On Monday 27 April 2020, 150 people met in the framework of the “Lundi en Commun” usually organised by Action Commune for a Special Edition “Fearless Cities” led by various french partner organisations: Mouvement Utopia, Ateliers Populaires d’Urbanisme (Villeneuve Grenoble), Commonspolis, Pacte pour la Transition, La Belle Démocratie and l’Assemblée des Communs Grenoble.
The CoVid-19 crisis forced us to cancel the possibility of holding this French Fearless Cities event initially planned for the weekend of May 15th in Grenoble. The organisations associated with the preparation of “Faire commun.e” (Make it common) wished to propose remote workshops inviting participants of elected and non-elected citizen lists and actors engaged in initiatives of citizen, social and ecological transition in the territories to meet, talk and exchange ideas and solutions online.
Participants splitted up in 3 thematic workshops:
Workshop 1: Feminisation of politics and care: how does it relate to municipalism?
Workshop 2: What are the conclusions and with what level of hopes for the future of municipalism in France after municipal elections of March 2020?
Workshop 3: What does the crisis teach us about the strengths, weaknesses and challenges of municipalism?
Each workshop offered a testimony or insights from two speakers and specific times for small groups of participants to tell each other, exchange ideas, identify needs and possible solutions.This article gathers the reports of the participants’ exchanges for the 3 workshops. We would like to thank the kind voluntary participation of the secretaries, moderators of the chats, technical assistants and the team of Action Commune who allow us to create for the participants quality sharing moments.
Workshop 1 : Feminisation of politics and care: how does it relate to municipalism?
The workshop was attended by 37 participants. It was an opportunity to listen to the testimonies of Fanny Lacroix (mayor of Châtel-en-Trièves in Isère) and Charlotte Marchandise (deputy mayor in charge of health and the environment in Rennes), followed by a time of exchanges in sub-groups between participants.
“Care” (or “Cuidados” in Spanish) and “Feminisation of politics” are particularly highlighted by municipalist platforms (especially Spanish ones), for whom these notions are intrinsically linked to municipalism. This workshop was an opportunity to shed light, through the experiences of the speakers and participants, on the lived reality and the perceptions or acceptances on these themes. What does ” depatrializing politics ” mean in concrete terms? What are these new ways of doing politics that put the dimension of Care inspired by eco-feminism at the centre? How do these concepts question the quality of relationships in a society; of humans with nature; within municipalist organizations and people who manage a municipality?
Key points
1/ It’s difficult to be legitimated when being a woman in politics
- It’s hard to express oneself, being listened to and to be taken seriously as a woman in politics (as well as in other sectors) and it often results in a self-sabotage phenomenon.
- Most of the time, giving more space to women is condition-based and remains theoretical.
2/ It’s hard to bring Care in the bright light, and not doing it results in penalizing women primarily.
- It’s hard to find within the municipal list people who understands the ecosystem of feminism.
- Within the collectives, the burden of time to activism actions and the mental load is not taken into account. Women are often the most impacted by the lack of care or when tension occur. They often disengage themselves due to lack of time.
3/ Changing practices and postures is not that easy, and more especially within activists organizations.
- Incitement to virilism (laughing at sexist jokes, fighting to get the last word in debates, seduce participants and pretend you are listening to others whereas you just wait to start a never-ending unilateral monologue…).
- Over time, this transforms women who, in order to exist in these spaces, adopt the same attitudes in contradiction with their personality.
- Even when gender equity is established in an organization, it has not always been enough. For example, when regulars in politics joined a citizen list, it has generated a fracture (the cooperative-based functioning of a municipalist list put emotional aspects first and this came up against the usual codes of politics).
4/ Women such like any other marginalized minority groups have a role to play in politics
- Women who are new to politics bring subjects that open up different thoughts than those that prevail (social action, education, solidarity, mutual aid, listening…) and may have a less “managerial” side than men.
- Elected women can develop the capacity to bring people together, and issues of group well-being are also often initiated by women. Women will more quickly succeed in creating a team and are more frequently sensitive to the general interest.
Possible solutions to meet these needs
Changing politics and vision of politics
- Change the words to change our imaginations: get rid of the term “feminisation of politics” because it potentially reduces it only to the issue of women in politics, and opt for the term “depatriarchalisation”; stop the warlike and conquering metaphors around politics.
- Change the view on the definition of the political leader (stop believing in the providential man, do “with” rather than “against”, let the elected representative be the guarantor of the emancipation of all).
- Bring humility in politics (one is not “above” the fray, to bring the right to make mistakes, to be more in touch and listening).
- Promote the education of men and women, encourage changes in outlook and individual transformation.
- Dare to take one’s place: to take the plunge, stop waiting for someone to come and get us / give permission, learn to speak up, free oneself from the mental burden and work on the balance between public and private life.
- Encourage people to become aware of the place they are taking.
