In late January 2025, the Black Rose/Rosa Negra International Relations
Committee (BRRN - IRC) accepted an invitation to send a member of ourorganization to the 15th Encuentro Latinoamericano de Organizaciones
Populares y Autónomas (ELAOPA) or "Latin American Gathering of Popular
and Autonomous Organizations" in Santiago, Chile. Ketino, a militant of
BRRN, primarily joined the gathering in their capacity as a participant
in a US based abolitionist social movement organization. Below they
report on their experiences at ELAOPA XV. ---- by Ketino B. ----
Introduction ---- Encuentro Latinoamericano de Organizaciones Populares
y Autónomas (ELAOPA) emerged out of and as an alternative to the World
Social Forum, an annual gathering of global social movement
organizations that posed itself as a popular counter to the Davos World
Economic Forum and the organized forces of global capital. Over time,
some participants in the World Social Forum became dissatisfied with the
incorporation of political parties, NGO's, and even some private firms
into the proceedings. It's from this context that ELAOPA was born,
maintaining an insistence on an orientation to class struggle and the
independence of social movements from the state.
For a US audience, it is important to situate the phrase "encuentro",
noting that it signifies something a bit more than a simple "gathering."
An encuentro in the context of Latin American social movements is
typically marked by a commitment to collaboration, horizontality,
pluralism, and democracy.
ELAOPA has taken place regularly since 2003, circulating between
different Latin American countries with each iteration. In 2020 it
became a bi-annual gathering. Throughout its history it has successfully
incorporated a variety of organizations focused on social-environmental,
student, indigenous, queer, feminist, worker, and territory based
struggles. ELAOPA seeks to bring together these organizations on the
basis of their shared commitment to the following principles:
To build Popular Power
An anti-patriarchal and anti-colonial perspective
Popular protagonism and direct action
Class solidarity, mutual aid, and internationalism
This year more than 400 people participated in the event, together
representing more than 100 social movements from Latin American
countries such as Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil, and Paraguay, as
well as representatives from other countries such as the United States
and Germany.
Methodology of ELAOPA XV
In addition to the general principles enumerated above, each iteration
of ELAOPA is focused on a particular framework. For 2025, the organizers
of the event offered this prompt:
"In this version of ELAOPA, we want to contribute to accumulating the
forces of our class, we call upon ourselves to scrutinize the forces of
domination to clearly identify the elements that will allow us to build
repertoires of counter-hegemonic struggle, with emphasis on the
patriarchal and colonizing forces, in order to integrate them with class
domination."
The encuentro is a space of encounter and mutual recognition as much as
it is a space for workshopping different issues. With an eye toward the
latter, ELAOPA organizers defined a clear methodological path for
discussions to follow. This included establishing the general goal of
"problematizing and deepening common horizons of struggle: updating them
for today's challenges in the Abya Yala region", as well as more
specific sub-goals including, "1. To position patriarchy as a relevant
and influential axis of domination at all levels of our struggle; 2.
Developing and/or strengthening experiences of popular power and; 3.
Possibilities for tactical agreements and joint projects to
transversalize struggles."
Calendar displaying the various campaigns and important events related
social movement organizations participating in ELAOPA.
To address these questions, participants were divided into "mesas
temáticas" (thematic tables), or breakout groups, based on the sector of
organizing that they are involved in. Breakout groups included
Territorial and Neighborhood; Public Workers; Private Workers; Memory,
Culture and Agitation-Propaganda; Socio-environmental, and Education.
In addition to the general and specific questions that framed this
approach, each breakout group was tasked with answering the following
questions:
Taking into account diverse approaches, experiences, and/or problems
made visible by your organization while understanding that patriarchy is
an axis of domination through which capitalism operates at multiple
levels of life: How does patriarchy unfold and how does it produce,
effect, or impact acts of resistance within our organizing work?
Consider internal organizational dynamics and relationships between
organizations and the communities we work with.
Considering the general context of Latin America, in addition to our
local struggles, and understanding Popular Power as the construction of
our autonomous organized force: How have we managed to implement and
strengthen the experience and practice of Popular Power? Consider
actions and difficulties.
Considering the tensions and difficulties in the collective construction
of a political project by and for our class. How do we unite our
struggles on common ground to coordinate and project them in the short,
medium, and long term?
Setting
As determined at the closing of ELAOPA XIV, the 2025 gathering took
place in Santiago de Chile, in the población (neighborhood) of La
Bandera. This neighborhood is itself the product of popular struggles in
the region. Established in 1969, La Bandera is the product of
movimientos de pobladores (population movements) which directly seized
land in an effort to meet immediate material needs and to force the
state to intervene by providing adequate housing for all. Initially
named toma 26 de enero (occupation of January 26), the occupation was
organized and defended by the Revolutionary Left Movement (MIR). During
the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet, residents of La Bandera faced
heavy repression.
Mural of María Tapia, a member of MIR, participant in the occupation of
January 26, and resident of La Bandera.
Today the neighborhood retains a strong political identity and
historical memory of its origin. For example, a few participants and I
stayed for the evening in a building where many local Chilean
participants in ELAOPA were also living. This building is a very recent
victory, produced by eight years of popular struggle to grant eighty
families affordable housing through cheap property titling. This is a
small expression of what we recognize as Popular Power: tenants gained
access to the building through popular struggle and now self-manage
their affairs through assemblies and delegates to address all instances
of life in the building.
Mural of the Anarchist Federation of Santiago (FAS) in the La Bandera
neighborhood.
Importantly, ELAOPA itself took place in a public school campus central
to the neighborhood. The fact that the organizers were granted use of a
public school, at no charge, speaks not only to the flexible and, to
some extent, decentralized nature of the public education apparatus in
Chile, but also to the nature of the school being situated in the
historical and political context of La Bandera.
Day 1
ELAOPA took place through the weekend of January 25-26. As already
stated, the event was a mix of discussion and debate via breakout
groups, cultural expressions, public statements, informational booths,
and a final plenary.
On the first day, Saturday, January 25th, an opening ceremony took
place, tables were displayed, a wall was erected displaying posters
describing the work of organizations represented at the event, and the
breakout groups met to begin working through the first two planned
questions.
I was advised to integrate into the Memory, Culture, and
Agitation-Propaganda group. The discussion methodology was clearly
stated and we held a three-hour work session. The first two hours were
used to engage the questions in a subgroup and the last hour was for
having a more extensive discussion with all people participating in the
breakout group.
Subgroups within the Memory, Culture, and Agitation-Propaganda group
were formed to take up the questions mentioned in the methodology
section of this report. We began with question 1, which aimed to address
the role of patriarchy in our organizing work. In discussions, we were
directed to first identify common points of agreement. Following this,
we engaged in a second round of discussion to hear critiques of the
previous dialogue. Because I was an active participant in these
discussions and not simply there to record, the following points are
recounted from a mix of memory and the notes I kept.
A breakout group at ELAOPA XV.
Subgroup Common Perspectives on Question 1:
Sexism—particularly "machismo"—impacts not only everyday life but also
various organizing processes.
Gender plays a role in shaping membership roles.
Gender, race, and class constitute an interconnected matrix
There is a need to reflect on both the qualitative and quantitative
vectors of this matrix
A feminist approach is crucial, one that also aims to dismantle binary
gender roles.
Horizontal political models should be further developed within
social/mass organizations.
Subgroup Points of Critical Reflection on Question 1:
Horizontal and democratic models alone may not fully guarantee the
dismantling of patriarchy and oppressive gender roles.
While education is crucial, it is also essential to recognize that
patriarchy can only be dismantled through the eradication of the systems
and structures that produce oppression, exploitation, and
domination—such as capitalism.
Following our discussion on question 1, we continued with the same model
to discuss question 2. This second question, as you will recall from the
methodology section of this report, related to the successes and
difficulties in establishing Popular Power. Below are the common points
of agreement we found through discussion on this question.
