Showing posts with label US ISO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US ISO. Show all posts

Monday, March 10, 2014

Rape Culture in Left Organisations - Drawing Lessons from Recent Experiences in the US ISO

Lisbeth Latham

(This post was written several weeks ago but I haven't had a chance to publish it until recently. Since I wrote it the handling of the case has been raised by ISO Renewal Faction here - the RF were expelled from the US ISO at ISO's convention. The US ISO's national leadership have responded to the RF in Socialist Worker and the RF have in turn responded. I will be writing some comments on the exchange between the ISO and the RF shortly).

The pre-convention internal discussion documents for the US ISO were published in early February at the Charnel House Blog. This site is run by Ross Wolfe who is a bitter opponent of intersectionality and thus many of his posts reflect deeply racist, misogynist and transphobic ideas. This is said as a warning for those perusing the site rather than having any reflection on the bulletin’s contents or the veracity of the bulletins themselves. While many of the articles in the bulletins are fairly standard fair – there are a number of interesting articles including those discussing the ISO’s shifting attitude to feminism and intersectionality
(which is a partial and conditional acceptance of the idea of intersectionality as it emerged from Black Feminism but an absolute rejection of both those aspects of intersectionality that emerged from post-modern theory and concepts of privilege in any form) however of interest to me is an article in the final bulletin discussing the handling of rape allegations against a leading ISO member in the San Diego branch – the publication of the article had been signalled in earlier contribution on problems of sexism and transphobia in the San Diego branch.

The article is an outline of the experiences of the San Diego branch’s efforts to deal with allegations of rape against a member of the San Diego Branch Committee (SDBC), the difficulties they encountered in handling this, the limitations of the support provided by the organisation's national leadership and in the organisation's formal procedures for handling allegations against members.

Before proceeding it is important to note that the article is written from members who view themselves as loyal ISO members who believe “The ISO as an organization, and all ISO comrades as individuals, are committed to fighting for a better world free from exploitation and oppression. We are also committed to practicing our fight on the terms of the oppressed. Not only is this the right thing to do morally, but we consider it fundamental that the overthrow of capitalism will require the confrontation of oppression by the oppressed themselves. We must therefore do everything we can so that victims of oppression can feel safe in the ISO and with ISO comrades, in order that they can fully participate in the struggle.”

Moreover they state that “We are not claiming that any ISO members acted in bad faith, but that is precisely the point: Even with the best of intentions, our established procedure produces huge failures”, so the article is written from a framework of wanting to both strengthen the organisations formal procedures in handling complaints of rape and assault against members and to combat any complacency – rather than arguing any deliberate failing by the organisation or its members.

While in general, from what is described in the article, the members who initiated and conducted the investigation sort to take allegations of violence from a survivor seriously, however there were clearly serious deficiencies on the part of the ISO, and it would be stretching credulity to argue that this was all done in good faith.

So what happened is that in July 2013, an activist from a different socialist group made comments of Facebook referring to a local leading member of the ISO in San Diego, referred to throughout the text as “Daniel”, as an attempted rapist, with other activists also stating that a cover-up had been carried out by the ISO at a local and national level. The response of some of the branch’s members was to seek to work out who might have made the original accusation, i.e. to not see the allegation as a fabrication but based on a concrete experience, and to speak to that person and get a firsthand account of what happened.

According to the article – the survivor (described throughout as “the victim", I’m not really sure why they didn’t give the survivor a pseudonym rather than depersonalising them in this way) described the incident in full – and stated that she did not want “Daniel” to be expelled from the ISO, but that she thought it was wrong for him to speak about women’s rights. In response an emergency meeting of the SDBC was called. The difficulty was that of the four members of the SDBC, one was “Daniel”, one recused themselves as they were “Daniel’s friend”, another member had been accused of the cover up and the final member was relatively new. So they had an impromptu branch meeting that initiated an investigation into the incident.

The incident had happened a year earlier and it became clear that five members of the branch had been aware of the allegations prior to them being raised in July 2013 (including two members of the SDBC), as they had been told by friends of the survivor and that their had been rumours circulating. Members of the ISO’s Steering Committee (ISOSC) had also been made aware of the allegations prior to July 2013.

