que esto es algo más quel cuidado de niños gratis y voluntario. Lo empiezo de entender en su totalidad. Hace seis años que cuido a niños de alguna manera. Cuando vine al “Bay Area,” deseaba continuar con este trabajo. Es cuando encontré al Colectivo para el Cuidado de Niños. Pensé, ‘Chido, una oportunidad para trabajar con los niños.’ No pensé en el aspecto político, ni en como apoyaba al movimiento social, el que tiene su origen unicamente en la gente. Simplemente quería trabajar con los niños porque me da mucho gusto y gratificación. Pero ahora me estoy involucrando en manifestaciones o reuniones y veo a los niños que conozco por mi trabajo con el Colectivo. Les saludo y ellos me reconocen por nombre. Me siento parte de una comunidad, como que estoy ayudando a construir algo fuerte.

En el 2002, un grupo de gente trabajando en San Francisco con el Colectivo de Mujeres del Programa de Trabajadores Temporales fueron animados por la importancía de la calidad del cuidado de niños y notaban la falta. Utilizando el modelo de la Escuela de Unidad y Liberación—un programa de entrenamiento de activistas y organizadores—se creó el Colectivo para el Cuidado de Niños en la Area de la Bahia. Su meta era ofrecer cuidado de niños gratis, estable y conciente a la gente que lo necesitaba más. Pero quienes eran ellos? La respuesta obvia era, por su puesto, los parientes. Pero hoy en día bajo el régimen opresivo, hay tantos parientes que lo necesitan pero no pueden hacer ese gasto. Mientras los niños crecen y se desarollan, lo mejor como parte de una comunidad de participantes dedicados, sería maravilloso si cada pariente pudiese proveer personalmente para todos las necesidades de sus hijos desde la comida a la educación, el apoyo emociónal. Sería un mundo ideal si los padres pudiesen criar a sus hijos con más atención, cariño y apoyo inmutable durante sus vidas enteras, en vez de estar forzados a batallar con el comercialismo a fuera. Pero, como dije antes, no vivimos en esa sociedad.

Nos enfrentamos mucho con la propaganda de “los valores familiares,” pero la verdad es el capitalismo, la patriarquía, el sexismo, el racismo, y las otras formas de opresión que lo mantiene, no aprecian a la familia. Quitamos lo preciso de la casa y de la familia y lo empujamos a los brazos del comercio. Si no se involucra el dinero, no vale su tiempo. Es ideología, pero de verdad el capitalismo nos fuerza obtener algo bastante abstracto antes de nuestros necesidades básicas. No hay campo para apreciar a la familia si hay que pasar más que cuarenta horas sigiendo al capital para sostener lo básico que requiere una familia.

De niño pasé mis días entre instituciones. Mis padres trabajaban y cuando no estaba en el “day care”(guarderia) estaba en la escuela. Cuando no estaba en la escuela, estaba en otra forma de guarderias.Como la mayoria de niños en estos tiempos, pasé más tiempo en ambientes de “escuelas” que con mi familia.Asi, la gente que me cuidaba eran tan importante para mí como una influencia en mis años de formación como la gente que me trajeron al mundo y que lleban mi sangre. Tengo que decir, de todas formas, que no hubo ninguna cohesión, no hubo una ideologia de unidad entre la gente que me cuidaba que me dejasen saber lo que pasaba. No me tomen mal, aprendí mucho de los individuales que se atrevieron e inspiraron a trabajar con niños; como cosas que nunca hubiese aprendido en casa o con mi familia. Reciví diferentes perspectivas y conocimientos extraños. Si hubiese estado simplemente solo con los emblemas de mis padres, estaria ahora mismo vestido todo elegante, trabajando en una caja, mirando a la pantalla de la computadora todo el tiempo. Pero, lo que no fueron nunca capazes de darme fue el sentido del continuación y de sentirse que uno pertenece a algún lugar. Esto, enriquesiendo el sentido de comunidad.

No puedo imaginar la vida de una madre soltera, no-blanca, pobre y no hablante de inglés en los Estados Unidos. Y ciertamente no quiero ni puedo presumir. Pero si se ,que la vida de padres es tumultuosa y dificíl. Mis padres eran niños de inmigrantes, lo único que querian era un mundo mejor para mi y mi hermana. Y pienso que esta realidad es verdadera para la mayoría de los padres. Los padres de mis abuelos inmigraron a los Estados y es por eso que mis padres trabajaron sin parar en trabajos que odiaban y por eso yo escribo para el Slingshot. Quiero que mis hijos crescan en un mundo mejor que el que yo estoy dejando detrás…Pero quien tiene el tiempo para luchar por mejorar el mundo?.Vete a trabajar, lleba los niños a la escuela, trabaja extra y a quizás un segundo trabajo, recoje a los niños, cocinales comida,ayúdalos con la tarea y etc. Es ya dificil para los padres ver a sus niños tanto como ellos quisieran como para ir a juntas y reuniones, o para no mejorar el mundo en el que vivimos.

