International vs local

Discussion during Vienna NMM meeting:

The views of old residents of a city differs from that of newcomers to cities. But differ also on matter of class and gender. The process of NMM, i.e. of drawing the maps brings differences of perspectives together.
 * Is this a difficult relationship, Important for INURA and for the NMM
 * INURA people live and do research in their localities and bring their research from their city to INURA Members must do research and theory in their city (but do not focus neither research, nor action only on local, of course).
 * But doing research in other parts does mean they’re not part of the local action.
 * INURA from its history is very localized. The view from the beginning is a local view, Is not an internationalism. Makes it difficult to open up. Those coming in make the struggle ..Both academic activism requires to have people that live there. Experts and activists but not experts in struggles in other parts of the world.
 * INURA has an approach of localism not internationalism. INURA is looking at local fights not international fights. (not all the present people agree on this point). If properly organised, what we do locally is part of the global fight. The idea that the fights on labour and housing held in European counties, have to be at least European, is part of the idea that we will not be able to change things if we act only on local level. (act only in the local level: With globalization it is perhaps no longer what INURA should do? But the way the local is approached brings together diversity. Re. Local and international, local, local is not equal local: