The New MDS Website

"Monty, Sometimes you make sense, sometimes you simply distort reality to fit your beliefs."

This makes no sense. Monty never makes sense. Sense is to Monty what Kryptonite is to Superman.

"Yes members of the "banning brigade" have acted as asses and thrown insults,"

You're saying there is a banning brigade. So essentially you agree with Monty but
dispute his finer points.

The Banning Brigade has very consciously engaged in a program to deprive sds/mds members of basic rights. They have employed a form of institutionalized violence insofar as their "ownership" of websites and listervs would not exist without the entire structure of Bourgeois Right, and the "'legitimatized" violence of state power that enforces Bourgeois Right. Kicking people off listservs, deleting entire listservs, unilaterally altering the political definitions of the group that are displayed on the group's websites, and holding the online membership rosters as private property are all acts of indirect violence. Indirect because the full violent force of the state props up the "right" of the "owners" to impose these decisions upon our sds/mds collective.

The derision and disrespect for criticisms (going back to Banning Brigade disregard of democratic decisions made for the 2006 SDS Convention and the controversy which arose following the 2006 convention's decision to approve the formation of MDS, Inc.) which the Banning Brigade has dished out, and the crude insults they introduced into our sds/mds conversation have predictably resulted in more of the same, escalation of anger and frustration.

There may well be some members of the Banning Brigade who still sincerely believe they are trying to "protect" our new organization. But it is clear to most who have watched all this unfold for a year and a half, that control is a real motive of their actions, and the organization needs to protect itself against the "protectors".

The Banning Brigade has clearly failed to win anything even close to majority support for censorship, for purging critics of the unelected and elected leadership, and for their conscious program to create an sds/mds based upon excluding entire segments of the Left (see Rubenstein's formal motion to bar Leninists, in the minutes of the meeting, reprinted below). I am no Leninist nor a member of any Leninist party, but I share with many members the firm belief that the original SDS's strengths derived from its openness and non-exclusionism. Members of the Banning Brigade controlling faction have abused their control (unelected) of MDS websites and listservs to block any development of any democratic MDS decision making process online and even want to prevent decisions from being made at the MDS meeting planned for Chicago. Why? The only plausible answer is to avoid a democratic structure from being implemented, which very likely would result in their own ouster from all positions of responsibility in the organization. To prolong their unelected control over our organization's means of communication and our membership rosters, they are blocking our democracy itself.

Faced with such scoundrels, members have a right to defend ourselves. Even the bourgeois United Nations recognizes the right of people living under a military occupation to resist that occupation with violence. The right of revolution is a right of self-defense. Non-violence is a strategy and a tactic. It is not the same as pacifism. sds/mds was never and should never be a pacifist group.

Currently, the Banning Brigade, having failed to win majority support for its anti-democracy, is trying to persuade us to split MDS officially (as though we had any democratic way to decide to). They are consciously trying to exacerbate and escalate our disputes toward that end. They would love to see pro-democracy people break off and form another organization, and leave them in control of stolen membership rosters. Instead, they must be removed from their positions of control and democratic processes for resolving differences must be implemented. If any of them truly care about building, not splitting, MDS, they will step aside from any and all levers of power (websites and listservs) and allow the group to elect their replacements.

We ought to work this out online, because that is where most of us can be included in the decisions. A physical meeting, in Chicago or elsewhere, simply will not garner the same amount of participation.

[note: the minutes below are a draft which was never approved by a subsequent MDS, Inc. meeting. ]

MINUTES
Movement for a Democratic Society (MDS), Incorporated
Teleconference
-
October 11, 2006

Present: Thomas Good, Al Haber, Jay Jurie, Penny Rosemont, Bruce Rubenstein

Agenda: treasurers' report, discretionary (petty cash) spending, February 17th MDS meeting, MDS Board administrator, recognition of caucuses by MDS, structure committee, membership recruitment statement, MDS chapters, MDS Board composition.

Good and Jurie joined the meeting late due to connection difficulties.

Motion (introduced by Rubenstein): A monthly treasurer's report will be prepared and disseminated by Bruce Rubenstein. Seconded by Rosemont. Carried.

Motion (introduced by Rubenstein): the treasurer will have the ability to use discretion to issue checks in the amount of $100 for general expenses and $300 for bail. Multiple seconds. Carried.

Motion (introduced by Rubenstein): the next meeting of MDS will be held in New York City on February 17, 2006 and the NYC MDSers will take responsibility for all logistics. Carried.

Motion (introduced by Rubenstein): the MDS board will be populated by nominees put forth by MDS, Inc; students, and; others. Nominees shall be figures with national prominence and who are known to be non-sectarian. At the February 17th meeting of MDS (in New York) a slate will be presented. Individual nominees can be removed by introduction of a motion, should it carry. Seconded by Good. Carried.

Motion (introduced by Rubenstein): the MDS board needs an administrator (non-voting officer) to develop biographies for the public website and to do liaison work with the Board members. Devra Morice was nominated for this position. Seconded by Rosemont. Carried.

Motion (introduced by Rubenstein): No formal/official caucus will exist within MDS, Inc. No member of a Leninist Party can be a member of MDS. Discussion followed and the latter half of the motion (exclusionary criteria) was tabled. Haber agreed to work on appropriate language. Rosemont and Good proposed that MDS, Inc should be expressly anti-authoritarian. The caucus motion was seconded by Jurie and it carried.

Motion (introduced by Rubenstein): A structure committee composed of Jurie, Haber, Good, Rubenstein and Rosemont would look at documents in order to create a set of recommendations for a national (MDS) structure. This committee would work in concert with the Board administrator. After discussion this motion carried by consensus.

Haber introduced discussion on identifying member recruitment and preparing a membership recruitment statement as a goal. There was agreement this is essential.

Haber asked Good to identify all existing MDS chapters. They were: MDS New York, MDS Central Florida, MDS Northern Florida, MDS Los Angeles and MDS Alabama. New York and LA were identified as the most established chapters.

Haber introduced discussion of the composition of the MDS Board indicating a need to have it reflect the ethnic, gender (and other demographic), etc. composition of the US. Gender parity, racial parity and other issues were discussed and agreement was reached that the Board should reflect the makeup of the nation.

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:30 pm. Informal discussion followed.
Recorder:
Thomas Good
SDS/MDS New York City