At the request of those involved, the name of the village is not
mentioned and the first names have been changed because some residentsfear finding themselves in the spotlight, or being labeled based on the
media's orientation. Real communalism in a village is the result of a
process that is certainly exciting, but remains fragile given its
innovative nature. It is imperative to respect the rhythms of the
residents and especially the choices made to disseminate their experience.
There is a small village in the Meuse region with 190 inhabitants that
has been practicing direct democracy since 2020. It's arguably a
perfectly normal, working-class village, where the electorate, as is
typical for this region, overwhelmingly favors the National Rally.
Nothing, therefore, particularly predisposed it to this unique
democratic experiment that we are about to present to you.
Eugène is the mayor of this village based on what we would call in our
circles "libertarian municipalism" but which the residents call: "direct
democracy through the Citizens' Assembly." Neither Eugène nor the
municipal council make important decisions; everything has been decided
by the village's citizens' assemblies for the past 4.5 years. It is the
only village in France to operate in this way. We wanted to learn more
about this experience and spoke several times with Eugène and Louise,
residents of this self-managed village. In this article, we are not
engaging in a critical political discussion; we are simply reporting on
what he and she explained to us.
The origin of libertarian municipalism in the village
Eugène and Louise are not without reason in the genesis of this
experience. These two activists met a little over 20 years ago; he came
from ecological currents, she from Trotskyist currents. Their journey
led them to want to break with the militant insularity and to find
themselves in the libertarian municipalism of Mr. Bookchin.
Eugène was already mayor of his town from 2001 to 2008, but with a
classic mayoral mandate. He had tried, like all somewhat progressive
mayors, public meetings where everyone could give their opinion, but
people didn't show up. He then emerged dissatisfied with this mayoral
mandate. About ten years ago, Janet Bielh's book "Libertarian
Municipalism" changed his life, particularly through its preface by
Annick Stevens. This book concretely addresses the problem he has always
posed through the practical and bold approach it poses. Eugène adheres
to the idea that the population can regain power through grassroots
assemblies. This is not a new idea (Chiapas, Rojava, the Soviets, the
Paris Commune, etc.), but for him, it provides a concrete response to
how it can be done in today's society. The idea of participating in the
municipal elections, with a program of direct democracy, seemed obvious
to him.
In their quest to move beyond the militant intimacy, Louise and Eugène
had begun by creating a self-managed association with others in
Commercy, a place where everyone could come and where everything could
be discussed, to do both festive and more political things. The idea was
already in some minds to lay the foundations for the conquest of the
city by the Citizens' Assembly. That's when the Yellow Vests arrived.
Eugène happily joined the Yellow Vest movement. He immediately tore up
all his political and union cards. He no longer wanted to be part of any
kind of militant group.
And it is no coincidence that it was in Commercy that the assemblyist
fringe of the Yellow Vests was launched to try to structure the
movement: the political outcome of the movement was to be the seizure of
power by the grassroots without demanding or begging for social advances
or measures at the highest level of the State. One of the strategies
envisaged was the seizure of municipalities. Then, La commune des
communes was formed, which was a collective following the Assemblies of
Assemblies of the Yellow Vest movement, to propose to people to take
power in their municipalities and run them through direct democracy.
There were thus quite a few lists that presented themselves in the
municipal elections, some in direct democracy, most in participatory
democracy. All the direct democracy lists were defeated, including in
Commercy where it only received 10%.
Eugène doesn't live in Commercy, but in a small village nearby. In this
village, the mayor didn't want to run again and came to ask Eugène if he
wanted to return to work. Eugène jumped at the chance and found about
ten running mates (a list of 11 people was needed) to whom he proposed a
charter: an assembly would decide and make all the village's major
decisions, and the elected officials on the list would undertake to
carry out these decisions. Everyone agreed on the principle. These
running mates weren't activists, but people involved in the village, or
willing to get involved, and Eugène's idea was accepted out of simple
common sense. The village's residents had mixed opinions about this
proposed system before the elections. Most people were skeptical. Since
there were no other lists, the list was elected. For Eugene, if there
had been another list, their list would not have been elected because
the idea seemed too far-fetched.
Following the elections, a first citizens' assembly was convened.
Thirty-five people attended, which was a real success. There were 42 at
the next one, and 45 at the third. There were up to 80 people, which
means that people very quickly took to the idea of the Assembly as
something completely natural.
