To: HH
From: 206
Re: 4 step on problems in HH
(February, 1981. The date is missing on the document.)
O: -On Tues. 102 showed me copies of the memos that he planned to send to BC to others in the HH. One had the mistake of revealing his identity to the BC, and the other contained the false criticism, but most of the HH members didn't question these.
-In subsequent self-criticism 102 put out steps but there is no provision as to who will organize implementation of them.
-In spite of repeated discussions of material problems in house such as wiring, nobody has been assigned, and there has been no movement on them.
-In response to my questions to 100, on matters of the BC and another question of O forms, she directed me to 102 with a general comment that he took care of those things.
-I asked 102 a question about dues that needed to be made in writing and centralized.
-After I wrote and distributed the 4 step on HH finances, 102 made a written response to me and suggested that I have others do the same. The effect of this was to undercut 104' s objective leadership of that process by setting me up in opposition to her.
P: Personalization of HH administration in 102.
A: Aspect A = 102
Aspect B = 100,103,104,206
PC is 102 VS [100,103,104]
102, the idealist, assumes personal responsibility for all HH administrative functions, with the exception of finances, which has been assigned only recently. The three metaphysicians have a clear interest in letting him do this as it allows them not to be responsible for things they might otherwise be assigned, and if mistakes get made, then it is 102's fault, not theirs. With the BC mistakes the three metaphysicians didn't have a basis to question what was about to be put out because they didn’t know the procedure.
My role has been to support these identities coming from my view that 102 has greater relative value based on greater quantity of experience in the 0.
S: Implement step of boarding 102 as a condition to break the identities established in the HH. Recommend Friday morning.
-HH responsibilities need to be redefined and reassigned. Key is definition of HH administrative function as distinct from that of organizational contact. I think the way to go about this would be a HH meeting this weekend, with a precondition that people prepare.
-other particularities that are out there can be dealt with in the new administrative context.
************************************************************************
Notes
To: HH HH is the Household I was assigned to in Chicago. I moved there in February 1981
From: 206 NB206 had been my organizational code number before I moved from the Twin Cities. NB stands for Nutritional Bakery, as in the People’s Nutritional Bakery, which had been the organizational program I was assigned to.
Re: 4 step on problems in HH 4 step refers to the Four Step Method, which was the basic way we in the CO examined all issues. We had more elaborate techniques for large situations, but we used the “4 step” routinely. The four steps are: O, to Observe phenomena, P, to Pose the problem, A, to Analyze the problem, and S, to Solve the problem with actions.
The date is missing. It must have been shortly before February 19, 1981, because that is the date two memos were written in response.
“102 showed me copies of the memos that he planned to send to BC and to other members in the HH.” BC is Buying Club for food items. 102 stands for H102. The H stands for H, or Hunt unit. Donald was his code name.
“mistake of revealing his identity” would have referred to using his legal name or perhaps his code name in internal communications when only his unit number ought to be used.
“the other contained the false criticism” We used criticism and self-criticism continually, but you needed to be judicious in when and how you used them. I have no idea what this “false criticism” was.
“In response to my questions to 100” 100 refers to H100, whose code name was Betty.
“to undercut 104’s objective leadership” of HH finances. H104’s code name was Ruth
“P: Personalization of HH administration in 102” The problem is posed as H102 administering HH activities personally, meaning informally, and not using explicit roles and arrangements.
“A: Aspect A = 102” The Analysis identifies 102 as the dominant aspect, meaning that he dominates this specific problem, or contradiction.
“Aspect B = 100, 103, 104, 206” means the non-dominant, or subordinate aspect of this contradiction is the other four members of the Hunt unit, which in this case is the same five people as the HH. This is the roster: H100, Betty, was unit leadership. H102 was Donald. H103 was (LW. I forget her code name). H104 was Ruth. She and I had just entered into a PR, a personal relationship. 206 was me. My unit number would become H106. Note: LW, Ruth, and I worked as computer programmers at a small software house in suburban Chicago. We scrupulously concealed the fact that we lived together from our employer and our co-workers.
“PC is 102 VS [100,103,104]” PC means the Principal Contradiction. According to Marxist Dialectical Materialism, the struggle between the dominant and the subordinate aspects of the principle contradiction defines the process in question. Transforming that contradiction is the necessity of the revolutionary struggle. Note here that I am not part of the PC.
“102, the idealist” Idealist refers to the bourgeois mode of thought. All persons in bourgeois, or capitalist, society, have a mode of thought that is either Idealism or Metaphysical. In contrast, the revolutionary and proletarian mode of thought is Materialism and Dialectical. We engaged in continual struggle to transform our Bourgeois World Outlooks into Proletarian ones.
“The three metaphysicians”. Betty, LW and Ruth were assessed as having a metaphysical and not and idealist Mode of Thought.
“S: -Implement step of boarding 102 as a condition to break the identities established in the HH.” Boarding meant hitting someone on the buttocks with a board.