Analysis of the meeting
Analysis of the meeting in the 3rd of November 2007 of alterglobalist, civil and social movements and tendencies of the CIS countries
At present time Russian internet is discussing of the meeting. We present your enlightened attention several opinions of the participants:
Stanislav Markelov, president of the Institute of Superioroty of Law.
1. The meeting was held in atmosphere of creative chaos: everything and all was taking place by itself, without over-organization. Flexible forms of self-organization are very important.
2. All, who wanted, took chair to speak
3. There was plenty of new people (from Kalmykii, Minska, Uliyanovska, Kazani and other regions), which enjoyed and liked the Meeting.
4. Unfortunately due to financial reasons, not all the C.I.S. states and distant regions of Russia were represented.
5. Catering was properly organized.
6. Due to different length of miscellaneous seminars some participants "hung in pause".
7. It is desirable to enrich the spectrum of positions at such meetings.
8. It is essential not to lose the orientation on diminishing of inter-group conflicts so that these meetings do not transform into platforms of clarification of old painful relations between separate persons and group, but to transform them to constructive logic, while preserving the atmosphere of discussions of such meetings
Darya Mitina, Second secretary of the Central Committee of the Russian Young Communist League (RKSM).
1. It is regretful that the meeting was not properly covered by mass-media.
2. It is necessary to make arrangements with exact known journalists (only 2 journalists were present) before, rather then simply send information to agencies.
3. This public information fault is practically unique. Alost all the rest was a success. The Action was prepared in extremely compressed periods, less than a month (first Organizational Committee (Orgkomitet) - an October 8, The meeting on November 3). The Improvisations sometimes do better, than carefully prepared actions.
4. It is advisable to record all plenary and section seminars (due to multiple requests by those who failed to come to Moscow but want to read the materials in Internet).
5. By the following Forum it is desirable to carry out some work with large partners, that either did not participate at all, or level of their participation was insignificant (VKT trade-union, IKD institute, Teachers' trade unions, left non-parliamentary parties, including unregistered or deregistered).
6. It is necessary to define the level and degree of our participation in preparation of SOCFORUM-2008 Social Forum considering that it would be held on Ukrainian territory. We should send our delegates and representatives to meetings of the Ukrainian Organizational Forum.
7. The database on participants and organizations (based on questionnaires, filled by participants at registrations), should be created and constantly renewed.
8. We should adjust distribution of materials (quite a lot of people do not receive them).
Larisa Ozhogina, "Alternatives" and Mihail Kropotkin, leader of a public enterprise.
1. The meeting was held at the working and what it is important - comradely, brotherly friendly atmosphere.
2. Selection of people for such meetings is not at the proper level. Amongst the participants must be less occasional people but rather those concerned with the real deal. So it is necessary for participants to fill questionnaires about its personal activity before their arrival. But this should not at all mean closeness of the meetings, but rather the principle of increasing of their efficiency.
3. We need a principle: not to criticize other organizations from formal position.
4. At meetings everyone must be greatly and constructively being self-realized.
5. At plenary meeting (the opening) the audience was drowned because of intergroup contacts, the audience did not actively participate. It is necessary to speakers at "open mike" to "keep" the audience.
1. I think that it was sound! And this not accidentally since it was reached by high quality of the alterglobalists meeting: profound, interesting, discussionable and herewith comradely, on-friendly, rather then hostile.
2. At the meeting there were no "slots", in which, as a rule something small-minded-spiteful live.
3. I liked architecture of the meeting: each of the organizers as in jazz orchestra felt the logic of the Integer and was initiative, trying to backstop each other. There was no fighting for egoistic interests.
4. I Liked that, for instance, the round table on questions of the culture and politics was conducted together by Vlad Tupikin and me. There was no a dictatorship of monistic approach and, besides, Vlad simply helped me in conducting at the most complex moments. He undertook the most difficult part of conduct.
5. I agree with critiques by Larisa Ozhogina that it is necessary to invite real working activists from regions. I offer to implement the principle of the labor participation in alterglobalists meetings: he, who works, arrives. To allow the principle of political representation of organizations is not acceptable. A one, even if he represents an organization nevertheless should previously describe what he personally does on ground. This will prevent at least at some measure penetration careerist and egoist motives in alterglobalist background.
6. We must introduce the principle of financial transparency in organizations of similar meetings, as it was for the first time implemented at this meeting.
7. Sales of any goods at such meetings must be done only with permission of the Organizational Committee of the Forum, since the Forum is responsible. But attempts to use the meeting as platform for their business (I mean not the left papers, of course) were undertaken during the meeting, in particular by one young person, who refused to introduce gimself.
8. I enjoyed very much that the speeches at plenary meeting were on background of jazz music. This is stylish!
1. The meeting showed high efficiency of the given formats: small resources, small facility, very short period and enormous effect.
2. The leaders of the plenary meetings were almost perfect.
3. Effect of size. Probably about 200 people are the most effective number of participants.
We now know empirically that it this form - Working Meeting of Activists and their counsels turned out to be very productive. And we can proudly call it a "Mini-Forum". Excellent form!
4. Sound organization of sections under given space and time, which we had in the restaurant and which we used on 110 %. But number of sections was too little not enough. Sure November in Moscow is exact time for outdoors sections.
5. I am sure, that consider the given form - Working Meeting of Activists we simply do not need to spend our efforts for PR activity with mass-media. We are not "political technologists" We should keep our PR resources for bigger and more open meetings.
Alexander Buzgalin, coordinator of the motion "Alternatives".
1. What is principally important, is that while preparing the meeting all work of the activists was free and not paid or compensated in any form. There was no spirit of business or bureaucracy.
2. After such meetings we should conduct "analysis of the flight" with analysis of our faults and strong points, not only by Organizational Committee, but also by all activists. Here, every vision of each is important.
3. We should make a smart and intelligent report about this meeting for sending out, as well as for Internet sites. The transparency of information is important.
4. For the future it is necessary to organize the well-timed sending out of the materials on preparing of the forum, as well as open for all Internet site.
Each interested person can join this "analysis of the flight". You cab send your own proposals and offers on e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org