How the Citizens' Assembly Works
At the end of each assembly, three people are designated to organize the
next one. These three people are responsible, on the one hand, for
collecting suggestions from the suggestion box that all residents can
use. There are also, of course, ongoing projects for which Eugène and
the municipal councilors are able to inform the three organizers, as
well as a number of major topics. For example, the next topic will
concern the development of the village square. The three people decide
on the date and draw up an agenda. They summon people to the Assembly,
where the agenda can be modified. The invitation is sent by email, text
message, post, and Telegram (a Telegram group has indeed been created
where most of the people are now, 94 people). By decision of the
Assembly itself, proxies are prohibited. For Eugène and Louise, people
have truly understood that proxies completely eliminate the virtue of
the Assembly's debates (and that by attending the debates, one can
change one's mind). However, what is authorized and practiced is
videoconferencing. People use it only when they cannot attend in person.
If a member of the Assembly requests a secret ballot, it is granted. A
secret ballot procedure has therefore been implemented via Telegram.
There is no pre-established frequency, it depends on the topics. Between
3 and 8 per year. The assemblies always last 2 hours, which is valuable
for encouraging participation. Afterwards, there is an aperitif and
sometimes a collective meal. The assemblies take place in a municipal
hall which is a former inn, so there is everything: bar, beer tap, cold
room, etc. On average, there are about forty people present,
representative of the village population in age and gender. At the
beginning, few people spoke, but now everyone dares to speak, especially
women. There is a president, a moderator (who has never had to
intervene) and a secretary.
For Eugène and Louise, it works wonderfully because there was no theory
upfront. The Assembly addresses important issues for the village that
directly affect everyone's life. There is a strong interest in these
topics, and anyone who wants to come and vote comes. People know that
this is where things are decided and that they are the ones who decide.
Little by little, those who didn't come much at first started to come
because everyone knows that being absent means not being able to
participate in the decision. However, day-to-day management decisions
are handled by the municipal council (like buying a new photocopier),
with the Assembly only deciding on important issues so as not to weigh
down the debates.
Some examples of decisions of the Assembly
Topics covered included, for example, road safety in the village, the
creation of a multi-sports ground, and renewable energy projects (a
community wind turbine and a collective solar self-consumption project
with storage). The topics are taken up and presented, either by the
mayor and councilors, or by those with a point of view, on a voluntary
basis. Many specific skills are brought together and automatically find
their use in shedding light on discussions and making proposals.
On road safety, for example, a small group of people naturally formed: a
worker who does road markings, a truck driver, a farmer, a bus driver, a
parent of a student. The project was proposed to the next Citizens'
Assembly with all sorts of modifications: 30 km/h, zebra crossings, stop
signs. There were two "yield signs" proposed for the main street to slow
down cars driving too fast. Eugène's job was to submit this project for
validation by the DDT. The DDT didn't validate everything: it was
necessary to put stop signs in place of the "yield signs" because of
visibility. So Eugène ordered two stop signs, and then when the stop
signs arrived, people said, "But what's that?" He explained the reasons,
but the reactions were: "Yes, but that wasn't validated by the Citizens'
Assembly. Stop signs aren't the same. Cars stop and it makes noise." A
new assembly had to be reconvened. Eugène then considered: "I had acted
like a local potentate, like any good mayor who behaves with knowledge
of the matter. I'm the one in the know, the authorities told me how to
do it, so I do it like that. Well, the Assembly had to validate it, and
they were absolutely right. They kicked my ass." The Assembly met again
and validated the stops.
Another topic of debate was the question of installing surveillance
cameras in the village, at the suggestion of a resident following
attempted burglaries. Eugène and Louise were convinced that this would
be accepted, as the village overwhelmingly voted RN. The Assembly met.
After the discussions, there were only 5 votes for the cameras out of
the 45 people present. The first round of arguments focused on the
effectiveness/cost ratio. The gendarmes themselves had said that few
cases were solved with the cameras, given that thieves wear balaclavas
and change their license plates. This already put people off. The second
round of arguments focused on who sees the camera footage: the mayor, a
designated person from the village, and the gendarmerie. One person
said, "If I come home with my lover at 2 a.m., I don't want the mayor to
know." This made everyone laugh. The arguments against it then came
thick and fast: "During Covid, when we went to other people's houses for
drinks, if there had been cameras, you'd realize." The project was
rejected by the overwhelming majority of the population. For Eugène and
Louise, if this had happened in a traditional city council meeting, the
latter would probably have voted for the cameras, attributing to the
population the fact that they wanted cameras.
