Gathering in Cluny Learning across difference Revitalising Radical Popular Education in European social movements - read about our first Gathering in Cluny, France! Reflections from our first radical popular education gathering in Cluny - France In January, partners from France, Serbia and Germany came together for the first time as part of a new European project on revitalising radical popular education in European social movements — a project that will unfold through a series of local ‘labs’ over the coming months. We met at La MUE (House of Utopias in Experimentation) in Cluny (France) for an intensive kick-off week. For many of us, this was the first time sharing a room, a language (or several), and a set of questions we wanted to explore together. This post shares some early reflections from that week, offering a glimpse into how this work is beginning: what felt alive, what felt difficult, and what we’re carrying forward into the next phase. La Mue terrasse Why this project, and why now Across our different contexts, we’re all engaged in popular education — but with different histories, urgencies and lived realities. Some of us work closely with questions of state violence, racialisation, and repression; others with gender, patriarchy or ecological breakdown. What brings us together is a shared commitment to learning that is rooted in lived experience and oriented toward collective transformation. This project is about learning across difference — across countries, languages, generations and political contexts — and generating new insights without flattening those differences. The week in Cluny was our first attempt to practice that. What felt most alive One strong thread that emerged was the importance of documentation. Often we think of documentation as an afterthought, but here we want to approach this as a shared political and pedagogical practice that weaves a thread between each conversation and local ‘lab’. We explored questions such as: What would it mean to practice documentation between labs, so that each group contributes to a shared learning process? How could our documentation engage multiple ways of knowing (cognitive, affective, somatic)? How could we make documentation sexy and fun? This led to a rich exploration of documentation as a creative, collective act. People experimented with different forms — collage, cootie catchers, spoken word — and surfaced questions that will continue to shape the project: who documents, for whom, and how we hold power in that process. Storytelling Another powerful element was storytelling. Moments where participants shared concrete lived experiences — including experiences of state violence — shifted the energy in the room. For some, these stories were primarily educational; for others, they carried a healing dimension. The week made visible how rare it is to create spaces where people are differently affected by systems of harm, yet can still learn together — and how fragile those spaces can be. There were also quieter, relational moments that mattered: late-night conversations, walks, and informal exchanges that allowed people to go beyond roles and presentations. Several of us noticed how meaningful it was that many participants arrived without fully knowing what the week would hold, and that translation — though imperfect — made it possible to be together across languages. Sharing in circle Where we felt edges and discomfort Alongside the vitality, there were real challenges which we want to name and hold together through this project — and that we hope by doing so publicly we can also support others facing similar challenges. The diversity of the group stretched our collective capacity and sense of coherence. Working across languages meant that translation sometimes limited depth, and that translators themselves couldn’t fully participate. Time pressure was another edge. Trying to do too much in a single week created moments where group coherence felt fragile, and where important questions — including around responsibility, harvesting, and decision-making — couldn’t be fully addressed. Several reflections pointed to tensions around knowledge capture: Who holds the responsibility for harvesting learning? How do we avoid collapsing collective sense-making into individual reporting? Differences in how people understand and practice ‘popular education’ also surfaced. This was not something we could — or perhaps even should — try to resolve. But a shared understanding was important to establish early on in the week. What comes next: the local labs The learning now moves into a series of local labs, each shaped by its context, while staying connected through shared questions and documentation practices. Berlin Lab – April 21-27: Focused on intersectionality within radical popular education, exploring questions surfacing within Beyond Patriarchy and CitizensLab. Serbia Lab – May 17-23: Hosted by Magnet House, exploring the use of art and dialogue with women in rural Serbia. France Lab – July 2-9: Returning to France to experiment with a people’s tribunal for victims of state violence and their families, building on the work of Réseau d’Entraide Vérité et Justice. Alongside these labs, we’ll continue to experiment with collective documentation and sense-making, so that learning doesn’t remain siloed or owned by any one group. An open process This project is still taking shape. As we move towards the spring and summer labs, we’ll keep sharing reflections — including where we struggle, where we’re surprised, and what we’re learning about how to learn together across difference. If you’re interested in being involved in one of the labs, or simply following along as part of the longer learning journey we’re on, reach out or make sure to contact CitizensLab and Beyond Patriarchy. Our intention is to build on these experiences and feed learning back into our movements. We hope to make the learning accessible and possible to adapt and build on by actors in other movement contexts.