rn- re: PGA, U.P.Secr., unitedpeoples


Richard Moore

Dear rn,

Thanks to Sune Nordwall and Andreas Rockstein for attempting to shed light
on what PGA and UP.Secr. are about and what the relationship is between
them.  You might want to read those yourself before going on to my
comments.  I want to say what I want to say, but I'd rather not prejudice
your own interpretation...


Evidently I was misled about the two groups being the same; it now appears
that U.P.Secr. has been using PGA's name without authorization.  According
to Andreas, U.P.Secr. has _today ceased claiming the PGA mantle... perhaps
because of what I said in the posting, unless the decision was just a
bizarre coincidence.  From what Sune comes up with, it seems that those
behind the World Parliament are even more diabolical than I suspected, but
fortunately, based on what Andreas says, there doesn't seem to be much
following for it.

Andreas - I appreciate your sincerity but I cannot find comfort in what you
say about PGA, for the following reasons...

1) You do not address my primary concern about PGA - their habit of
encouraging a style of confrontation (in demonstrations) that alientates
people rather then attracting people to the movement.  When activists
destroy GM crops, many people respond sympathetically; when people throw
stones at police and shop windows (as I've seen in PGA demonstrations),
they're viewed more as simple hooligans.

2) Your attempt to explain that PGA isn't an 'organization' doesn't settle
the issue for me.  I realize they insist they aren't an organization, but
if a duck quacks "I'm a cat" it remains a duck.  You don't need membership
forms and official titles to behave organizationally.

 >Of course, there are some 'coordination' structures, and peoples which are
 >'more' and some which are 'less' involved in decision making. But this is
  >not a question of 'exclusion' or 'hierarchy'.

As I see it, PGA is acting as a leadership/organizational cadre in support
of actions involving many other organizations.  The critical question is on
what basis this leadership group sets its policies.  If it is accountably
representative of the cooperating groups, then it can claim some degree of
democratic legitimacy.  If instead the 'more involved' coterie have their
own agenda, by which they influence the direction of actions, then it
smacks of manipulation by an activist-elite - a 'shadow organization'.

When PGA talks about having 'no organization', then the thing we know for
sure is that there is no established, accountable mechanism by which PGA
can claim to act on behalf of the cooperating groups.  In the absence of
such a mechanism, you are left with a small group of people, whether they
call themselves an organization or not, which exerts influence on its own
volition.  The way I see it, the absence of a visible organization is
equivalent to an absence of accountability.

You may yet convince me, but you would have to address the issues raised.
Incidentally, could you tell us how to subscribe to the PGA list?  I've
been getting occasional forwards, but would like to get a more complete
picture of what they're up to.


Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1999 12:35:22 +0200
From: Sune Nordwall <•••@••.•••>
Reply-To: •••@••.•••
To: "Richard K. Moore" <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: rn- broadbased actions against globalization

Dear Richard,

You write:
> The existence of a vacuum creates 'a market' for all sorts of intiatives,
> both good and bad.  The best-organized (by far) player in this game is of
> course the same folks who are bringing us globalization itself.  I would
> expect them to be among the first to launch a well-organized 'peoples
> movement' aimed at channeling popular energy into counter-productive
> directions.  In fact, they seem to have done so - in the form of PGA
> (Peoples Global Action), alias "U.P. Secr", which posts from the address
> <•••@••.•••>.

As it to me seemed to have the flavour of ELP, the organization of
Lyndon LaRouche, I did some search on it.

Using http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois, the search
result for pga.org says that the Registrant of PGA is AMP c/o IAS, 5
Samuel Constant, Geneva, GE 1201 CH, and that the Administrative
Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact of pga.org is a Alex,
Iordachescu  (IA303) •••@••.•••, where ARTAMIS has a site at
http://www.artamis.org/intro.html A not uninteresting site (but in
French only ...). Maybe U.P. Secr. ("United Peoples Secretary"?) has
turned out to be too far out for them, as he has now constructed a new
site of his own:

A search for •••@••.••• led to a new site:
http://www.unitedpeoples.net/ registered by a Ole Fjord Larsen
(UNITEDPEOPLES2-DOM), P.O.Box 36, DK-6701 Esbjerg, DK-6701 DKwhere,
according to http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois. On the
site Ola Fjord Larsen(?)/"•••@••.•••" really tries to
initiate something in the direction of the strange description in The
Apocalyse of how the Second Monster, (the "Sun Demon" "Sorat" according
to the Kabbalah) made it necessary for people to have his mark on the
right hand or on the forehead to be able to buy and sell. And
•••@••.••• out of some inspiration openly tries to make it a

One of the methods of ELP is to use shock to throw people out of
balance, emptying the inner space for the I of man. In one of the
writings of L LaRouche ("What is a Humanistic Academy?"), he says that
one of the goals of education must be to teach man to regard "technical
intelligence" as his proper "I".

