Developing a clear politic and raising one's consciousness is central to sustaining a progressive social movement. This process relies in part on the language and terms we use to talk about our activism. This contribution is not meant to be an exhaustive analysis of the terminology, but rather an attempt to open dialogue about the term "self-organization."
Loosely explained, self-organization is the actions of a collective of individuals who, sharing a similar politic, outlook and consciousness, work together towards a specific goal or goals. It denotes the self-activity of the oppressed and relies on our own power and strength rather than depending on the benevolence of "leaders."
Self-organization means that the people involved with the issues play a central and primary role in deciding and mobilizing their resistance. For this reason, self-organization is rooted in each individual's experience. Most frequently it happens in response to a direct experience or from an informed consciousness of another's experience. From experience or consciousness, a group of individuals act in solidarity to defend, reclaim or liberate themselves from exploitation or oppressive structures and forms.
Some examples of self-organization are: Gay activists in the 1980s staged "kiss-ins" or "love-ins" at Queen's Park (the provincial legislature) demanding public recognition and rights for same sex couples and the inclusion of sexual orientation into the Ontario Human Rights Code. Queen's University students who in the Winter of 2002 successfully occupied the principal's office, built a community movement, applied public pressure and made it impossible for the Ontario government to force through the deregulation of all educational programs at Queen's. Since the 1970s, groups of women have setup defence lines at abortion clinics to provide security to ensure woman who wanted to exercise their right to an abortion were not harassed or denied entrance by anti-choice, religious zealots. These lines are still active today in Toronto's Cabbage Town. All these examples are different forms of self-organization, but they all demonstrate that self-organization is not the act of one isolated individual working for change, but a group of people working together for a particular end.
As activists interested in building strongly rooted movements that create change, we must delve further into the meaning of self-organization. The one consistent underlying factor associated with self-organization is collectively working for change in a way that is free from the stifling of bureaucrats and bureaucratic structures. A concrete example of this is the earlier work of CAW flying squads who, independent of their leadership, collectively participated in community actions defending immigrant rights from political, xenophobic clogs in the system. Another example is the mobilization of thousands of activists into affinity groups and their participation in spokes councils to formulate collective, but also autonomous, resistance in Quebec City in 2001.
Self-organization takes place through a loose relationship of networks removed from dominant power structures. This is why self-organization often results in independent structures like rank and file caucuses in unions, affinity groups, flying squads, community defence lines or coalitions that recognize that many of the traditional institutions or bodies are not effective in bringing about change but need to be forced or pushed to do so.
Self-organization is a means of challenging and working free from bureaucratic practices. For this reason, it is often associated with the phrase "socialism from below." Both emphasize grassroots forms of organizing developed by the oppressed and exploited against oppressive social and economic structures and that rely on their own power and activity rather than depending on a small group of "leaders," the state or parliamentarians. In this model of organizing, all individuals play a role and multiple voices are integrated. People have collective ownership over their actions.
People are politicized through self-organization, in part because of the actions they must take in order to push forward the demands of their struggle. Forms of direct activism, embodying a diversity of tactics and actions, must be enacted to ensure that the struggle and development of a self-organized group transpires into more than another bureaucratic layer in the movement. Through different forms of direct action, activist can develop a radical consciousness and become aware of their power.
Action oriented self-organization enables people to make gains on their terms rather than negotiating and settling for what the exploiter (the employer, the state, police, the corporate capitalist) hand out. But, it is important to remember that direct engagement and discussion with others is a necessary piece of the puzzle prior to acting to avoid replicating top-down strategies.
A prerequisite for self-organizing is rank-and-file or community activists talking to others "where they are at" - focusing on common struggles and grievances. Along with establishing direct relationships and building a network based on trust, at the heart of self-organization is democratic transparency. This means that meetings are open, inclusive and accessible; educational materials are be accessible (for example, available in different languages) and distributed to everyone to keep them informed; teach-ins, and other actions are directed at building skills and relationships based on common awareness; and decision making practices are informed by an anti-oppression framework.
An explicit emphasis on building an open democratic framework is critical. Without building a group identity, or a dynamic that has an organizational foundation different from that which reinforces hierarchical structures, the struggles and gains of those self-organizing can not develop a sustained movement of resistance that effectively moves to challenge the bigger picture of global capitalism and entrenched systems of oppression. Furthermore, for self-organization to become a catalyst for sustained resistance, it must translate into more than ungrounded, single efforts of pushing bureaucrats to pass motions of endorsement.
Although rank and file unionists are often centrally placed in the discussion of self-organization, primarily because union workers have a base to organize from, a common setting of struggle and a familiarity, it is essential that we challenge the notion that only workers can experience and engage in a process of self-organization. Public and private unions in Canada and Quebec report that only 30% of the working force is unionized. This means a majority of workers are left without a central in which to organize. Further, considering the economic downturn, increased job loss and contractual work, insecure work conditions and changes to employment standards, unionized workers are increasingly placed in vulnerable positions.
Such fragility also results from today's over-bureaucratization of work, culture, organization and decision-making. This is then exacerbated by worker fragmentation, racism and the lack of community within the workplace. Combined, these factors serve to work against the building of a layer of activists that understand and push for self-organization within currents of the working class. The Days of Action in Ontario are a prime example of how the momentum of workers and movement building has been quashed by the labour leaderships' bureaucratic reliance on electoral politics, rather than collective action, for winning social change.
Many struggles in history have also failed because, in practice, they have tolerated and accepted covert and overt forms of racism, sexism and homophobia (progressive language in collective agreements, by-laws and hiring procedures aside). Making the link between class exploitation and racism and sexism and homophobia is essential in order for self-organization to move beyond recreating hierarchical forms of organization. It is also crucial in order to ensure that the practices of the exploiters and oppressors are not entrenched systemically in our organizing. Instead of merely focusing on the exploitation between employer and employee, effective self-organization must challenge all oppressions facing members.
We should remember and celebrate the victories, big and small, that are won through self-organization. The CUPE 3903 strike at York University in Toronto was a bold and successful attempt to challenge bureaucratic bargaining and picket line tactics. Even though similar battles remain, much ground has been gained. In particular, we have seen an increased radicalization and heightened consciousness. The rank-and-file resistance of workers - unionized and non-unionized - has translated into labour flying squads and independent caucuses that have empowered workers to physically and metaphorically walk away from bureaucratic models of leadership, most notably by turning towards the fence in Quebec City.
Developing a common understanding of the meaning and importance of self-organization is necessary for activists to imagine the multiplicity of means through which we can resist global capitalism and the multiple social oppressions that accompany it. This struggle can start with challenging labour bureaucracy, fighting for subsidized day care, attending the prom with your same sex partner in a Catholic school or fighting to protect immigrants and refugees from deportation pushed by racist systems of state terror. As a starting point for generating this "activist imagination," we must first engage in the discussion on the significance of self-organizing as a necessary and fundamental principle for "breaking it down" - the "it" and how depends on you!