Another example of a grant. Eugène has a history of activism that
everyone in the village knows about against the radioactive waste
disposal center in Bure. For the purchase of the restaurant [see below],
the town could have received a grant through Andra, the National Agency
for Radioactive Waste Management, which buys up towns near Bure by
showering them with money. Eugène was obviously against it, but out of
honesty, he submitted the issue to the Citizens' Assembly. The vast
majority decided to apply for the grant, and Eugène had to make this
request... which is clearly still making everyone laugh.
As for the municipal budget, it isn't discussed in assemblies. In their
village, they decide on a case-by-case basis. Thus, the municipal
council looks at what has been spent, what has been earned, and the cash
flow. People are informed of all this. The budget serves the decisions
made throughout the year without setting things in stone. At the
accounting level, the municipal council then modifies the budget if
necessary. This may seem surprising, but for Eugène, there is a budget
fetish fueled by a collective illusion. For him, it is an artifact that
seeks to set things in stone.
Today, the village has a municipal still (the only village in France), a
communal orchard with 35 trees (apples, pears, cherries, mirabelle
plums), and a press that people can use for free. There is a project for
a giant wind turbine that would belong to the municipality itself, not a
private developer, which would be a first in France. The building permit
has been filed. The wind turbine will provide electricity for 3,000 or
4,000 homes. It will belong to the municipality, which will resell the
electricity for the benefit of residents. Also planned is a
gravitational micro-step storage system, that is, a collective solar
autonomy system to which a storage system is added to provide
electricity at night as well: there will be two ponds, one at the bottom
of the village, one 100 meters higher. With the electricity produced
during the day, the water from the lower basin will be pumped, and at
night, the upper basin will spin a turbine that will release the stored
electricity. Again, this is completely unique in France. All residents
will be able to have electricity, which will be cheaper because it will
be purchased from the municipality instead of from EDF. And the price of
electricity will not vary for 20 to 25 years, so it will not be subject
to market fluctuations.
According to Louise and Eugène, none of these rather ambitious projects
could have been envisaged without the Citizens' Assembly, because the
support and endorsement of the majority of residents could never have
been clearly verified, and the municipal council would therefore not
have dared to do so.
But the topic that sparked the most passion was apparently the purchase
of a restaurant so that it wouldn't disappear. Eighty people came twice,
within a month of each other, to decide.
Class struggle through the Citizens' Assembly
The only restaurant in the village was up for sale, but since it
couldn't find a buyer, it would close, and there would no longer be a
restaurant or guesthouse in the town. The idea arose that the town
should buy it. This was highly debated and contested because the old
families of the village, mostly conventional farmers and entrepreneurs,
instinctively put up a front: a restaurant had to make a profit, it had
to be profitable, the town had no business getting involved in these
matters, the work would be the town's responsibility, and the
municipality's budget would be burdened. Some argued that municipalizing
a business was like "communism." This was, in fact, an instinctive
political opposition that was not at all a majority, as what followed
would show. The authority of this group, although a minority, may have
seemed significant during the first assembly. And many ordinary people
said they were "crushed," paralyzed by these seemingly common-sense
arguments.
But the magic of the Citizens' Assembly is that it dilutes the power of
those most accustomed to wielding it and allows for freer thinking.
First of all, as opponents of the purchase rightly pointed out at the
first meeting, where 75 people were present, the file had flaws. The
companies' quotes for the work were missing, there were conflicting
estimates for the property's value, and so on. It was then decided by a
large majority to postpone the decision. At the second meeting, which
took place a month later, there were 80 people present. This was the
topic that everyone was passionate about. Opponents of the purchase were
then largely outnumbered by a secret ballot. Women, in particular, who
had felt crushed at the first meeting, spoke out a lot at this second
meeting and influenced the final decision. The result was clear: 65 for,
12 against and the rest abstained.