I don´t envy •••@••.••• his state of mind, whatever the
reasons for it.

A small counter effort; on the anthroposophical side a David Heaf, an
anthroposophical biochemist, has set up a site at
http://www.anth.org/socialthreefolding/, a small contribution to the
understanding of social issues. He is since 1995 UK coordinator for
Ifgene - International Forum for Genetic Engineering

Good wishes for all your work!

Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden

- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell biology and
EU as a mechanical esoteric temple and threefolding of society

Date: Sun, 1 Aug 1999 17:11:03 +0200
From: Andreas Rockstein <•••@••.•••>
To: "Richard K. Moore" <•••@••.•••>
cc: Jan Slakov <•••@••.•••>, Alain Kessi <•••@••.•••>,
Subject: Re: rn- broadbased actions against globalization

Dear Richard,

I'm writing to you again, because i think your (mis)interpretation of PGA
is simply and solely based on a misunderstanding.

---<snips in quoted stuff below; also some redundancies snipped - rkm>---
 >Nonetheless, we can't claim any
 >significant success with movement-building. The fact remains that
 >there isn't a movement with the kind of scope required to 'make a
 >difference' in the context of globalization.

First --- this isn't a big surprise for me - you cannot create any
movement only via internet without any "physically" structures beyond. Of
course e-mailing is a suitable tool to maintain an international network
but its impossible to buil up such a network without common (as well as
local!) actions and regulary meetings like the international campaign to
stop WTO's 'millennium round' as well as Peoples Global Action  is doing

  >The existence of a vacuum creates 'a market' for all sorts of
  >intiatives, both good and bad.  ...

2nd --- In my eyes this is a misunderstanding of what is happening today
(since the 'stop-MAI campaign') I cannot notice any 'vacuum'.

What I see are multiple ways of attempts of 'consensous building' by
multiple and different organizations, groups and networks to find common
strategies to built up a 'global' resistance against globalization.

PGA is only a part of this 'global' resistance and like into the different
movements there are different approaches also into PGA.

  > ... The best-organized (by far) player
  >in this game is of course the same folks who are bringing us
  >globalization itself.  I would expect them to be among the first to
  >launch a well-organized 'peoples movement' aimed at channeling
  >popular energy into counter-productive directions.  In fact, they
  >seem to have done so - in the form of PGA (Peoples Global Action),
  >alias "U.P. Secr", which posts from the address

NO NO NO, dear Richard! You mustn't put 'PGA' and 'U.P. Secr' in the same
dip! PGA is a broad network of multiple basic mouvements from northern and
southern countries and ...

  >PGA has its own set of proposals for a
  >"World Parliament" and for "Consumers' Power Committees
  >(CPC's)" at the national level.  Their language reads like
  >something out of the days of Stalinist-front organizations,
  >and the content of their proposals sounds like something
  >Mussolini would have come up with. FYI, I'm including a recent
  >response I sent to Jan and to Aaron Koleszar regarding PGA.

 ... this Idea of 'world parliament is going out from an individuum (or a
small group) which whant to present it as a common objective of PGA but
which is rejected by a majority of activists acting 'below the banner of
PGA' (*) from the beginning, but he didn't stop until today to sell it as
a PGA project.

(* with 'below the banner of PGA' I mean that principally any group can do
its action in the name of Peoples Global Action so long it's accepting the
PGA Manifesto [see www.agp.org] - but generally there is a type of
coordination which mostly take place on grassroots level)

Others actions you don't mention are much more 'conform' to the Idea of
PGA (which aren't mentioned by "U.P.Secr" as well) like the
InterContinental Caravan (see http://stad.dsl.nl/~caravan/) or June 18th -
international Day of Action (see http://www.j18.org or
http://www.infoshop.org/june18.html) and now a broad alliance to oppose
WTO and its proposed 'millennium round' in November in Seattle.

