Economikit and expressed ideologies
I think I owe you more of an explanation about my reactions to discussing imperialism, wokism, feminism, etc. in this group. Like re-ordering Wednesday's agenda so I could drop off and not sit through that agenda item.
It is not just practicality for practicality's sake exactly, although yes I get that way sometimes. Ok, often. :)
A small piece of local context: We live in an area with people that span a huge political spectrum; but there isn't any real wealth here (relative to the US anyhow). Our neighbors across the road I'm sure voted for Trump. He plays fiddle and does carpentry; she takes in foster kids and homeschools their kids. The husband was wearing a shirt the other day that said something like "proud white straight male". On the other hand, they went to Chicago to catch the train for a vacation, and he was outside the station by himself with his cowboy hat on, totally intimidated by the city hustle and bustle, and begged his family to not leave him alone again out there. Cultural superiority and cultural inferiority in the same package. Also on the other hand, they get along well with the mixed race couple from Chicago area who have a cabin next door. Their kids (boys) like guns and anything with a motor; but also help take care of the foster babies there. If he sees your car went into the ditch, he will drop everything, get his tractor and pull you out - they are good neighbors. There's a lot of gift economy here. I want and need people like these to be my allies. I would never talk with them about intersectionality. I would ask them if they wanted to be part of a neighborhood tool share or solar energy collective.
In our EK context, we came together as a group with some general unity around anti-capitalism, feminism, intersectionality, etc. I know we do not share exactly the same perspectives, but still it is an important part of our relationships. It may not seem like it, but I do think it is important to address those ideologies (using the term here as a short-hand for class, gender, race/culture and all forms of domination/subordination) in our practice together. I expect it is the deepest problem facing people who work for change.
In EK, we also came together with the intent to create something new and useful in the holochain ecosystem that can be offered to support groups who want to create change. I see this as primary, and the ideological part as what needs to go along with all work, as part of the process of creation. (For some processes, the ideological issues might be primary, say if we were doing consulting in group dynamics. But we are making modular configurable software.)
The ways I would think about addressing ideology in EK are:
1) Help each other constructively based on our existing unity and work together. Each of us has struggles, things we are working through ideologically (or materially for that matter). So it is helpful to understand where each of us is coming from, and then help each other in the context of our work together, creating a culture that encourages constructive criticism and self-criticism, and personal development to negate what capitalism bequeathed us. This culture only happens where there are concrete effects of concrete practice and willingness to address them, in my experience. And different groups might focus on this more or less, depending on level of unity, etc.
2) Make sure our software allows or encourages people to act and collaborate without destructive ideologies, at least in the adjacent possible. We have done some of that in Valueflows, in that it consciously supports networked P2P forms of organization, co-ops, etc., and allows people to figure out what they think is fair economically. It won't do anything about say consciously developing women's leadership; and for that matter people can create hierarchical economic relationships too. I'd be interested in how intersectional thinking might affect reputation schemes, chat, etc., when the time is right.
I don't see addressing ideology by spending a lot of time writing up our theoretical agreement and putting it front and center of what we are as a group, and front and center of what we offer to the world, for example on the home page of EK website. Those words become way less meaningful out of context, can be interpreted in many ways, and can even be insulting to the groups that have been historically subordinated, depending on how the words are presented, and what we are also actually doing to mitigate that harm. There can be a place for communicating those thoughts, but better in their context and not front and center.
On the other hand, I thought it was good we discussed the current P2PF issues because there is an actual organizational and ideological problem where we were each involved to greater or lesser extent, and also that affects the movement we are all part of. And we had options of how to respond in that context.
Also on the other hand, if you see something I am doing (or avoiding) that is holding back our work, please let me know, and I will try to do the same for you.