It may not be immediately obvious why we consider the affinity group to be a form alternative polity. However, the value of this practice as a prefiguration of alternatives is accepted by a number of prominent contemporary activists, such as John Jordan of London RTS:
RTS does not see Direct Action as a last resort, but a preferred way of doing
things… a way for individuals to take control of their own lives and environments….
If global capitalism does not manage to destroy the ecosphere and human civilization…
and a new culture of social and ecological justice is developed, RTS would hope
that direct action would not stop but continue to be a central part of a direct
democratic system (Jordan 1997).
A similar line is taken by Stephanie Guilloud, an anti-globalization organizer
involved in the Battle of Seattle:
In the streets, we relied upon trust and consensus to make our quick decisions
about how to respond to tear gas and where to move next. Our process embodied
the nonhierarchical vision we were working to realize (Guilloud 2001: 226).
What is the affinity group? Although it has become prominent in the late 1990s
and early 2000s, it emerged in Spanish anarchist circles in the late nineteenth
century, where it was adopted in conscious opposition to hierarchical marxist
styles of political organizing. 'A movement that sought to achieve a world united
by solidarity and mutual aid' <Murray Bookchin> notes apropos of the grupo
de afinidad Solidarios, 'had to be guided by these precepts; if it sought a
decentralized, stateless, non-authoritarian society, it had to be structured
in accordance with these goals' (Bookchin 1998: 180). Formed out of a shared
desire to accomplish a specific task, affinity groups are consensus-driven and
oriented to achieving maximum effectiveness with a minimum of bureaucracy, infighting,
and exposure to infiltration. They tend to be small, typically consisting of
between five to twenty individuals. Affinity groups have formed the basis for
successful actions carried out across a broad spectrum of engagement, from decentralized
service groups such as Food Not Bombs,
to AIDS activists ACT UP and the clandestine
cells of the Earth Liberation Front. They have
also become a favourite organizing tool at major anti-globalization convergences,
where the model has been extended to larger groups of groups via the mechanisms
of clusters and spokescouncils.
Some activists see the affinity group as a form that is most appropriate for
actions that are illegal or otherwise can't be public. For larger scale organizing,
more open and inclusive groups might better suited to bringing in new members.
But it seems clear that affinity groups are 'good for developing personal dynamics,
for dealing with issues like sexism and racism' within social movements, and
that for major convergences, the spokescouncil is 'something we all understand',
a method that allows people from different regions and ideological perspectives
to come together to implement a common vision (Battistuzzi 2003). The affinity
group, then, is not an organizational panacea. But it is a model that can be,
and has been, extended to larger groups and non-statist federations. Certainly
it must be remembered that its value lies not only in achieving political efficacy
and organizational efficiency, but in building alternative cultures and societies
-- alternative subjectivities and ways of being -- within the currently hegemonic
order.
References:
Battistuzzi, Dave (2003) Interviews with Sean Haberle, research assistant for
the Affinity Project, Queen's University at Kingston, Ontario. Interviews conducted
May 10 and July 19, 2003.
Guilloud, Stephanie (2001) 'Spark, Fire, and Burning Coals: An Organizer's History
of Seattle' in E. Yuen (et. al. eds.) The Battle of Seattle: The New Challenge
to Capitalist Globalization (New York: Soft Skull Press)
Jordan, John (1997) 'The street party is only a beginning… Interview with
John Jordan by Naomi Klein' in The Anarchives 4(9), Available from: <www.ainfos.ca/A-Infos97/4/0552.html>
[Accessed 7 July 2004]
ACT-UP’s discussion of using affinity groups in organizing:
<http://www.actupny.org/documents/CDdocuments/Affinity.html>
Well--organized site on affinity groups, clusters, spokescouncils, and more.
<http://www.actagainstwar.org/article.php?id=14>