• needed convergence center functioning 2 weeks before action (not just 5 days before action) and to stay open for several days after the action, and stay open late
• no coordination between the working groups until the very last week before the action. meetings with spokespeople from each working group which would inform everyone of the other work going on should have started early on to prevent duplication of efforts and also to improve the general morale.
• the action camp was really bad timing and/or too far away, took so much resources (money, people, art supplies, energy, time) away from prague in the last week and most crucial time before the action.
• there were not enough trainers or trainings at the action camp and convergence center
• there were too many spaces, with poor communication between them. (info centre, imc, media centre, medical centre, convergence center) yet there were not any spaces for meetings and we were forced to have meetings squeezed into a small back room at a pub, competing with a table football game
• major problem working in coalition with international socialist groups and other groups which are hierarchical, and which came and greatly influenced the decisions made at the international meetings and then didn't work together with INPEG to mobilize after.
• English dominated the meetings, native English speakers dominated the process
• unclear system for helping new people get involved in different working groups

• focusing so much on the action on S26 with little attention paid to the following two days was a problem. assumption that we would still have the convergence center and be able to have meetings each evening to plan for the next day was not good, particularly since we knew that there was a night-time action on the 26th.
• there were not enough actions in the week(s) leading to S26, the few demonstrations planned were small and people were afraid that they would all be arrested then and not free to participate on the 26th. also not enough focused targeted actions against multinational corporations.
• need contingency plans, plan B's, elaborated and discussed
• disagreement on strategy. some people trying only to blockade, others trying to get into the congress centre. many people didn't like the strategy of blockading the delegates inside and others interpreted the action plan statement "get as close to the congress centre as possible" to mean go inside.

• most meetings were not prepared for. people just came to a meeting expecting that something was going to happen and it was rare that someone worked on an agenda or a proposal beforehand. working groups came to meetings unprepared to give updates.
• there was not consensus on the process of reaching consensus! need more work on consensus process, more workshops, to allow people to buy into the process and own it If the revolution is the process, and the process is the revolution, how did we do as far as involving all the different groups into the process? different countries came with different ways of doing consensus-based decisions, and there was never a clear standard for prague
• people who arrived in prague in the last week often did not trust the decisions which were made by people who had been working in prague for months. many groups came and did not respect the work or the processes which led to decisions made. people came with a certain arrogance that they had better insight than czechs and internationals who had been working closely with czechs. massive criticism from these people that they were not consulted about decisions was difficultówas INPEG supposed to wait until September 20 before making any decisions, or wait a week to get feedback over the internet on every decision that needed to be made? if we are going to work effectively as an international network we must find ways of respecting the work of local groups and not attempt to override that work because it isn't the way we do things at home.
• more work on affinity group building, separating affinity group roles, empowering different affinity groups to take autonomous decision so they are making the decisions and not the tactical team, or the communication center or INPEG leaders. also, it helps if organizers are in affinity groups if they are to encourage others to do so!
• how to make the spokescouncil an actual decision making body? so much time spent at every meeting giving information rather than moving on. would be good to have introductory meetings daily for new people so the evening meetings could move forward and do more planning.
• not enough facilitators. it would be good to have facilitation team, people willing to help organize and facilitate the large spokescouncils, more Agenda planning for big meetings, perhaps having a working group of facilitators who build agendas for spokescouncil meeting would be good. this group would of course be open so people could join or bring proposed agenda items to planning meetings
• Some big decisions made by few people, without group process, or even telling the group that a decision was made!

Communications:

• no good system for information to get to all the working groups, and generally tactical info on the day of action (suggestion: one CENTRUM, one location, one phone line, being updated hourly by different working groups, and then different working groups can access info about eachother, such as Media finding out what Art and Resistance is doing)
  Bad assumption that we would have higher tech equipment than we did. Need to simplify, use handsignals, flags Mobile phones did not work so well but were the best we had
• reliance on mobile phones for the entire communications structure on the day of the action set up an information hierarchy based on who had the money and access to the technology.
• there was no clear way of informing newly arrived internationals (in the last several weeks before the action) of everything that was going on, decisions which had been reached at the international meetings, the context in which we were working, the political reality which is so different than what people coming from "Western" countries know, etc. if people arrived and didn't have strong self-motivation or initiative, it was difficult for them to find a place to join.
• there was often not good communication between czechs and internationals, and this was agreed to be the fault of everyone.
• the information centre was often not updated about events, decisions, meetings etc. there was no clear structure in place for getting information consistently to the info centre
• we could have used the IMC, the Prague 2000 listserve, and the media group to be communication centres/resources

Outreach/Infocenter

• there were so many leaflets that were not coordinated; many were repeating the same information and it would have been good to have a long term group which coordinated this (there was a group which didn't coordinate much after August). This same group also could have easily coordinated translation, and prevented it from being so difficult.
• one main original intent for the infocentre was to do outreach to czech people and it failed at this, partially because of the neighborhood, partially because there weren't enough Czechs working in infocentre and many other reasons
• no good alliance building with NGOs, INPEG lacked credibility due to this
• there was a lack of political content, no strong focus on the issues, and deep lack of visions of the future, alternatives to these global institutions, solutions to the problems we highlighted.

Media

• spokesperson model problematic, created a hierarchy of sorts
• media working group disconnected from the rest of mobilization
• How do we deal with the reluctance of many activists to talk to the media and still get our message out? particularly people with more radical perspectives, who usually don't talk to media
• the media centre was also not getting information regularly. one reason for this was that they forgot to send representatives to meetings.
• Media group and IMC were not proactive in refuting the statements made by the mainstream media
• media group felt disconnected from the rest of INPEG.
  Having spokespeople was problematic, particularly with this disconnect, and with the lack of attendance at INPEG meetings. Also problematic ideologically - how can a network which loosely connects many diverse groups have spokespeople? Why were they speaking for the movement, which they often represented inaccurately?
• media group felt that they had too many press conferences, which took up too much time and energy

Violence vs Nonviolence

• How to deal with Nonviolent Action Guidelines and commit people to respecting them?
• violence deescalation teams
• not enough discussion about violence/nonviolence/property damage, no forum in advance for people wishing to do this kind of action to communicate their intentions

Low Mobilization Numbers/Border Situation
why were the numbers so low?
Why did we not anticipate the border reaction?
Needed to publicize Dresden Camp and alternate action plan for those turned away at border

• the borders group (3 people) all knew that they would not be in the office on the night of the 25th and all day on the 26th, and they tried unsuccessfully to find people who could answer the borders hotline for those last days. since no one was found, there were many buses that were stopped at the border and didn't have support to get them through.
• borders group should have started much earlier and had more coordination with legal and media; their presence at the major border crossings would have been useful
• groups coming together from other countries could have planned border actions in case they were not allowed through and INPEG could have set up more support systems for that.

Medical

• no money, not given enough importance
• affinity groups just wanted to get trained, not plug into medical structure
• medical group did not have information about each march and had to work hard to find out which groups were doing actions which were possibly more risky than others and might need more medics.
• communication to the medics was sometimes very inaccurate and resulted in medics being sent to the wrong places and not ever hearing about places where they were needed.
• not enough medics on the blue march

Accountability

• the movement in general has no system for holding people accountable within it. if someone is organizing hierarchically, or works in sexist ways, or is withholding vital information from the group, or is in control of the finances and refuses to give money to groups which were allocated money, it is left to individuals to confront the one doing these things, and there are usually no results, no change. There were several people who had all of these concerns about one person, and who did confront the person as individuals, but with no visible result--nothing was done that had any impact on that individual and his power and control, and the individuals with the concerns did not have explicit support of the group in challenging his power and hierarchy.
• no system or process to hold people or groups accountable for going against generally consensed decisions

Czechs were afraid of the responsibility and the aftermath of S26

Financial
Need a more open and accountable system

Art and Puppets/Banners
needed more, needed convergence space to create them many signs and banners were unclear, needed more art

Openness/ Paranoia/ Hierarchy/ Non Hierarchy
Tactical Planning was slowed by openess question: how can we effectively plan a mass action and still keep some degree of security and secrecy about our plans?
Should we just be completely open under the assumption that there will always be infiltrators? Paranoia stopped discussion

the intense fear of infiltration prevented people from being open about their plans. how can we work with the assumption that we are infiltrated and not let that stop us from organizing effectively?

How do we as non-hierarchical organization, open to everyone, deal with hierarchical organizations who we invite to our mobilization, come to consensus decision making meetings, push the decision their way, then expect us to do all the mobilizing work on the ground?
Should they send some paid organizers?

• blockading them inside, surprisingly effective
• Meetings were practically empty on Wednesday and cancelled on Thursday, delegates were afraid
• the infocentre and convergence centre were perfect spaces and so useful and necessary
• having the map with the grid made communications on the day of action much easier
• music was a strong point, there were rumours that delegates inside could hear the bands play, people on the streets were more energetic and felt supported by music, one cop was seen dancing!
• pink and silver march had spokescouncil meetings in the streets and there was strong trust in each spokesperson
• Art of Resistance festival and counter summit both fantastic
• brought the issues into public discourse
• blockade on Wednesday morning at the Hilton
• small actions happened inside congress centre, fire alarm went off
• on wednesday when the gathering at namesti miru was surrounded there was a very good meeting to decide what to do
• czechs who had brought the sound system to nam. miru had never worked together before and were happy to do so, and very happy to have the opportunity to play music in the middle of the city like that
• people generally had a very strong will, were ready to do anything in the streets, took higher risks than many imagined they would do
• there was such a wide variety/diversity of actions and it was distributed effectively on the different marches, so people ready to break through police lines by whatever means necessary were not interfering with people who wanted to sit down in front of police lines and sing peacefully or vice versa. each group was for the most part able to do as it chose and be with others who felt the same way.
• the jail support started up immediately, lists of embassies compiled rapidly, border support for those deported set up, safe houses, rides etc.
• very high level of commitment from organizers who worked long days and took much criticism and got much accomplished
• the night demonstration/party on the 27th at Starometske namesti was good conclusion to a very frustrating day.
• most people were able to find their place and use their skills effectively
• there was incredible crowd intelligence, even (especially) in more intense situations, people helped each other a lot, coordinated running from police so it was not a mad panic but groups were able to stick together and the slower ones were not left behind
• for many, their experience being arrested and imprisoned only strengthened their resolve to continue resistance
• the bike caravan was overall fantastic, and there was an irrepressible spirit which enabled them to survive being detained 7 hours at the czech border in the rain and still sing songs, play games and enjoy themselves.
• the borders group response to Rampenplan getting stopped was brilliant
• international solidarity actions, both on S26 and for jail solidarity
• Dresden support for borders before and deportations after the action

what to do in future

• bring issues to people's front doors, Britain very successful in getting genetics issue in public light, with ordinary people concerned and acting on it
• proactive mobilizing, building or strengthening community networks and resource centers, be more creative in coming up with ways of working with other local movements, gardens projects, free meals, regular discussion groups, anarchist football games etc. so different groups are not working in isolation.
• really encourage formation of affinity groups, not just for actions at all, groups might start a zine together, start study groups--read and discuss anarchist/leftist etc. history, theory, etc, will then be able to more effectively work together on actions

-focus more on education.

• instead of solidarity actions around the world on Global Days of Action, perhaps have solidarity teach-ins, targeted at activists and "general public"
• do speaking tours, show video, photos etc, about actions and about issues/campaigns--this will help strengthen global network while educating and countering corporate media coverage of actions/campaigns
• more skill shares, convergences that are not centered around planning for an action
• take responsibility personally for our own education, read more, talk to more experienced folks, etc.

-focus on what we are for

• learn, create and articulate our visions, solutions, alternatives to global capital, corporate dominance, and "free" trade
• live and work in ways that we believe in--decentralize more, develop ways (as communities) of challenging people in our communities or the "global network" who organize or behave in hierarchical, patriarchal, racist, homophobic, ecologically destructive (etc) ways. leaving this to the individual is problematic, it is a communitiy problem
• have national or regional conferences to focus on vision
• get more people involved
• bring new people along on actions and support them, talk with them afterwards, etc.
• diversify our movement--how? in Europe and the US we are predominantly 18-30 year old white people.
• create our own media more to show who we really are, focus less on high tech media, imc is great, if you have a computer. network with independent filmmakers, videographers, writers etc.
• have public events that are truly public, get out of our "activist ghetto," show films, have discussions, art exhibits, performance etc. in places where ordinary people will feel welcome (when meetings are always in bars and shows always in squats, they aren't as accessible to "non-activists"
• make it fun! have more dinners together and fewer meetings, make more art, start up samba bands
• make it sustainable, take care of ourselves, start collectives of health care workers, massage therapists, herbalists, doctors, nurses etc. who will sprovide support to activists. if we are to do this kind of stressful and important and rewarding work for life we need to be healthy and strong.

-other stuff

• change our tactics, be more creative, following meetings of massive evil global institutions and surrounding their buildings has been done rather often....
• seriously discuss differentiations and strategic advantages/disadvantages of property damage or destruction, violence, nonviolence.
• reclaim language--what is violence? describe the acts rather than use that loaded word. other example-- in seattle they did not use "rubber" bullets (as the media calls them, which sound like they might bounce off), but plastic and wooden ones, along with webbing filled with small lead pellets -develop creative ways to communicate in the future. internet is limiting, how can those with internet access consistently distribute information to those without? using the internet as an organizing tool has made many activists lazy...
• how to act globally with continuity? strengthening the grassroots will naturally strengthen the global movement, think of global campaigns rather than just Days, keep doing the days which are inspiring, but they are resource intensive, and happen with alarming frequency...
• increase awareness of criminalization of our movement, publicize internationally the brutality, disappearance, targeted snatching of organizers, targeted abuse of medics. support other activists who become targets of federal agencies -learn to continue working even if infiltrated, (learn to assume that we always are inflitrated), learn to communicate in safe ways to make it difficult for informants to have large impacts, work hard to fight paranoia and rumours. awareness and security are crucial, but paranoia is limiting and inhibits our ability to work together--if we cannot talk to each other, we cannot work togeher, and then They have won....

S26 Prague
S26 Global Action Day