The strategy dialog continues…


Richard Moore

From: •••@••.•••
To: •••@••.•••
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 16:57:49 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Workshop
CC: mailto:•••@••.•••
Priority: normal

Dear Richard,

Compliments are extended to you for the comprehensively detailed
despatch of the things concerning sessions and panels of the workshop
on Globalization and Corporate Power.

The workshop may prove to be a corner stone for the most coveted
state of absolute liberty, true equality and real fraternity. So it
is assured on our part that we would like to join and participate in
the workshop as a pair or couple whatever category you have
classified as such. Our commitment and confirmation is rather duly
substantiated with a wire of CAN$35.00 each to your accredited bank

In view of the strategic importance of South Asia regarding the new
scenario of the world as well as its tumultuous and disorderly state,
interested delegates from this part of the globe must be given
priority chance to attend the workshop. It would definitely limelight
a vista of crises which need to be discussed and resolved through
such a high-profile workshops and conferences as you are scheduling.

If selected, we would like to join the following sessions:

* Tanveer Ahmad Meer: Politics and Democracy
* Murtaza Ali Shah: International Relations

      *Regarding Politics and Democracy I would bring to limelight
the prevalent malpractices in the electoral process which is even
more heinous than the resultant pseudo-democracy in this part of the
world. How the feudal aristocracy is manipulated by the all-powerful
imperialistic forces to exploit the helpless masses would be the
hallmark of my treatise with a couple of pragmatic remedies to the
ailment as well.

    *For International Relations, I would draw your attention towards
the Middle East imbroglio which presents an ignoble picture of
high-handedness, open discrimination, hypocritical numbness at
cruelties and clandestine support to the criminal etc. A comparative
study would be offered with references from history to render the
same effective for peace and prosperity on the globe.

Hoping a favourable response soon.

Truly yours,

Tanveer Ahmad Meer
Murtaza Ali Shah

# 423, St. No.1,
G-8/2, Islamabad, Pakistan
Fax: (92-51) 278135 (Attn. Tanveer)


Dear Tanveer and Murtaza,

Yes indeed you would be most welcome to participate as workshop
delegates.  And thank you for an exemplary response: clear, one-
paragraph topic descriptions.

Please also wire registration fees and send us your accomodation
requirements, including dietary restrictions if any.


Date: Thu, 30 Apr 1998
From: Robert Gold <•••@••.•••>
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: strategy

Hi Richard.

I was thinking about what you wrote in the latest article on strategy
about community building.

I know that strategy development is critical and the most urgent because
nobody is doing it and it can have the greatest positive impact.

Community building and coalition building on the other hand has been
is being done, and can be done by alot of other people and

Was wondering wether CADRE shouldn't concentrate most of its' efforts at
the moment to strategy development.


Dear Robert,

I'm flattered that you would look to cadre for a special contribution in
the strategy domain, and I agree strategic thinking is sorely
underdeveloped (outside of elite circles, that is).

In fact, we feel we do have something to offer, and we're endeavoring
`give it all away' as rapidly as possible so it can become community
property and develop further via the folk process.  There's nothing at
all complex or esoteric about strategy; most of us don't usually think
about it for the very simple reason that we've all of us been
systematially conditioned from childhood in disempowerment.  We're
taught that `things' can only be changed in incremental ways and via
certain channels.

You say that `Community building' is `being done'.  The point is not
whether people _know _how to build communities, nor whether _useful
communities exist -- the point is that the _particular community that is
necessary to defeat capitalist hegemony does not exist and is not in-
process of forming... indeed, the trend is toward accelerating

The first truth to learn about strategy is that the elite are experts at
strategy, have a thoroughly brutal attitude toward employing it, and are
several steps ahead of us at present.

_They know that widespread disaffection with the neoliberal project is
inevitable, is already evidencing itself, and will only accelerate.
They have very conscious and very effective countermeasures in place,
and have announced refinements whose early-deployment signs can already
be seen.

The core of their strategy is divide-and-conquer factionalism, but a
very much refined and flexibly applied version.

Starting at the macro level, the strategy is to create a system of
regional `civilizations' -- ostensibly `natural' entities reflecting
cultural boundaries.  This strategy was articulated by (CFR spokesman)
Samuel P. Huntington in his already-classic "Clash of Civilizations".
In each region, there is to be a `primary power'.  This is factionalism
on a global scale and it brings several concrete elite benefits:
        - citizen solidarity across the regional boundaries becomes
          nearly impossible (eg, American workers have minmal empathy
          with Iranian
        - human-rights abuses, necessary for maximal capital
          are re-interpreted as `cultural differences'
        - anti-systemic uprisings can be readily contained to a single
        - military-enforcement of moderate-scale can be left to the
          regional `primary power', so that the hi-tech elite strike
          force can save itself for the biggees like Desert Storm

Already we can see this strategy being deployed, as Germany is given a
leading role in Central Europe, and Turkey is granted policing power in
occupied Iraq.

Within the first world, the USA provides the best lessons in the
strategies for `domestic factionalism', that's where the new techniques
are first field-tested.

Of course there's always race, and we've got the fundamentalist sects,
and the militias, etc. etc.  The ideologies that are becoming
increasingly prevalent are ones that are nearly immune to communication
outside of themselves.  This is a major obstacle to creating a majority
political coalition of any kind.

The elite knew decades ago that solidarity was the one thing they could
not allow to develop, and a program of factionalism has been underway
for quite some time.  Notice how closely correlated, for example, was
the growth in the Christian Right, and the rise of neoliberalism.

`Community building' is a _primary _strategic _necessity, and we at
cadre will continue to devote most of our effort toward that end.  But
not to worry, as we are discovering with this posting, reaching
consensus on strategy has become, spontaneously, the first order of
community business.