It was a majority of ordinary people who brought solidarity into play
because the couple who were supposed to take over the restaurant are
very involved in the village and they are modest people. There was a
kind of instinctive solidarity that was shown towards them. Many said:
"it's the big guys against the small guys." It was a bit of a
caricature, certainly, but there was still that feeling. Those opposed
to the municipalization of the restaurant made their voices heard, but
they didn't succeed, as the dominant figures in society usually do, in
bringing the others along because their power in an assembly is
completely diluted. For Louise, this assembly allowed her to take a step
forward. It took place three years after the elections, that is to say,
after three years of experience, of learning from discussions. Many
people took ownership of many things and they also understood the
interest of the common good.
Following this restaurant purchase, a few minority residents
unfortunately decided to no longer participate in the assemblies. Others
returned and again had to bow to a similar issue. Indeed, there were
farm buildings up for sale. The idea of having the municipality purchase
these buildings arose in order to rent them to circus people for their
small winter jobs, which suited the circus performers. These residents
opposed it for the same reasons as for the restaurant: it's not up to a
municipality to manage this or own so much property. But the Assembly
decided otherwise. And for the second time, the choice to communalize
property was made by a large majority of residents.
What about the legality of the decisions made by the Citizens' Assembly?
There isn't one, given that every decision of the Assembly is validated
by a deliberation of the municipal council. This deliberation is itself
systematically validated by the prefectural authority's legality review.
Like any decision of any municipal council, those of the self-managed
village can naturally be challenged in court. But that wouldn't occur to
anyone. Indeed, on the one hand, nothing that is decided is done
lightly, and collective intelligence is very wise and cautious. And on
the other hand, it would be psychologically very complicated for
minorities to legally challenge a decision made by the majority of the
population. That would amount to alienating neighbors and friends, not
just a mayor or a few councilors.
The impact of the Citizens' Assembly in the village
Today, many residents appear very proud of their Citizens' Assembly.
There is no tension in the village apart from the few people who regret
the authoritarian functioning of the old municipal council because it
gave them the illusion of being the repository of common sense. There
are also people who are indifferent, but they are truly a minority: out
of 120 voters who could participate, 107 have participated at least once
in an assembly. There will always be a few people hostile to the
Assembly, but most of them still come because issues are important to
them. There is a hard core of about thirty people who are really
passionate about it, capable of defending the Assembly outside the
village. The others come sporadically.
The village atmosphere was considerably improved by the Assembly. People
who had stopped talking to each other found themselves in this place
again and were encouraged to meet again and exchange ideas. All the
tensions haven't disappeared, but they have faded. There's a dynamic for
doing things together that didn't exist before. People have gotten to
know each other simply because at the Assembly, people don't insult or
shout at each other. For example, there was a centuries-old tension
between hunters and hikers. Today, they are able to talk to each other
because they have a framework for discussion. The hunters also
participated in designing and digging the hiking trails. Louise
concedes, "I myself didn't see myself having sympathy for hunters. I do
now. The hunters bring us wild boars for our convivial meals."
The town now has a pétanque court and a barbecue area next to the
children's field (a multi-sports field chosen by the Assembly). This
brings the generations together, and on several occasions, community
events have been organized for all generations. To illustrate the
village's dynamic, last year the village association launched a Celtic
festival. There were 55 village volunteers for a village of 180
inhabitants. Everyone recognizes that the Assembly brings a different
atmosphere to the village.
Far-right electorate?
In the elections, the RN won 40% in the presidential elections and 60%
in the European elections. How can we understand that the current system
has no impact at the electoral level? For Eugène and Louise, it seems
that people don't make the connection between what is done locally and
what is happening at the national level. The only thing the Assembly
allows is to create trust within the village and to be able to discuss.
Eugène and Louise can thus freely discuss their ecological,
anti-capitalist political ideas, etc. And conversely, Eugène and Louise
can understand why many people are led to vote RN.
Eugène and Louise explain: it's more of a working-class population,
modest, afraid of the future and economically insecure. The world around
doesn't change because there's an Assembly. It's the village that
changes, but people are still, at the national level, under the
influence of the media. The media scream that we're insecure, that it's
constantly increasing, that it's a jungle. The people of this
self-managed village see, like everyone else, the suburbs burning, the
little grandmothers having their bags snatched, the teachers being
stabbed by terrorists, the smallest news item like a little girl being
raped. The country is on fire and blood for the inhabitants, and it's
mainly immigrants who are singled out by the mainstream media: so
"quick, the RN!" It's the media frenzy in which we operate that pushes
this. Logically, they also vote for the National Rally because the
betrayals have been so enormous for so long that it is deeply ingrained.