The reasons given at the local level for not investigating the allegations in 2012 were due to “how it [the allegation] was brought (on facebook), and that the person bringing it (that they were hostile to the ISO). Also people didn’t want to bother the victim about it”. While a member of the ISOSC informed them "I was told in September 2012 that the issue had already been resolved because [the victim] wanted to move on with her life and didn’t want to press charges."

But the ISOSC impression was based on the view of the SDBC member(s) who in 2012 (without doing any investigation) thought that the actions described did not amount to attempted rape, as the third-party accuser had characterized it, nor did they think that there was a violation of consent. The existence of a complaint was also brought to an ISOSC member’s attention in March 2013, when a member of the San Diego branch contacted them to report the fact that a third party had accused "Daniel" of attempted rape. The
ISOSC member said that they assumed the accusations were false and did not connect the San Diego member with the ISO’s national Discipline Committee (ISODC).

The branch response to the allegations were hampered by the approach of the ISO to dealing with complaints, where the national bodies refused to intervene, despite requests from the branch to do so, this was because their policy requires formal written and signed complaint for the national body to intervene.

Based on their experiences the San Diego members draw a number of lessons and make recommendations for changes to the ISO’s procedures . The lessons are “Political context:

  • False accusations of sexual abuse made by people who face gendered oppression are incredibly rare. It is, however, disturbingly common for assaults to remain unreported or be unjustly dismissed. We must therefore approach every accusation as though it is almost certainly true.
  • No one, including the most militant anti-sexists, are immune to living in this deeply sexist culture. 
  • Education is needed for ISO members on consent, intimate violence, and other interpersonal expressions of gendered oppression (or any oppression for that matter).
  • When the ability of the BC to function is compromised, the only substitute is the full branch.
When an accusation is made:

  • Make every effort to get a firsthand account as soon as possible.
  • Ask for endorsement of the account from the accuser if notes are taken by a third party.
  • Even in the absence of a formal complaint, the allegations must still be dealt with by the branch.
  • If the accused departs the ISO during an investigation, the organization must still resolve the investigation to make a determination about the member’s status.

During the investigation:

  • Every accusation must be taken seriously, regardless of how it was brought, or who is making it.
  • Taking allegations seriously should never be met with hostility by any member.Those who may bring an allegation forward in a way that can be seen as problematic, unserious, sectarian, emotional, etc. should not be attacked for doing so.
  • Members close to an accused comrade should be especially conscious of reflexive defensiveness by themselves and the accused toward those taking allegations seriously.
  • Do not form unannounced factions, and be aware of informal discussions that could amount to that.
  • Disagreements will arise among members in a situation like this. Bringing them up early to the branch as a whole is the best way to diffuse tension. It is the responsibility of the BC to make space to discuss the progress of a case like this early and often.
  • Be aware of the tendency to form cliques. Informal networks should not be the basis to develop political currents in the branch.
  • Even when an allegation is made in a public forum in a way that’s meant to harm the ISO, members should respond prudently and thoughtfully. We should be aware that we can be held publicly accountable for anything we say, even in private or online.”

The recommendations that were made for the ISO's policy are that organisation drop the requirement for a signed written statement written by a complainent in order for the ISODC to investigate, and instead accept either a written statement (not necessarily written by the complainant personally, or an audio recording of a statement made with the consent of the complainant) and to add a protocol to the complaints proceeding that "If an individual ISO member makes or hears about an accusation of sexual misconduct, they should make every effort, with the help of other ISO comrades as necessary, to contact the alleged victim and obtain a formal statement, if they wish to give one. The statement should then be forwarded to the ISODC and the local BC.

“If the alleged victim does not wish to give a formal statement, the member should take the accusation to the BC. If the member is concerned that the BC is compromised, such as when the accused is a member of the BC or is closely tied to a majority of the BC, the member should bring the accusation to the whole branch".