Aqui es donde empieza el Colectivo para el Cuidado De Niños. En su declaración dicen firmemente y con admirable convición: “Estamos comprometidos a la mejora de organizaciones vitales y movimientos compuestos de/para las mujeres inmigrantes, pobres, o mujeres de color con entrenamientos, capaces, pacientes y cuidadoras politicas por acciones y reuniones.

La idea es simple: Hacer del mando del reprimido y el no representado lo primodial. Soportando y creando movimientos que solo ellos pueden dirigir, y ofrecer necesidades básicas que de otras formas no podrían crear comunidad y organización.

Asi es como funciona: Una organización como POWER (People Organized to Win Employment Rights) (Gente Organizada para Ganar Derechos de trabajo)— o el Colectivo de Mujeres o Critical Resistance (una Organización anti-carcel), grupos que trabajan, y que son dirigidos y comprometidos con mujeres inmigrantes, pobres y de color. Estas organizaciones, normalmente tienen un Coordinador que se contacta en el “Centro del Comité” del Colectivo para el Cuidado de Niños.. El “Centro” es un grupo del Colectivo que tiene las responsabilidades financieras, como de hacer beneficios, horarios y más. Para estar en el “Centro”, uno debe primero ser un voluntario y complementar una orientación, como también algunos entrenamientos y, por supuesto, hayan tambien cuidado a niños. Con algún tiempo y comunicación, se crea una relación entre el Coordinador de una Organización y el Centro del colectivo hasta que el colectivo tiene una idea de las necesidades de la Organización . El centro, entonces, contacta, via email o teléfonica a sus voluntarios para llenar las necesidades de la Organización. Los voluntarios firman con caras contentas y buenas intenciones y….VOILA!!, hay ahi una guarderia gratis!!

La misión de la declaración tambien dice: ”Vemos a las Guarderias como un acto político. En relación de algún movimiento, para que triunfe, sus ideas tienen que ser pasadas de generación en generación. El Colectivo para el Cuidado de Niños funciona para asegurarse que los niños se diviertan y estén informado de el trabajo que los padres están haciendo. Nosotros esperamos ayudar a los niños a situarse con ellos mismos como valiosos e importantes miembros de la comunidad y de un movimiento!!!

Whoaaauu….Imagínense eso!!! Unos pares de voluntarios ayudando a crear comunidades de miles de generaciones y movimientos. Y yo ya he empezado a verlo. Veo mujeres de color inspiradas y organizadas haciendo trabajos importantes y yo llego a interactuar con sus niños, fuertes e independientes.Y me pregu
nto que es lo que esos niños sacarán de sus interactuaciones. A veces sueño sobre ellos, hablando cun sus padres sobre sus luchas internas o sus pasos del futuro. Y estoy agradecido de que tomé un rol, aunque fuese pequeño, en el desarrollo de su movimiento. Hubo una vez que un niño que empezó a sentirse ansioso y me preguntaba que donde estaba su mamá, que se queria ir a casa; y aunque esas palabras doliesen, yo le dije: “Tu mamá esta ayudando a hacer nuestras vidas mejores, y eso toma tiempo…andale, vamos a jugar”.

Hay muchas cosas que hacer, pero al Colectivo de Cuidado para Niños no les importa. Están intentando estabilizar una presencia más fuerte en el Bay Area. Recientemente empezaron a ayudar con Mandela Arts Center y con Critical Resistance in Oakland. Sin embargo, siempre necesitan voluntarios, nuevos y dedicados!!!! para covertirse en un miebro, uno debe: -cuidar a los niños de vez en cuando -tener al colectivo informado de tu información de contacto

-devolver todas las llamadas de telefono

– ir a las orentaciones

– e ir a las reuniones de voluntarios.

Pero lo primero y más importante por hacer es contactar al Colectivo. Si usted esta interesado en hacer voluntariado o si su Organización necesita cuidado de niños, llame al Colectivo para el Cuidado de Niños al: 415-541-5039 o mande un email a: childcarecollective@lycos.com

“El Colectivo para el Cuidado de Niños espera jugar una parte importante en la construcción de un movimiento que reconoce y hace primordial las voces y agendas politicas de mujeres y madres, especialmente mujeres de color, pobres e enmigrantes. Las necesidades de los padre no han sido tradicionalmente reconocidas y el deseo es esporádicamente por lo mejor”

Lo más importante es recordar que el Colectivo no es el movimiento. o la mayoria del tiempo, el Colectivo está comprometido a gente joven y educada que tiene algún privilegio. La belleza de esto es, que esa gente ha encontrado un lugar para ellos mismos y sus talentos en movimientos dirigidos por gente de color. Pero es importante no idealizar la posición del Colectivo. Ellos se dan cuenta de que el movimiento pertenece a las mujeres de color que lo dirigen. Nosotros, los voluntarios, simplemente estámos ahi para ayudar a sus niños.