New practices and tools for our activist organizations
- Identify and write down the rules, the common values of a group and define the associated methods to allow each person to find their place, to express themselves, to be listened to. For example, starting from the question: “How can we imagine a world without exclusions? “and include these elements in an ethical charter for the group.
- Make visible (notably through education, art, culture and exchanges) the richness of differences, to allow the emergence of a more respectful and inclusive model of the human being.
Tools for the management of speaking times :
- Develop body language and safe operating rules: Timing the meeting, not cutting each other off, giving each other time to speak and respecting silences.
- Use the tools of participatory democracy such as election by consent
- In addition to the basic tools for sharing the floor, also assign observers who analyze the speeches.
- Systematically quote the woman or women who are at the origin of an idea to avoid mansplanning
Create sharing and talking spaces :
- Build spaces to discuss Care with sensitive people and invite people away from this subject to raise awareness (training).
- Develop solidarity networks and safe spaces for dialogue (mixed or not mixed) to avoid the isolation of women and to deconstruct masculinist behaviours.
Practical rules for more Care in our collectives :
- Build and illustrate Care with concrete examples and practices (e.g. room maintenance).
- Implement moments of talks on these subjects to provoke a gradual awareness.
- Give visibility through rules and tools for individual limit needed to prevent activism from becoming too demanding and tiring.
- Develop care facilities that allow women to free themselves from the extra burdens they have (e.g. childcare).
- To avoid getting stuck in roles, appoint a rotating facilitator for meetings.
Leads for municipalities: :
- Having several women on a municipal council and putting a woman at the top of the list.
- Organize the sharing of allowances, change the status of local elected officials, especially regarding allowances by allocating them according to the person’s situation.
- Involve external facilitators in the management of meetings, especially since the opposition is always frowned upon when it is the bearer of innovation, in order to move towards greater horizontality.
- Bring in outsiders to public meetings to get conflicting opinions in order to learn how to better take people into account.
- Go door-to-door to mobilize women (and people from afar) in citizen participation.
- Include residents in local policy decision-making processes.
Workshop 2: What are the conclusions and with what level of hopes for the future of municipalism in France after municipal elections of March 2020?
The workshop was attended by 68 participants. It was an opportunity to listen to the testimonies of Guillaume Gourgues, Lecturer at the University of Lyon 2 and Sixtine Van Outryve, Doctoral student at the Catholic University of Louvain.
Workshop 2 returned to the expression of an emerging French-style municipalism, particularly through the candidacies for the municipal elections of March 2020 of participative lists and those that carry the aspiration of a more libertarian municipalism.
These municipalisms reflect a movement of repoliticization and a reappropriation of issues at the local level by the inhabitants. In particular, they are based on greater citizen participation and new political practices that differ from the current political professionalization.
Key points
1/ Sociology and representativeness :
- The results of the first round on March 15 are difficult to exploit. The experiences shared show that despite the ambition of a wider popular base, the sociology and demographic representativeness of these lists still needs to be worked on so as not to limit themselves to those who would have the time and the economic and social capital to get involved.
- There is a real desire to get out of the middle, to reach out to the people who are excluded or self-excluded (invisible), to open up to the abstainers, to new voters.
- The spaces for debate opened up by many participatory lists during the campaign were very unifying, sometimes more so than others backed by major political parties. These lists are now part of the local landscape and are all keen to continue this work on the ground.
2/ Relationship with the State and institutional organization :
- In spite of a good capacity to self-organise and to create spaces for debate and proposals outside the institutional field, ambitions to self-govern, mistrust of the State and the capacity to create institutions of direct democracy are today strongly constrained by the institutional structures in place. Municipalities are also creations of the state and require elections to win them.
- The institutional organization of inter-municipalities limits democratic practices on this scale.
- These discussions also raise questions about the role of the State, the necessary revision of decentralization and raise questions about other forms of more federal or confederal organizations, the capacity to manage major social issues, guarantee the principles of solidarity from other, more local levels, etc.
- The establishment of direct democracy, imperative mandates or democratic bodies outside the institution and their consideration in municipal deliberations, come up against the legality of a system based on representative democracy.
3/ Counter-power and municipal minority opposition
- The role of counter-power makes it possible to rework the bond of trust between residents and elected officials, to ensure that their commitments are respected (obedient elected officials) or to better find one’s place when one is in a minority within the municipal council.
- Finally, being in the minority makes it possible to get closer to the residents, to bring another perspective, to get out of the frontal opposition to continue to create a dynamic around parallel resource spaces (assemblies, democratic spaces) or to reinforce municipal action through active participation in committees, delegations, etc.
- This relies in particular on a better balance between the structuring of lists and citizen self-management, or the establishment of assemblies (citizen, local, popular) or extra-institutional democratic spaces.
4/ Changing practices and political images
- The will to change political practices clashes with the views of an electorate that continues to seek the figure of a paternalistic, reassuring mayor.
