[KWPeace-groups] On taking positions (Re: Minutes from July 20th meeting)

Tue Jul 26 15:04:19 EDT 2016

Thank you, Bob, for clarifying so much here.  Yes, I’m fully in support of lively discussion of issues and people taking a wide variety of positions and recommending particular actions on the blog.  A rich diversity of voices, and in-depth articles addressing peacebuilding issues is so needed, and something KW-Peace can offer.    What I don’t think we are (or haven’t yet understood we are) is a group that takes up those issues in its meetings, and comes to consensus on positions and actions to take as a group.  I love the view of the blog as a place to "post articles by and
> about your group, make your views and positions known. There will be contradictory views, opposing ideas, calls for militant advocacy and nonviolent protest. It will be messy, chaotic, and wonderful.”

Thoughts?

Sue

> On Jul 26, 2016, at 10:11 AM, Bob Jonkman <bjonkman at sobac.com> wrote:
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Sue wrote:
> 
>> Yet it is outside of the scope of KW-Peace, which was created for 
>> collaboration and networking between community groups.
> 
> I don't know...  I put up the KW Peace blog in 2012 to give wider
> circulation to Eleanor's newsletter of local Peace and Justice events.
> 
> http://kwpeace.ca/2012/05/
> 
> Although they have my name on them, they're Eleanor's articles (I
> should fix that). Those articles took specific positions and
> recommended specific actions.
> 
> I offered the KW Peace blog as a common forum to publish articles and
> events for all the KW Peace and Social Justice groups, but it would be
> sad to lose Eleanor's voice because some groups may not agree with
> every viewpoint offered.
> 
> I encourage everyone to register on the blog, post articles by and
> about your group, make your views and positions known. There will be
> contradictory views, opposing ideas, calls for militant advocacy and
> nonviolent protest. It will be messy, chaotic, and wonderful.
> 
> - --Bob.
> 
> 
> On 07/26/16 09:42, Sue Klassen wrote:
>> Thank you Diane and Eleanor for you questions around KW Peace
>> taking positions. This certainly warrants discussion.  The easiest
>> route is for us to have a policy of not taking a position on any 
>> issue—supporting, instead, our constituent groups to take
>> positions. If we do choose to take positions, I’m seeing things in
>> a similar way to what Emily has expressed.  As a networking group
>> of KW area peace-related groups, I see it being issues local groups
>> are working on, that they bring to us, that we might endorse.  Or,
>> again, we could just go the route of letting groups network through
>> KW Peace’s calendar and blog and meetings, sharing their positions
>> and reasons, while not taking a position as a group.  This may be
>> the wiser choice long term, even though I expressed my support of
>> endorsing the current issue that launched this conversation.
>> 
>> Eleanor, I had started this email yesterday, and just read your 
>> impassioned—and deeply disappointed—post this morning.  We need
>> more Eleanors!  I certainly think there’s a need for committed
>> people to gather around these issues, to study them deeply and
>> inform policy makers and the general populace alike.  This is the
>> important work of a democracy.  Yet it is outside of the scope of
>> KW-Peace, which was created for collaboration and networking
>> between community groups.
>> 
>> If KW-Peace’s networking capabilities—while not in full blossom 
>> yet—are able to help you find others in our area that can commit
>> to the group you’re are longing for (and hoped KW Peace was), I
>> would be delighted to see such a group emerge. I would hope, if
>> formed, it might connect to other groups through KW Peace.
>> 
>> What KW Peace is *about* is collaboration and networking between 
>> peace-related groups in our area—the core need those of us who
>> came together initially identified.  Its purpose is to leverage the
>> work we’re doing in our individual groups through the connection to
>> other groups.  I know I can’t take on a host of other issues
>> outside the weighty ones (such as TRC follow-up, Line 9, and
>> refugee sponsorship) we’re tackling through Stirling’s group in
>> addition. Networking and collaboration can support this work,
>> rather than draw me away from it.