About 'Seattle' I could tell you much more - but so much here: There are
very different groups, organizations etc. preparing to do something during
the next WTO ministerial. PGA will be come to a major part. And if it will
succeed PGA action will be coordinated with the international NGO
campaign against WTO 'millennium round' (there's already a close
cooperation of PGA activists in the US and Canada and 'Public Citizens
Global Trade Watch' Washington which you can tell the 'flagship' of the US
NGO campaign if you like)

Because of its open and non-hierarchical structure of PGA we must expect,
that occasionally there are arising ideas and projects settled below 'PGA'
by its authors, which are not going conform with the Manifesto ...

I regret that you didn't pay very much attention to the answers of
different peoples a few months ago wich are much more involved in PGA than
from "proples@post" or even from me - who is less implicated.

>It most certainly is!!   "PGA" & "U.P.secr" & "peoples@post" are
>all the same organization. ...

Please don't tell PGA 'organization'! It's a non-hierarchical grassroot
network of multiple organizations and individuals. There is no membership
nor 'office' or anything similar.

You've heard oftenly enough these sentences and I know that you don't
belive it. But how schould I exlain you?

Of course, there are some 'coordination' structures, and peoples which are
'more' and some which are 'less' involved in decision making. But this is
not a question of 'exclusion' or 'hierarchy'. When you're acting in your
local group (for example preparing June 18th actions) you must'nt 'ask'
any 'boss' and you're 'allowed' to do quite 'crazy' actions, so long these
are not contradictonary to the 'Manifesto'. And even this 'Manifesto' is
not our Dogma on which you mustn't cast doubt. Rather it's a proposal and
everyone is invited do discuss about.

> ... I'm on their mailing list.  ...

This is NOT the mailiunglist of PGA!

> ... They started
>using "U.P.secr" last September in their message "INTERNATIONALIZE THE
>CORPORATIONS", which included: ...

... Messages send out from "peoples@post" alias "PGA & U.P.secr" are not
comming out from 'PGA'. I get this messages too, but I don't pay too much
attention on them. There is a sort of 'PGA secreatariat' which is
spreading messages (and you've to notice the difference of addresses -
•••@••.••• is not the same as •••@••.•••, which is the
'correct' address) which are consensous (and "peoples@post" isn't
representing this consensous!). Beyond there are others 'PGA-mailinglists'
couvering specific actions (Caravan, J18, Seattle).

  >There are so many things wrong with these guys that I don't know where
  >to start.
  >Their "World Parliament" concept is totally top-down and closely
  >resembles Stalinist models of international communist organizations,
  >where local groups were sold out to Soviet realpolitik interests.

... but I don't like the Idea of 'World Parliament' as well as the
majority of PGA activists but I wouldn't compare it with 'stalinist'

Rather the author of this Idea seems to be a bit confused, and don't
realize that he's creating a model with a serious lack of 'democracy' -
failing to notice ways of basic democratic decision making which you can
see in multiple groups and organization acting below the 'Banner' of PGA.

Further the 'World Parliament' is still remaining a fantasy - I cannot
notice any serious efforts to realize it and I cannot notice any support
by much other activists not at all any global mouvement.

I hope I've given you a comprehensible clarification and I'll suggest you
to leave 'World Parliament' 'World Parliament' and to turn your attention
to other - to 'real' PGA projects (I don't speak very much about, but it
isn't very far from you, I don't know in which city you're locaded but you
can find groups activists in Toronto, Montréal, Vancouver and others - if
you like I can give you local addresses. You have to look for PGA as a
grassroot network on local level but not too much in abstracts).

No comment to the rest!

All the best,



    an activist discussion forum - •••@••.•••
    To subscribe, send any message to
    A public service of Citizens for a Democratic Renaissance
        (mailto:•••@••.•••     http://cyberjournal.org)

  **--> Non-commercial reposting is encouraged,
        but please include the sig up through this paragraph
        and retain any internal credits and copyright notices.
        Copyrighted materials are posted under "fair-use".

    Help create the Movement for a Democratic Rensaissance

    To review renaissance-network archives, send a blank message:

    To subscribe to the the cj list, which is a larger list
    and a more general political discussion, send a blank message:
    To sample the book-in-progress, "Achieving a Livable World", see:

            A community will evolve only when
            the people control their means of communication.
                -- Frantz Fanon

            Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful
            committed citizens can change the world,
            indeed it's the only thing that ever has.
                - Margaret Mead