#horizontalism

occupy’s failure, is the shared failure of that anti-globalization movement, and in between - that of the arab spring, which had seemingly exhausted imagination for another kind of social modality other than one informed by neoliberalism - islamist or not. even the anti-globalization movement came to fore as a sort of post-cold war rebuke of state socialism and the vanguardist politics used to set it up, only to fumble once confronted with the hard power of the state and especially great power conflicts - in a way that ‘actual existing socialist’ states could not do. the occupy movement also forgoed the kind of deep organising that could actually build class consciousness and galvanise the working class into making demands.

No one was obeying some ideological command. People simply met on a street corner in their neighborhood, with other neighbors who had par­ticipated in the cacerolazos. For example, in my assembly, in the neigh­ borhood of Colegiales-and I know many other cases-someone simply wrote on the sidewalk, in chalk, "Ncighbur let's meet here Thursday night. " Period. Who wrote this ? No one knows. In the first meeting there were maybe fifteen people, and by the next week it was triple that. Why did it increase in this way? It wasn't an ideological de­ cision, or an intel­ lectual, academic, or political one. It's like asking why people went out to cacerolas. It was the most spontaneous and elemental thing, to go out in the street and meet others on the corner. It isn't that there was a deci­sion to be horizontal--it's not that there was a decision to use direct democracy as if someone had just thought it up. It wasn't a decision. We simply came together with a powerful rejection of all we knew. A strong rejection of political parties and their structures, a strong rejection of all those who represented the state or who wanted to occupy positions in the state. We made a specific decision that we are going to do things for ourselves. 

To understand this phenomenon requires more than calling it " direct democracy." Naming it is an interpretation. To call this new relationship direct democracy is technically correct, but "direct democracy" wasn't in people's vocabulary back then. The initial vocabulary was simply: Let's do things for ourselves, and do them right. Let's decide for ourselves. Let's decide democratically, and if we do, then let's explicitly agree that we're all equal here, that there are no bosses, that we don't want bosses, and that no one can lead us. We lead ourselves. We lead together. We lead and decide amongst ourselves. Someone said, this is horizontal, and well, yes this is horizontal because it's not vertical. We don't want bosses, and because of this it isn't vertical, but it isn't part of any theory of hori­zontalidad or direct democracy. Like the cacerolazo, no one invented it. That was a way to protest. It just happened. We met one another on the corner and decided, enough! Enough of this, let's start everything anew. Let's invent new organizational forms and reinvent society. "

Kai Fong Pai Dong (街坊排擋). 2015.

Kai Fong Pai Dong means “neighbourhood market stall”. Once  a quintessential part of the Hong Kong cityscape, these market stalls have faded away as a result of aggressive neoliberal gentrification. A self-organised, autonomous space in Yau Ma Tai (Hong Kong), Kai Fong Pai Dong started in 2015 as a response to the neoliberal agenda. Part second-hand shop, part event space, part fruit and vegetable stall, the space works under a “pay-what-you-can” system of mutual aid..

Kai Fong Pai Dong is run collaboratively between two farmers, a hairdresser, two farmers, a barista and an elderly neighbour. They provide a range of products and services - from weekly English lessons to locally home grown organic bananas, haircuts and local events. Through this, Kai Fong Pai Dong seeks to empower both those that run the collective and the neighbourhood community it serves.

You can keep up with Kai Fong Pai Dong at www.paidong.tumblr.com.