Unfortunately, because time ran short, my subgroup did not have the
opportunity to identify and address criticisms.
Subgroup Common Perspectives on Question 2:
It is essential to build and articulate struggles from and within el
territorio.1
Democratic values must be upheld while considering context-specific
sensitivities.
Collaboration with organizaciones comunitarias ("community"/mass
organizations) is key.
Popular Power should be built through two central axes: program and mass
organizing.
Clear alternatives to hegemonic structures must be proposed.
Participatory planning should be emphasized.
Decision-making processes should be decentralized.
Identity empowerment through self-management and education is essential.
Flexibility in frameworks is necessary—finding the right model for each
specific context.
Awareness of potential contradictions between Popular Power and various
ideological perspectives is crucial.
The principles of Popular Power can generate tensions and contradictions
in different contexts.
Co-optation of communities and poblaciones (neighborhoods) by other
political models—such as parties or non-profits—must be critically examined.
Control over the production and distribution of information is necessary.
Efforts should be made to unite all groups engaged in the struggle.
Attention should be given to historical and generational differences in
interpretations of Popular Power.
Culture can serve as a space for struggle, resistance, and self-management.
The rest of day 1 was designated for a Mapuche cultural ceremonywhich I
was unable to attend because I was on kitchen duty. The day closed with
a performance by a street band and the issuing of public statements to
those gathered.
Day 2
The second and final day of the encuentro opened with a mass meeting,
after which we quickly went to breakout groups in order to address the
last question in the program. At one point the old groups were
scrambled, with members from the various sectors intermingling. This was
called the "intermesas" (the cross tables), this discussion was more
open-ended, meaning the structured "agreement-disagreement" format was
not followed. Instead, participants shared their opinions more freely.
The following are key points of discussion that emerged in my group
during this portion.
Key Points of Discussion on Question 3:
The need to pay attention to the class character and content of specific
feminist movements, as highlighted by members of the Sindicato Aceiteros
de Rosario (Rosario Oil Workers Union).
The role of class in building unity and alliances.
Developing procedures for organizing rank-and-file assemblies.
The influence of nationalism on different patterns of class struggle.
Distinct challenges faced by housing based organizing.
Understanding el territorio as a space where different groups intersect.
After about 90 minutes, the discussion came to a close and we all came
together for the final plenary.
During the plenary, some highlights of the work performed were addressed
and some resolutions were proposed. There was an emphasis on reaching a
more durable understanding of the common direction of the social
movement struggles at a continental level. Some statements in support of
missing and detained comrades were made, and a very touching video from
North and East Syria (Rojava) was played. After a group picture was
taken the event was declared adjourned.
Concluding Reflections
I think events like ELAOPA are precious and present massive
opportunities for personal and collective political growth. But ELAOPA
was also a very particular experience for two main reasons: context and
attendance. I had the chance to meet many people—there were some 400
attendees—involved in different areas of the social and popular struggle
and I also had the priceless opportunity to do so while being in a
historic and ongoing site of territorial struggle.
Indeed, it was this territorial aspect that struck me the most, with
regard to the way it shaped every aspect of the event. It helped me to
think more concretely about this sector, especially as we in Black
Rose/Rosa Negra continue to discuss, debate, and experiment with its
application to the terrain of popular struggle in the United States.
Finally, it feels important to relay the concern expressed by
participants in ELAOPA about the revival of expressly predatory policies
towards Latin America in the context of the current U.S. administration.
It is no secret that Trump favors returning the U.S. to a posture of
naked aggression similar to that which marked 19th century U.S.
international policies like the Monroe Doctrine. I believe it is crucial
for us to further grow the already multiple and solid ties we have with
our sibling organizations in South America.
While territorio literally translates to "territory" in English, a more
context-specific understanding of this term is necessary for the United
States.
https://www.blackrosefed.org/elaopa-xv-report/
_________________________________________
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