- It has also come up against the expression of extremely powerful and well-established political violence on the part of seasoned political opponents or in relation to political parties.
- The naivety of the lists newly engaged in politics has exposed them to this violence, but also constitutes a force in their refusal to perpetuate this same violence and to adopt a unifying stance.
- The communication around the ways of doing things, the governance of the lists, or the understanding of the term “municipalism” have been difficult for the general public and the media.
- The values (building democracy, ecological transition, social justice) and these new practices have been a source of curiosity, of support from a population that political parties do not usually reach, and even of transformation of the militant local fabric.
- The field work and other long-term experiences, particularly of rural communes re-elected after 6 years in office, remind us that trust is built over time.
Possible solutions to meet these needs
- Share experiences and models of municipal democratic schemes in order to find proposals to be readapted according to the realities of each one.
- Energize democratic spaces outside the municipal institution.
- Continue the dynamics of debate to acculturate.
- Engage in the Estates General of Local Democracy.
- For the elected representatives of the opposition: seek legal opportunities to participate in decision making, actively participate in committees, ask for the granting of a delegation, promote the power of the inhabitants to act on small projects, open spaces outside the municipality to support the municipal team, etc.
- Re-establish contact with residents through fieldwork, door-to-door work, public meetings, municipal counter-journal.
- Browse Provence Ecocitoyenne’s proposals for a common communication strategy for citizens’ lists around transparency on the allocation of public funds (filmed), referendum on municipal initiative on major municipal projects, citizens’ municipal councils and alternative mayors.
Workshop 3: What does the crisis teach us about the strengths, weaknesses and challenges of municipalism?
The workshop was attended by 50 participants. It was an opportunity to listen to the testimonies of Anne-Sophie Olmos (elected to the Grenoble municipality and active in the Grenopolitains) and Vincent Liegey (essayist, descendant and coordinator of Cargonomia in Budapest).
Faced with the failures of the State in managing the COVID crisis19 , the municipalities found themselves in the front line in managing the crisis with the inhabitants. A multitude of mutual aid and solidarity initiatives then emerged, supported or not by public policies. The objective of Workshop 3 was to exchange ideas, based on the example of Grenoble and Budapest, in order to consider the strengths, weaknesses and challenges of municipalism.
Key points
1/ This crisis confirms municipalist ideas
- This crisis has led to the emergence of existing territorial responses and a shift from theory to practice on the issues of degrowth, territories and resilience.
- The current situation is opening a breach that makes it possible to strengthen the municipalist discourse (better balance between the State and the territories).
- Tendency towards mutual aid which has been reinforced with multiple initiatives at the moment. The municipalist schema reinforces the possibility of implementing these imaginaries, of “deconfining” the imaginary.
- Municipal services have been in the front line in managing the crisis in a context of State failures.
- This crisis shows the importance of local public services and better crisis management by municipal services than by private entities.
- The crisis confirms the necessary importance of resilience in territories and the place of local authorities.
- The crisis engenders practices of mutual aid and cooperation (examples of seamstresses and solidarity actions): horizontal model of the VS contribution model of execution of the guidelines given above.
- Citizens are the bearers of many demands that must be supported by municipalities (access to masks for all, rent moratoria, relocation…).
2/ Common challenges & needs
- We are all connected to the same issues at the same time, wherever we are in the world.
- There is a tension between the horizontality of movements based on permanent democracy and the need for verticality to ensure effectiveness.
- There is a need to network to share successes and failures, to master common ground, to have more room for manoeuvre to compensate for the actions of the state.
- There is a need for documentation on the initiatives, as practiced in the commons, of these new services and new economic models that are emerging.
- Communicate on the actions of municipal teams (Examples of Grenoble and Budapest)
- Cities can be weakened in the crisis, especially in terms of local finances. Build solutions now to fight future austerity plans.
Possible solutions to meet these needs
- It is important to make room for women, to bring about a political break with a will to change the relationship to power, to move towards a patient, constructive and dialogue-creating stance.
- Make the link between citizens and institutions and, more globally, rethink the governance of the common people and the way of living politics.
- Focusing on the involvement of people, starting from the concrete situations experienced by the inhabitants in order to involve them in local political life.
- Build new alliances, share feedback between communes (e.g. of the same size).
Support moratoria on rents and charges for the most disadvantaged inhabitants without putting social landlords in difficulty (provide for a compensation fund guaranteed by the State). - Remunicipalise health-related issues (physical, mental, social), which are not currently necessarily addressed in municipal programmes.
- Think of an alternative economic model (especially for cities) that is not dependent on multinationals and mass tourism.
- think about the occupation of empty buildings and wastelands that will be generated by the economic crisis.
- Plan a relocation of economic activity, especially in relation to the failure of State management (stock management, notion of risk).
This article was also published in french by Action Commune in Medium.