While the members who responded to the allegations in July 2013 would appear to have responded genuinely and with a motivation for justice for the survivor, I don't think that it would be unkind to say that this has not been the case with all of the responses by the ISO in this case. Moreover the assumption that all members of the ISO, or any other organisation in this society, are acting in good faith if they fail to act around allegations, and having a focus on maintaining internal dynamics of a branch during an investigation ignores the reality that internal opposition to such an investigation is likely to reflect sexist and misogynistic attitudes amongst members. While attempting to lower the trigger for the ISO's Dispute's Committee to start an investigation is positive, the recommendation to reduce the requirements in relation to the type of formal statement being made ignores the fact that progressive organisations should be proactive in seeking to exclude sexual predators from their organisation - and that to rely on survivors making formal allegations both ignores the social and personal pressures on survivors that can make reporting difficult, but also makes making activists spaces safer the responsibility of survivors rather being a collective responsibility. The recommendation idea that there would be regular discussion of an investigation into a rape at a branch meeting is also deeply disturbing - such discussions would:
  • violate the survivors right to confidentiality and privacy
  • it makes the investigation and its findings something that is up for general debate (highlighted by the fact that nowhere in the document are specifics as to what was alleged in this case and all we are left with are the various assessments as to the character of what was alleged)
  • it has the capacity to enable the spreading of gossip and disinformation against a survivor to publicly undermine their credibility both in the organisation and in broader activist circles
  • trigger survivors in the branch, and make branch meetings unsafe
  • It will also act as a deterrent from reporting as it sends a signal to survivors of what they can expect if they raise a concern

The discussion in the article of the investigation makes the investigation more than it should really need to be. The purpose of the investigation shouldn't be to convince the branch membership, or the friends of the perpetrator of the perpetrator’s guilt, if that is what is seen as being required then there are some serious problems that need to be addressed through the avenue of politics rather than through an "investigation" and how its proceeding. Ultimately why would anyone want to talk about the ins and outs - of the investigation? Doing so risks recreating in the organisation the worst elements of the bourgeois legal system's treatment of survivors. Moreover as a community the left, whether within an organisation or more broadly needs to shift it’s orientation to one of zero tolerance of violence, particularly to violence towards oppressed communities – this opposition to violence should be premised on the basis that it is the right thing to do in building empathy, solidarity and empowerment rather than some instrumental motivation of making it easier for people to be involved in your organisation.

                      -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Read more...

Monday, March 28, 2011

Opening the way to a fightback

Madison resident Marshall Braun reviews the last month of protest in the capital.
Socialist Worker.org
March 16, 2011

IT'S BEEN a month since Gov. Scott Walker introduced his "budget repair bill" and simultaneously kicked a sleeping giant called the labor movement in the face.

Bill details were released on a Friday in February with little to no fanfare. On Sunday, 80 people protested at the governor's mansion. On Monday, February 14, 2,000 people showed up with "Valentine's Day" cards for Walker at the Capitol. On Tuesday, 15,000 folks surrounded the Capitol. Wednesday, 30,000 shut down the streets around the Capitol square. Thursday and Friday saw increased numbers, culminating in 70,000-plus on Saturday the 19th.


The occupation of the Capitol building began that Tuesday and lasted nearly three weeks before severe restrictions on Capitol access, combined with Democratic Party maneuvering, forced the remaining occupiers out. There were 24/7 protests, with numbers in the thousands nearly every day after, and on Saturday, March 12, the largest protests yet drew 185,000 people, according to the Wisconsin AFL-CIO's estimate.

This past month has been the most tremendous and invigorating yet exhausting time of my life. It has been dotted with tremendous high points, like the four-day "sick-out" of thousands of teachers across the state, and devastating setbacks, like the signing of the amended bill that strips most public-sector unions of most of their rights, with the not-so-hidden intent of decertifying as many of them as soon as possible.

There have been small lows, like daily forgetting where I parked and the all too often accompanying ticket--and personal highs, like my 2-year-old son falling asleep in my arms despite following a drum line with helicopters overhead, and being surrounded by 70,000 protesters out-chanting a couple hundred Tea-baggers.

There is a political fire in this town, hard to describe, maybe even harder to quench. It's difficult to leave my apartment without getting into a political conversation. On top of the ever-present pins and T-shirts folks are wearing in solidarity with public workers, many have decided simply to carry around signs.

At first, I thought people were just going to or coming from the Capitol, but I've since realized that getting groceries is the perfect time to carry a placard. While driving, I've gotten so used to seeing joggers with carried or pinned-on signs that I instinctively give them the "This is what democracy looks like" horn beep, which always elicits a raised fist, no matter how tired they may be.

People are taking literally any opportunity to show their union support and contempt for Walker. Because Johnsonville Brats gave a hefty campaign contribution to Walker and are served at the twice-annual world's largest Brat Fest, multiple alternative brat fests are being planned, including a virtual fest that's already up on Facebook, promising a "cyberbrat" in return for a donation to a local food bank.

This spirit isn't confined to Madison. My small hometown nestled in the conservative armpit of Wisconsin known as the Fox Valley has had multiple pro-labor rallies. There have been solidarity rallies in all 50 states. Of course, many other states are now facing the same type of legislation, or even worse, which has prompted massive protests from Indiana to Ohio to New Jersey.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

LAST WEDNESDAY, the state Senate hastily passed the stripped-down union-killing bill. The GOP-controlled Senate had been waiting since February 17 to pass the full bill. On that day, we stopped the vote by blockading the Senate chamber.

People also blockaded several Democratic legislators' offices, preventing the police from taking them to the chamber and allowing at least one senator, Chris Larson, to sneak out a window and join his fellow Democrats in Illinois. The 14 AWOL senators prevented a quorum that was necessary to pass the full bill. Instead, the new bill passed with a smaller quorum. Devoid of any "fiscal" provisions, it laid bare the lie that union-busting had anything to do with balancing the budget.

Within an hour of the bill passing, thousands surrounded the Capitol, while hundreds fortunate enough to be let in earlier protested inside. When I arrived, people were banging on doors at all of the dozens of entrances and chanting "Let us in!" Many people including myself were looking for any way in. A familiar protester whispered to me, "Window open at Wisconsin Street entrance." When I got there, hundreds of completely silent protesters were waiting to stream through a chest-high window.

Dozens got in before extremely angry police officers came and shut it from inside. Immediately, the silent crowd boomed. Some who got in the window broke through the cops and opened the doors. I was among the roughly hundred or so who rushed in before the police regained control of the entrance.

We immediately started planning how to let everyone else in. We found some who were already talking about rushing one entrance as a decoy, and then sending many more to the opposite entrance to try to keep it open. We planned it for 10 minutes out and texted everyone we knew outside to move to the State Street entrance.

The deception worked, as dozens of us flew past a couple cops and opened the State Street doors, allowing thousands to stream in to cheering and high-fives from the jubilant protesters inside. That action broke the cops' resolve, and they retreated to the fourth level.

Hundreds made their way toward the Assembly chamber, where the final vote required to pass the bill was to happen at 11 a.m. the next morning. Many spent the night in a vestibule outside of the chamber, discussing how best to hold their ground. Unfortunately, by morning, the numbers had dwindled. The vote went through, but the demonstrators succeeded in delaying the vote by a couple hours as state troopers had to drag dozens from the hallway.

The "people's mic" that had run continuously for three weeks, except for during sleeping hours, was once again live in the middle of the rotunda with thousands listening to speeches and chanting. Around the mic, I ran into state Sen. Mark Mueller's son, who was trying to convince folks to leave. He was saying that we would look bad if we were arrested and would ruin the efforts of his dad, one of the "Fab 14." I argued that if we held our numbers, no one would be arrested. Following him around for a while, I made that point to everyone he talked to.

I took the microphone and introduced myself as a 20-year Madison resident, worker and a socialist, to hearty applause. The biggest reaction came when I talked about the various aspects of the original bill beyond stripping collective bargaining.

