||Write a new blog entry|
A call for an Authentic Initiative for Human Interests of Refugees in Berlin.
created: 02 Aug 2013 17:09
This is a protocol of discussion made at 31/8/13 between a non representative individual and W (a Berliner Representive assembly of the Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg district.)
W explained that in essence the German birocratic and politic creates a separation between projects [providing] "social need of" members versus projects [creating] "use value for" members, such members as Human, European, German, Berliner, Kreitzberger etc. e.g. for dichotomy:
- "social needs": the school project (under the Kreitzberg district authority) could be providing human "social needs" of "housing" including worming, feeding, human hosting + internet, therapy, safe rooms for hilling, assembling, medical care etc.
- "use value": other spaces in berlin ( under the Berlin authority) could be providing human a project form documentation of the stories of refugees e.g. like tribunal, a project for human culture/art/music/literature etc of the refugees and a project for human voice of refugees by/for refugees and others including editing/media/studio/tv/radio-channel etc
W said that he is supporting and will try finding founding for the "use value" projects, but only after "we" could provide concrete adequate and competent teams. But the main point here is the authenticity of teams in such projects, especially when creating such "use value". Such authenticity cannot be determined by the 4-5 people of the team providing or running the project, as these people only provide the means to produce materials being documented, produced, channelled etc, whereas the people being refugees appearing in the "material", only once, or even never, must be fully recognized, as those for whom the interest of the initiative is to be provided.
For insuring the authenticity of the Initiative so that it would always be kept for the interest of the refugees, the refugee people should be "peer owners" in the Initiative and the Initiative or its spin off must be working in both categories "use value" and "social needs":
"peer owners" can be defined in the cooperative agreement. Here is
the definition taken from http://is-with.wikidot.com
A Common Company (ComCom) is an owners group, of which ownership is
based on unchangeable agreement between its owners matching the
group's criteria and being either peers
(equal-owners/co-owners/associates) or not, where
- 1. all the peers equally holding together d*100 percent of the group and their number is defined independently by them alone,
- 2. each peer may only be a person or ComCom, but a non-peer may be in addition a non-ComCom body,
- 3. peer-coin, being either a coin of respect or money, reflects the value of ownership of one peer and hence of the group too, but only as the coin's price ranges proportionally to one peer's power in the group and only as the group has the first right to buy it,
- 4. only a single holding position per owners is allowed through all the holding layers of such groups and
- 5. The d, being one or smaller positive number, represents the decentralization property of the group, either where d is constant,
- or where any incoming to the group or to its sub groups is first a peer in the group, and the number of all shares in the group equals the number of members, being the owners in the group or its sub groups, and the number of shares held by one peer is one or smaller positive number defined independently only by the group's peers.
Included page "nav:footer" does not exist (create it now)