The elite are several steps ahead of us in strategic consciousness, and
their programs are well underway, but with aikido strategy on our part,
that elaborate apparatus can all be turned against them.  The fact is
that they have telegraphed all their punches.

When you know from whence the punch is coming, then you can focus your
energy on exposing it, alerting those at which it is aimed, taking the
over-confident aggressors off balance, and shifting the outcome in your

To the factionalism `punch', cadre offers the following `wrist-twist' in
its manifesto:

      (3) Political activists must rise to the challenge of this
      strategic opportunity -- it is time to move beyond our special-
      interest causes and find a path to solidarity and the collab-
      orative pursuit of shared objectives. Foremost among our tasks
      is to build bridges cross the gulfs dividing factions such as
      liberals & conservatives, believers & non-believers, labor &
      environmentalists, etc.

                     We are all in this together!


From: "Angela Lemos" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: Workshop business: Delegate selection, accomodations, *->
time for commitment
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 12:52:32 -0300

Dear Richard,

Unfortunatelly I can't attend the event. However, I am still
here, wishing to help in some way.

First of all, I would like to suggest that the steps, related with the
formation of the coalition and its decisions for the future
should take the following framework, based in
Philip Kotler's idea:

1) Defining the mission of the coalition (we have one yet): "is to work
with people and organizations everywhere to help bring about an historic
transition from this  Era of Corporate Hegemony to a new Era of
Democratic Renaissance".

2) Identifying the threats and oportunities of this new coalition. Here
have to analize the external points (macro and micro level) of the

Here we should identify "Where are we?".

- What kind of actions corporates can take against the coalition and its

- How governments will react against our coaltion?

- How people, in general, will receive this new idea?

- How coalition will be developed around the world?

- Where are the corporations's weak points that we can attack?

- How can the coalition find these points and use them as our

- And so many questions related with these topics.

3) Identifying what are our (coalition) weak and strong points. Here we
   have to analize our internal environment.

- How many people are engaged?

- What are their knowledge level and where they play their roles?

- How can we use the power of our members in their activities?

- How can we help to develop the coalition around the world?

- How can we develop funding for this coalition?

- And so on...

4) Stabilising the objectives and goals. Here we need to identify
   "Where we want to be in one year, five years and ten years".

5) Stablishing the strategies to get these objectives and goals.

6) Stablishing the action's program.

7) Implement the strategies. In another words, stablish "How can
   we get these objectives and goals?"

8) Reevaluate and control the strategic planning.



Dear Angela,

You have articulated a very useful list of considerations.  You are also
assuming that a certain kind of project structure is necessary.  That's
a very natural thing to do.

Allow me to suggest, however, that the first step needs to be to survey
the various models of engagement and select the one most advantageous
for our circumstances.  You've articulated what I'd call a `regular
army' approach to a campaign, and it has a highly centralized flavor, eg
`stabilising _the objectives and goals'.

Another model might be `guerilla warfare' which has more distrituted,
autonomous operations, directed more at targets of opportunity, and with
no resources devoted to holding territory.

And there are other models as well.

At this stage we need to develop our thinking across a broad front while
remaining flexible in terms of actual policies and strategies.  I say
this because the coalition itself is an organic thing whose growth path
is difficult to predict.  Develpments will not be `linear', big changes
will occur all-at-once.

Consider for example our relationship to the anti-MAI movement.  Many
people are involved in both, but no one has suggested that a stronger
alignment be pursued.    To me it seems obvious that the two initiatives
could gain from each other.

(Perhaps I'll do something about that.)  But just suppose Maude Barlow
and other leaders of the anti-MAI movement were to endorse the manifesto
(or better yet suggest an improved version we all could endorse) and
declare solidarity with the coalition.  That would expand the scope of
the anti-MAI folks to include the full elite threat and it would all-
at-once increase considerably the credibility of the coalition, and
could be expected to attract additional organizations.

We can't predict how things will unfold, especially in the short term.
It's more a process of exploration and discovering opportunities than a
planned campaign.

I can suggest an exercise which is helpful in developing strategy, and
that is to consider the endgame and then work backwards... Imagine you
are in a room with representatives of the elite and your own compatriots
and your job is to negotiate a win-win settlement: what are your
proposed terms?  What is your last-ditch bargaining position?


Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 20:05:42 +0400 (WSU DST)
From: •••@••.••• (Sviatoslav Zabelin)
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re:  rn sub •••@••.•••

     Dear Richard,
     I am glad receiving your message and agree with your remark  that
the situation changed during these 20 years.
     I read your article and I also agree that you described the  sce-
nario what the "world governors" would like to realise.
     The question - if the  global  socio-economic  (+  environmental)
system is so simple to be governed.
     Some times it happen and Soviet Union many years was  the  leader
of space exploration.  And soviet government celebrated victories. But
it collapsed ... .
     It seems to me that we will have the same history with global ca-
pitalist system. May be it will flourish some years else ... . But may
be not.
     Of course,  I will be happy to join your coalition and I will try
to add  my  experience  to your experience.  Thank you including me to
<•••@••.•••> recievers list.
     Will exchange the ideas ... .
     Of course, I will be glad to know more about your coalition.
     I am ready to inform you about Socio-Ecological Union if you will
be interested.



Please say more -rkm


*>--->  June 25 <incl> July 2 - 1998 - Nova Scotia - Canada
                               - - -
                  Restore democratic sovereignty
                  Create a sane and livable world
             Bring corporate globalization under control.
        To subscribe to the PPI newsfeed (cyberjournal), simply send:
                To: •••@••.•••
                Subject: (ignored)
                sub cyberjournal Jane Q. Doe  <-- your name there