It is obvious that folks sped to the Capitol that night, angry about the loss of collective bargaining, but many were also upset about cuts to wages, state health care plans, transit and other programs for the poor. Walker's new budget released last week has severe cuts across the board.

It's laughable that he advocates the only way to balance the budget is through spending cuts when he just gave a $140 million tax break to corporations a month and a half ago, at a time when half of the corporations in Wisconsin already pay nothing in taxes.

I ended with a plea for people to keep up the protests and for rank-and-file union members to talk to each other, organize and think about job actions. The union leadership is reluctant to even hint at a strike and is seemingly content to focus only on elections and recall efforts for select GOP state senators and Walker. There has been one notable exception. President of the Madison Firefighters Union Joe Conway has advocated for a general strike.

Most people who are jazzed about the recall effort have their heart in the right place. However, it will take a year before we can even start collecting signatures for Walker's recall.

The Democrats are obviously pressuring the unions to convince their members to channel their protest energy into the polling booths and petition drives. Ironically, the recalls and ultimately the bill's overturning will happen only if the political pressure of the type fostered by the protests is maintained on the Democrats.

For example, there is no way that the now famed Fab 14 would have left the state had it not been for thousands of people in the streets.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

WHAT ARE the next steps? Already illegal for public unions to strike, the new bill makes it more difficult by allowing the governor to fire any public employee who misses three days of work without a doctor's note during a "state of emergency."

However, massive job actions make it nearly impossible for firings. The teachers have already shown that. The governor cannot replace most public positions with scab workers because they are specialized jobs. One of my favorite signs at one of the protests was, "Can the National Guard Teach Organic Chem?"

That being said, the union leadership is making a concerted effort to shift energy into electoral strategies and away from strikes. AFSCME Local 60-Council 40 President Don Coyler wrote to members a day after the largest labor protest in memory:

Thanks to everyone who attended Saturday's rally. This enormous show of unity was inspiring. As you talk about this event with family, friends, and co-workers, please encourage them that we need their continued support. The recall effort needs grassroots support. Volunteering to help with gathering signatures or donating money are just two ways to help. Then, there will be campaigning for more enlightened candidates.

This type of rhetoric has been persuasive, judging by people's attitudes.

Now is the time to keep up the protests and civil disobedience. The lesson from Wednesday's reoccupation of the Capitol is that confident steps and a little bit of planning can cascade into victory.

Continued protest can give confidence and organizing space to union members. Civil disobedience is, by nature, illegal, but we must not be afraid of breaking the law. Most of what we've done in the past month has been illegal. The occupation was illegal, especially last Wednesday night's, since a recent court order threatens up to six months in jail for anyone staying past closing time.

Every rally since the first has been held without a permit. How can we expect unions to act illegally if we won't ourselves?

We've come so far. The Teaching Assistants' Association, which during the Valentine's Day rally urged its members to stay on the sidewalk in order to not disrupt traffic, is now having to urge them not to strike.

The Firefighters have moved from symbols of solidarity to leaders in the struggle, disobeying police orders to leave the Capitol two weeks ago. In fact, it was their steadfastness that convinced Capitol Police Chief Charles Tubbs to disobey his superiors and allow the protesters to stay another night, which led to four more days.

It may take one bold union like the Firefighters Union to show the way and open the doors for others to enter the fray. A victory in Wisconsin could embolden the union movement nationwide.

Even if we lose here, something has fundamentally changed. Masses of workers here understand for the first time in a long time that they are workers, not just consumers. Across the country, many workers are starting to realize that their interests lie primarily with other workers, private or public, Black, Brown or white, male or female, gay or straight.

They realize that the Koch Brothers' interests are not their own. The formerly one-sided class war has met a second side here in Madison, and we have Scott Walker to thank for that.



Read more...

About This Blog

Revitalising Labour attempts to reflect on efforts to rebuild the labour movement internationally, emphasising the role that left-wing political currents can play in this process. It welcomes contributions on union struggles, internal renewal processes within the labour movement and the struggle against capitalism and imperialism.

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP  

Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Australia License.