1. At a public talk someone asks you, "okay, I understand what you reject, but I wonder what you are for? What institutions do you want that you think will be better than what we have, for the economy, polity, gender, race, ecology, or whatever you think is central to have vision for?
   

What I want is the ability of communities that are historically denied access to power within the U.S. polity to have voice in the allocation of resources and the development of policy.  Massive cultural (structural) changes must occur that are democratic, counter-hegemonic (non-racial [nonhierarchical], nonpaternal, pro-environment, noncorporate run media and anti-capitalist).  The two party system must be broken up and a multi-party system must be developed with each party having equal access to the media.

2. Next, someone at the same event asks, "Why do you do what you do? That is, you are speaking to us, and I know you write, and maybe you organize, but why do you do it? What do you think it accomplishes? What is your goal for your coming year, or for your next ten years?
   

My writing and my practice are dedicated to creating social practice that can break down the obstacles to creating a society that allocates resources based on peoples needs.  I am dedicated to the notion of creating effective political organizations that can create and implement working strategies for political and social change (healthcare, housing, nutrition, transportation, employment, education and voice for all).

3. You are at home and you get an email that says a new organization is trying to form, internationally, federating national chapters, etc. It asks you to join the effort. Can you imagine plausible conditions under which you would say, yes, I will give my energies to making it happen along with the rest of you who are already involved? If so, what are those conditions? Or - do you think instead that regardless of the content of the agenda and make up of the participants, the idea can't be worthy, now, or perhaps ever. If so, why?
   

If such an organizational effort were dedicated to what I’ve described above and someone like me asked me to join I would probably join in.

4. Do you think efforts to organize movements, projects, and our own organizations should embody the seeds of the future in the present? If not, why? If yes, can you say what, very roughly, you think some of the implications would be for an organization you would favor?
   

Yes, the efforts should be the change we wish to create.  I have seen it done in some current organizations, but they lack the scale to be more effective.  In addition to adhering to principles described above these new organizations must be able to facilitate internal disagreements in a way that all concerned understand that their concerns were heard (even if we disagreed with the decision of the majority).  A democratic and transparent decision making apparatus must be in place.

5. Why did you answer this interview? Why do you think others did not answer it?  
   

I have the hope and commitment to building an alternative world and will work with others to make that change happen.  Maybe they need results to overcome their inertia.