Login Join IOPS

How To Become a Spokesperson for IOPS

  • Written by:
  • Published on:
  • Categories:
  • Comments:
  • Share:

IOPS has no spokespersons – yet. No one is mandated to speak on behalf of IOPS. I think it is time to change that. How?

In 2003, Andrej Grubacic held a speech entitled Towards Another Anarchism, in which he read an outline of a new anarchist international he had been given to the audience. I don’t know the provenance of that outline (handed down to him engraved on golden plates?) and I have not heard any further news about the initiative, but the outline resembles the basic idea underlying IOPS. You might even go so far as to think that IOPS is an embodiment of it.

One item of this outline cannot be found back in IOPS, though. After an exposition of some principles, the text goes on:

“Anyone who accepts these principles is a member of the Anarchist International and everyone who is a member of the Anarchist International is empowered to act as a spokesperson if they so desire.“

Why don’t we as IOPS embrace the same idea, at least for the issue of spokespersons? Then everyone who is a member of IOPS is empowered to act as a spokesperson if they so desire.

The assumption is, of course, that members will do so in good faith, representing IOPS as well as they can. In particular, every member will be empowered to sign declarations in support of struggling activists, or sign petitions, on behalf of IOPS, whenever the aims are in accordance with our values and mission. Other occasions may arise in public debates, or when holding an event organized by IOPS (that is, by members acting on behalf of IOPS).

Some care should be taken if the relevant issue is in the heart of a topic for which there already is a specific IOPS group, like a project or chapter. When aware of an identifiable diversity of views on some issue within IOPS, spokespersons should acknowledge that diversity.

Discussion 13 Comments

  • Bat Chainpuller 11th Nov 2016

    Not sure what you saying exactly but a mandated role for doing this seems a bit pointless at the moment. This place isn't really anything yet. It's scrambling and in my opinion (that's what IMO means everyone, you know when you see that. Like BFF which I used to think meaht best fucking friend, or FYI, meant, fuck you imbecile) not anything to write home to mum about. Members just do what they can. But I doubt at the moment I would really ever mention that I was a member of IOPS or a representative of something that isn't really anything at all and has 3000 odd members, most of whom seem to be doing nothing let alone talking to one another. I mean there is a chapter in London that is doing its best to separate itself from the international or this website. Started their own even. They should be called LOPS, not the London chapter of IOPS. Just call yourselves the London Organisation for a Participatory Society. Splitters! When I sign on to anything, I do not write down member of IOPS if it asks if I belong to anything. Because this place isn't anything yet. It's still just a website waiting to be shut down when the money dries up.

    Mandated role. Nah. Just go with the flow. As I noted on Antonio's latest blog, I don't even know what organise means anymore. It seems I should know, that it be obvious but it actually isn't.

    • Lambert Meertens 11th Nov 2016

      Right now no one has the right to speak for IOPS. The idea is that every member will have this right, just by virtue of being a member.

      Pointless? I have received requests from journalists to identify a spokesperson for IOPS, to which I replied we had no such persons. I have seen more than a few lists of organizations supporting some action in which IOPS would have fitted well but was missing. At the moment it is almost a secret that IOPS exists at all. IMHO (IYKWIM) we need to work more on presenting ourselves to the rest of the world.

    • Bat Chainpuller 12th Nov 2016

      Pointless had more to do with the fact that IOPS at the moment isn't really anything or functioning at all, so to have a spokesperson seems pointless to me. But if "people", by which I mean members, reckon "we" need one, so be it. Jeepers, a secret that it exists? It doesn't really exist does it? It's got 3000 signerupperers, of which a little over one hundred voted recently and now of which only about 11 (since I last looked) have voted regarding the financial departments roles. In the eyes of the activist world, it doesn't, even in the eyes of some who helped start it. Journos always want that specific person to talk to, the "spokesperson". I remember Graeber talking about this issue once. Can't remember much detail but.

    • Claire Bruhn 12th Nov 2016

      Stop being suck a negative Nancy, Chainpuller, but I like your profile photo, it is befitting.

    • Bat Chainpuller 12th Nov 2016

      Oh come on Claire. It has nothing to do with being negative. There are five to ten people or something using this site. Just using the site. And even then they aren't really doing much. I can handle the idea of some mandated roles if people want to fill them. No problem. But spokesperson? My opinion is, can we wait a little on that one. I'm still wrapping my head around all the other mandating going on. Just till this place actually becomes something, if at all. Please. And it's always good to have a dickhead around. Otherwise all the positivity and niceness becomes overwhelming. Diversity you know.

  • Claire Bruhn 12th Nov 2016

    Five to Ten might be a bit generous. It is nice to have a diversity dickhead on the docket.

    • Bat Chainpuller 12th Nov 2016

      Maybe you could hand them out at the entrance, DDDs. Diversity Dickhead Dockets. And NPCs - Nice Person Certificates. Like tagging people so you know what you're gonna get and anyone with a DDD would be prohibited from speaking on behalf of the organisation, or whatever this is, to journos particularly.

    • Claire Bruhn 13th Nov 2016

      I could hand things out at the entrance, but then we'd be a little heavy on dishing out the D's. Maybe since you are so mouthy, you could offer your speaking services.

    • Bat Chainpuller 13th Nov 2016

      I'm laughing. Now I'm "so mouthy". Anything else you wish to tell me Claire?

  • Claire Bruhn 13th Nov 2016

    Glad to make you laugh. Yes, I have more to tell you, stay badass and awesome. I am serious though, you should think about being a spokesperson. Cheers.

    • Bat Chainpuller 13th Nov 2016

      Keith Jarrett-Piano
      Dewey redman-Sax
      Charlie Haden-Bass
      Paul Motian-Drums
      Guilherme Franco-Percussion
      Danny Johnson-Percussion


  • fred curran 13th Nov 2016

    I would like to second that nomination.

    • Lambert Meertens 14th Nov 2016

      And... you will be the proud possessor of your personal International Tragicomic Participatory Online Soap Box (ITPOSB).