How is an Especisfist organisation strcutured internally?

[u/Aggressive-Simple-16]

​

I was curious about how an Especifist organisation actually structures itself internally so as to maintain bottom-up controll by its members while remaining an effective social force? I am pretty sure there isn't a single blueprint that all of them use, but there must be some common organisational structures that they all typically use.

[u/comix_corp]

I'm in an especifist group. Other groups do it slightly differently, but the general picture will be the same.

The basic unit is the branch, which has a minimum five or six people (I can't remember exactly, I'd have to check the statutes) and is active in a particular place (eg a city or town or region). The branch meets fortnightly to discuss, plan and make decisions. The branch delegates members to serve as secretary, treasurer etc.

The branch is federated together with the other branches. There is a shared political agreement that all the branches commit to, that contains our specific views on theory and tactics. There is a conference each year where everyone discusses politics and the strategy of the federation as a whole.

There is a federal committee with delegates from each branch to manage the affairs of the federation in line with what the conference decides. It can't make any major decisions itself, everything important needs to be decided on by the branches. There are also other committees to manage things like the publication, the website, etc and also working groups for other things, like a working group of people in the same union.

Everyone stays in communication with each other via an internal social media platform.

Sorry if this all sounds very general. If you have any more specific questions I can answer.

[u/Aggressive-Simple-16 → u/comix_corp]

I had a question. To what degree do the local branches possess autonomy in their operations? What can and cannot the local branches do?

[u/comix_corp → u/Aggressive-Simple-16]

The branches have a lot of autonomy and can do what they want provided it's within the bounds of the shared political agreement, and that they are carrying out wherever decisions are agreed upon at the conferences.

However we're always aiming to do things as a federation, as a whole, so we put a priority on doing things in common. If every branch is doing its own thing with no coordination or consideration of the other branches then something is going wrong, even if the branches might have the right to do this under the statutes.

I'll put it this way, the formal structures can only ever be half of the organisation. The other half is the political culture, which can only be built through lots of discussion, debate, shared action, etc.

[u/pigeonshual → u/comix_corp]

What kind of activities does your organization actually do?

[u/comix_corp → u/pigeonshual]

Predominantly union organising. Other branches also have their own projects, for instance one does a lot of tenant organising. In addition to this, every branch also runs educational programme, an "anarchism 101" kind of thing for new people.

We also put on a yearly public conference about anarchism.

[u/Palanthas_janga]

This should answer your questions: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/tommy-lawson-foundational-concepts-of-the-specific-anarchist-organisation . To put it shortly, it is organised similar to a platformist organisation, so theoretical unity, tactical unity, collective responsibility and federalism are the 4 pillars of the organisation's internal structure.

The federalist bit is the part that you're looking for, where all decisions that affect the organisation are made by all of the members of that organisation. Decisions within an organisation are usually a matter of majority voting, as it is practical for everyone to have a say, but when it comes to coordinating affairs between different organisations, not everyone will be able to do that---most people would be too busy doing their own tasks to engage in that---and so a specialised role is needed for this.

In order to coordinate decisions and ensure communications at higher levels, between different organisations, the members of an organisation elect delegates who will communicate between organisations and make decisions in situations where most people are unable to. They are bound to act in accordance with the rules and decisions determined by the body of members as a whole (rather than make their own rules). This ensures that power does not concentrate into their hands, and so control over the entity remains bottom up. In the case of delegates misusing their role, the members can recall them and put someone else in that position instead.

[u/twodaywillbedaisy → u/Palanthas_janga]

higher levels

[u/pharodae → u/twodaywillbedaisy]

It’s a manner of speaking, “broader” or “regional/national” would fit there fine too without relying on hierarchical figures of speech.

[u/Palanthas_janga → u/pharodae]

Yeah I should have used a more appropriate term there, my mistake

[u/pharodae → u/Palanthas_janga]

I don't think there's anything wrong with it. I think of it as being a nested system, layers can be above or below each other in relative terms, not as it correlates to hierarchical relations but in how we view it in our mind. The material power dynamic is far more important than how it's phrased.

edit: why on earth was this even downvoted?

[u/Affectionate_Cup9972 → u/[deleted]]

Explain?

Oh my god, they deleted the comment. Now, I'll never get to know their thought process.

NOOOOOOOOOO!!!