>> 
>> I was so grateful to meet you at the potluck, and have appreciated 
>> your insightful input into the discussions.  Even as I understand 
>> this is not the group you are needing, know that you are always 
>> welcome, and I hope we’re able to collaborate on various issues
>> over time.
>> 
>> Sue
>> 
>> P.S.  Bob, I’m not sure how to make this go to the blog and to 
>> everyone here. I’m just releasing it into your wonderfully capable 
>> hands to make this all work.
>> 
>>> On Jul 25, 2016, at 8:43 PM, Eleanor Grant <eleanor7000 at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:eleanor7000 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I had never heard this!
>>> 
>>> If our group isn't going to launch initiatives of its own, it
>>> isn't where I want to be.
>>> 
>>> Where can I find anyone to talk to about the huge dangers posed
>>> by Canada's involvement with NATO, arms sales, and the TPP?  How
>>> can I promote local support for the current push to allow US war 
>>> resisters to stay in Canada?  And does anybody care about
>>> weapons components being built in our region?
>>> 
>>> I feel so alone.  Nobody is doing these things.  (Only the war 
>>> resisters issue has a grassroots mvmt but it's in Toronto, does 
>>> that mean we can't support it?)
>>> 
>>> I just don't see the point in being an umbrella group but not
>>> being *about* anything ourselves.  I am in great despair.
>>> 
>>> Eleanor
>>> 
>>> On 25 Jul 2016 15:06, "DIANE FREDERICK" <dfrederick at rogers.com 
>>> <mailto:dfrederick at rogers.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> Emily, I really liked your summation of the group"s focus --  "
>>> I think our role is to facilitate collaboration and networking 
>>> between groups, and support the initiatives that are happening, 
>>> rather then targeting issues and launching initiatives
>>> ourselves". It was my understanding the focus is collaboration &
>>> networking for community groups.
>>> 
>>> Thanks, Diane
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Diane Frederick, RN,MA,ICADC,ICCS
>>> 
>>> http://www.tapestrymc.ca <http://www.tapestrymc.ca/> Weaving 
>>> mindfulness & compassion Blog:
>>> http://tapestrymc.ca/category/blog/ Phone: 519-5763871
>>> <tel:519-5763871> Mobile: 519-588-3871 <tel:519-588-3871>
>>> Facebook: Tapestry-Mindfulness and Compassion - Diane Frederick 
>>> <http://tapestry-mindfulness%20and%20compassion%20-%20diane%20frederick/>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> On Monday, July 25, 2016 8:56 AM, Emily Mininger <e.mininger at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:e.mininger at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> We haven't discussed taking positions on public policies. I think
>>> generally, as we are intending to be a collective of groups, we 
>>> can't expect everyone in the group to agree on every issue. So,
>>> In my mind, I see it as focusing on our core values (improving
>>> our communities and trying enact positive change). In this sense,
>>> I think it makes more sense to be reactive - it would be
>>> exhausting to discuss our positions on every issue and work out a
>>> platform. If a member brings up an issue or initiative that we
>>> can all get on board with, great! Then we can decide that at that
>>> time. If not, then we can try to find something that everyone can
>>> support. I think our role is to facilitate collaboration and
>>> networking between groups, and support the initiatives that are
>>> happening, rather then targeting issues and launching initiatives
>>> ourselves.
>>> 
>>> That's just my two cents; what do others think?
>>> 
>>> Emily
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Eleanor Grant 
>>> <eleanor7000 at gmail.com <mailto:eleanor7000 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi All - Since I haven't been at every meeting, forgive me if
>>> I've missed something. Have we ever discussed as a group the idea
>>> of taking positions on any public policies?  Such as, for
>>> example, whether Canada should be joining in the NATO deployment
>>> to Latvia? Or whether the TPP and other trade deals may be a
>>> threat to implementing climate change policies?  Or the way
>>> poverty is a form of violence, and how to reduce it?  Or the
>>> justice system and why a disproportionate number of Aboriginal
>>> people are incarcerated?  Or whether Canada should take in more
>>> refugees?  Or whether to support the BDS movement of peaceful
>>> resistance to Israel's Occupation? Just to name a few issues that
>>> are much on the hearts and minds of all of us who care about
>>> building peace in our community and our world. Do we perhaps need
>>> a time to clarify what we see our role as?  Are we happy to
>>> simply react to issues that our component groups happen to be
>>> working on at the time?  That could be OK, if we've decided that
>>> KWPeace should play that role. Let the issue of free bus passes
>>> for the poor be the impetus for us to clarify what we want to be
>>> about as a group. Eleanor On 23 Jul 2016 12:59, "Emily Mininger"
>>> <e.mininger at gmail.com <mailto:e.mininger at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi All!
>>> 
>>> Let me know if you think there's anything I failed to write in
>>> the minutes that's important.
>>> 
>>> Also, Nadine Quehl from the Alliance Against Poverty wanted to
>>> know if she can list KW Peace as endorsing their call for free
>>> transit for target groups:
>>> 
>>> Alliance Against Poverty (AAP) is planning to speak at Regional 
>>> Council to call for Free Transit for folks on OW/ODSP and we are
>>> contacting other anti-poverty organizations to ask for
>>> endorsement. Please let me know if we can add KW Peace to our
>>> list of organizations that endorse this campaign. You can read
>>> more about it on our website: www.allianceagainstpoverty.com 
>>> <http://www.allianceagainstpoverty.com/>
>>> 
>>> Please let me know if you think we should endorse this campaign
>>> as KW Peace. I personally am in favour.
>>> 
>>> It was lovely to see you all on Wed. Next meeting is August 17th,
>>> pending confirmation of Stirling space availability.
>>> 
>>> Have a good weekend!
>>> 
>>> Emily
>>> 
>>> -- Emily Mininger PeaceQuest KW Affiliate Facilitator
>>> 
>>> Email: e.mininger at gmail.com <mailto:e.mininger at gmail.com> Phone: 
>>> 519-568-3879 Twitter: @PeaceQuestKW Facebook: 
>>> facebook.com/peacequest.ca <http://facebook.com/peacequest.ca> 
>>> Website: peacequest.ca <http://peacequest.ca/>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- Emily Mininger PeaceQuest KW Affiliate Facilitator
>>> 
>>> Email: e.mininger at gmail.com <mailto:e.mininger at gmail.com> Phone: 
>>> 519-568-3879 <tel:519-568-3879> Twitter: @PeaceQuestKW Facebook: 
>>> facebook.com/peacequest.ca <http://facebook.com/peacequest.ca> 
>>> Website: peacequest.ca <http://peacequest.ca/>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Monday, July 25, 2016 8:56 AM, Emily Mininger 
>>> <e.mininger at gmail.com <mailto:e.mininger at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> We haven't discussed taking positions on public policies. I think
>>> generally, as we are intending to be a collective of groups, we 
>>> can't expect everyone in the group to agree on every issue. So,
>>> In my mind, I see it as focusing on our core values (improving
>>> our communities and trying enact positive change). In this sense,
>>> I think it makes more sense to be reactive - it would be
>>> exhausting to discuss our positions on every issue and work out a
>>> platform. If a member brings up an issue or initiative that we
>>> can all get on board with, great! Then we can decide that at that
>>> time. If not, then we can try to find something that everyone can
>>> support. I think our role is to facilitate collaboration and
>>> networking between groups, and support the initiatives that are
>>> happening, rather then targeting issues and launching initiatives
>>> ourselves.
>>> 
>>> That's just my two cents; what do others think?
>>> 
>>> Emily
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Eleanor Grant 
>>> <eleanor7000 at gmail.com <mailto:eleanor7000 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi All - Since I haven't been at every meeting, forgive me if
>>> I've missed something. Have we ever discussed as a group the idea
>>> of taking positions on any public policies?  Such as, for
>>> example, whether Canada should be joining in the NATO deployment
>>> to Latvia? Or whether the TPP and other trade deals may be a
>>> threat to implementing climate change policies?  Or the way
>>> poverty is a form of violence, and how to reduce it?  Or the
>>> justice system and why a disproportionate number of Aboriginal
>>> people are incarcerated?  Or whether Canada should take in more
>>> refugees?  Or whether to support the BDS movement of peaceful
>>> resistance to Israel's Occupation? Just to name a few issues that
>>> are much on the hearts and minds of all of us who care about
>>> building peace in our community and our world. Do we perhaps need
>>> a time to clarify what we see our role as?  Are we happy to
>>> simply react to issues that our component groups happen to be
>>> working on at the time?  That could be OK, if we've decided that
>>> KWPeace should play that role. Let the issue of free bus passes
>>> for the poor be the impetus for us to clarify what we want to be
>>> about as a group. Eleanor On 23 Jul 2016 12:59, "Emily Mininger"
>>> <e.mininger at gmail.com <mailto:e.mininger at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi All!
>>> 
>>> Let me know if you think there's anything I failed to write in
>>> the minutes that's important.
>>> 
>>> Also, Nadine Quehl from the Alliance Against Poverty wanted to
>>> know if she can list KW Peace as endorsing their call for free
>>> transit for target groups:
>>> 
>>> Alliance Against Poverty (AAP) is planning to speak at Regional 
>>> Council to call for Free Transit for folks on OW/ODSP and we are
>>> contacting other anti-poverty organizations to ask for
>>> endorsement. Please let me know if we can add KW Peace to our
>>> list of organizations that endorse this campaign. You can read
>>> more about it on our website: www.allianceagainstpoverty.com 
>>> <http://www.allianceagainstpoverty.com/>
>>> 
>>> Please let me know if you think we should endorse this campaign
>>> as KW Peace. I personally am in favour.
>>> 
>>> It was lovely to see you all on Wed. Next meeting is August 17th,
>>> pending confirmation of Stirling space availability.
>>> 
>>> Have a good weekend!
>>> 
>>> Emily
>>> 
>>> -- Emily Mininger PeaceQuest KW Affiliate Facilitator
>>> 
>>> Email: e.mininger at gmail.com <mailto:e.mininger at gmail.com> Phone: 
>>> 519-568-3879 Twitter: @PeaceQuestKW Facebook: 
>>> facebook.com/peacequest.ca <http://facebook.com/peacequest.ca> 
>>> Website: peacequest.ca <http://peacequest.ca/>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- Emily Mininger PeaceQuest KW Affiliate Facilitator
>>> 
>>> Email: e.mininger at gmail.com <mailto:e.mininger at gmail.com> Phone: 
>>> 519-568-3879 <tel:519-568-3879> Twitter: @PeaceQuestKW Facebook: 
>>> facebook.com/peacequest.ca <http://facebook.com/peacequest.ca> 
>>> Website: peacequest.ca <http://peacequest.ca/>
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> - -- 
> 
> 
> - --
> Bob Jonkman <bjonkman at sobac.com>          Phone: +1-519-635-9413
> SOBAC Microcomputer Services             http://sobac.com/sobac/
> Software   ---   Office & Business Automation   ---   Consulting
> GnuPG Fngrprnt:04F7 742B 8F54 C40A E115 26C2 B912 89B0 D2CC E5EA
> 
> 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2
> Comment: Ensure confidentiality, authenticity, non-repudiability
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAleXb44ACgkQuRKJsNLM5erM9QCfWSxo/0ucLJIK1oZCFUUA0yz1
> 9QAAn1HFmn5EqvxHEj0gFcXn6i8kdWeZ
> =wtcK
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kwpeace.ca/pipermail/groups_kwpeace.ca/attachments/20160726/8d364a55/attachment.htm>