For the majority of people, the National Rally is anti-establishment,
and we haven't tried it. The National Rally's discourse appears very
fraternal: people must help each other at the French level. If we are
not politically equipped to understand where the National Rally comes
from and what it really wants, it is a complete illusion.
The Assembly cannot reverse such things in four years. Eugène and Louise
point out, "In a citizens' assembly, one must be humble and not believe
one holds the universal truth and claim to be lecturing. It is an
exchange between citizens, as equals, where everyone defends their point
of view with respect and kindness." For Louise and Eugène, this is the
only way to make a difference.
The extension of libertarian municipalism?
The question of extending this experiment arises. For Eugène and Louise,
their experiment is merely a micro-laboratory. The only proof that has
been provided is that citizens are mature enough to manage themselves.
Moreover, in surrounding villages, people are beginning to consider
municipal lists based on the same framework. But Eugène and Louise know
it will be complicated. If there are two lists, the "direct democracy"
list will certainly be defeated because it is too far-fetched for
people. On the other hand, Eugène is convinced that in his village, the
direct democracy list would even win against another list because,
through experience, this direct democracy system has become firmly
established in people's minds.
There was a similar experience in Saillans before 2020. A list was
formed around a useless project. This list gave the population a voice.
This was publicized in activist circles. This list was defeated in the
following election. It seems that several factors caused this defeat,
according to what Eugène was able to gather: The first reason is that
people got tired of the number of meetings. The list leaders wanted
people to take charge of all subjects and become experts in everything.
However, managing administrative files is time-consuming and tedious. In
his village, Eugène is the one who manages the administrative side
because he is used to doing it by profession. The Assembly only decides
without having to manage everything afterwards... which for Louise
raises questions about the power that experts can have. The second
reason, still according to Eugène, is that it was politically colored.
They were ecologists, and so the projects had to have that orientation.
For Eugène, this is the limit of organized groups: "We are happy to
practice direct democracy as long as there are safeguards. In our
country, there are no safeguards, and we defend our ideas in the
Assembly with the hope that they will have a majority, but accepting in
advance the possibility of losing... or changing our minds."
What about the extension of this model and the future? For Eugène, the
experience is largely reproducible. First of all, there are nearly
20,000 municipalities in France with fewer than 500 inhabitants. Then;
in medium-sized or fairly large cities, there could be a division into
truly autonomous neighborhoods, each neighborhood becoming like a
village, and the city becoming like a community of municipalities. A
community of municipalities can very well accommodate citizen assemblies
with a back-and-forth between the basic assemblies and the assembly of
the community of municipalities for major projects. Beyond that, in a
village or a neighborhood, there are a huge number of highly political
subjects that can be decided at the grassroots level: energy autonomy,
food autonomy, roads, housing, living environment, sports facilities,
etc. For Eugène, this leaves a huge field of possibilities for local
democracy to truly be exercised and not just on sub-subjects. Obviously,
if this spreads, and if self-managed municipalities come to federate,
one could fear that one day there will be a blockage at the state level
for certain decisions. For Eugène still, these refusals will be much
more difficult for the population to accept if it is they who
co-constructed the projects. There would then be an awareness that the
system prevents us from implementing common-sense measures, whether
economic, ecological, or social. This could be a factor facilitating the
construction of a balance of power if necessary.
For him, if we succeed in creating a connection, in showing people that
they are capable of thinking, of reflecting, of deciding for themselves,
if we succeed in popularizing this idea, in inspiring people, we are
laying the foundations. "In our village, people say of their own accord
that this is how it should work everywhere else, at the local level as
well as in the National Assembly. There is no need to profess any theory
or any final goal. It comes directly from collective experience. People
come to it naturally. The municipalization of buildings, the communal
wind turbine, energy autonomy, ... all of this comes from the Assembly,
from the will of the people. It comes from their experience and these
are natural human aspirations. The Assembly simply provided the
framework for these aspirations to be revealed." Someone said to Eugène
not long ago: "Ah, I like you better now that you're more involved in
politics like before." Eugene replied that he was still involved in
politics, "yes, but it's not the same, you're involved in local
politics, you're taking care of your village. I like doing politics like
that with you."
RV and Muriel
http://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4385
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten