Welcome!

CISV Devils is a website dedicated to improving the international peace education organization CISV by proposing outside-the-box ideas. From 2005 to 2008 62 proposals were submitted to this website and discussed in the comment threads of each proposals. Read more about the purpose of CISV Devils on the About page. To get you started, here are the top 5 most-discussed proposals:

1. Proposal #38 Children living happily
2. Proposal #50 CISV exit strategy
3. Proposal #21 No national nights
4. Proposal #28 Gender whatever
5. Proposal #29 World of chapters

In 2007 a new section called CISV Is Crap was added, which introduced another way of discussing controversial issues of the organisation.

As of now (January 2009) CISV devils is over, dead, closed for good. The proposals will still stay online, and for a while commenting will still be possible (no new peoposals will be accepted, of course). I'd like to thank everybody who contributed with proposals, comments or crap and especially those of you who gave feedback on the general structure of the site and helped with promoting CISV Devils.

Oh...one last thing...if anybody is interested in what the editor has to say on CISV, please check my new (experimental) personal blog on CISV matters called From The Balcony.

Update (March 2010): Blogger has unfortunately decided to discontinue their FTP service, on which this website relied upon - don't worry I won't go into technical details, except, that commenting will no longer work. So, from May 1st 2010 on, this will finally be a static page.  Which is gret, because people should be discussing elsewhere anyway.

Proposal #62: The more the merrier.

I propose to make CISV an organization that would not be mainly spread by word of mouth.

Rationale

I think CISV is big enough to start making serious efforts to take it to schools, universities, etc. And change what for many cisvers is one of the most important characteristics of the organisation: every new CISV member is backed by another CISV member. Being spread by word of mouth guarantees till some extent, that every newcomer is going to be someone that easily fits in the CISV world, which is good. But seeing how big CISV is nowadays, I think is about time to start giving opportunities to those who do not have friends inside CISV but would love to be in it, in conclusion, trying to be a bit less exclusive, that however we try to hide it, we still are.

Respectfully submitted, Máximo (ESP)

Proposal #61: ISS.

I propose that instead of 3, we only keep one International Staff for Seminar.

Rationale:

It costs a fortune. This year, over 40.000 £. I suggest that with this money we build, every year, a CISV house in a different country. This would keep camps cheaper for a generation, and allow us to increase the quantity and quality of all our programmes.

Respectfully submitted, Marcos (BRA)

Proposal #61: Exit IJBC.

I propose that no more IJBCs are being held.

Rationale

With the growing strengths of regional JB structures,and the IJB-team as a de-facto JB-committee that meets during pre-AIM, it's the logical next step to scrap the IJB-conference altogether and make the best use of the human and finacial resources elsewhere.

Respectfully submitted, Nick (GER)

Proposal #60: Sabbatical.

I propose that for two years we host no International Programmes or AIM. This time would be used for chapters to re-organise their local resources and learn how to be self-sustainable and do local education.

Rationale:

CISV Chapters often have no clue of what they are doing. The success of a village is measured more by the budget impact than by the educational impact. A good chapter is a rich chapter, not a chapter that does more activities. Still, most chapters are poor and don’t do activities.
A reason for that is they are constantly focused on “looking for kids” and “looking for leaders” - leaving no time at all to actually be organised (meaning: an organisation). If we took two years off from camps, and used all our resources to focus on organisational development on the local level - we would be able to much more solid chapters - that can function and understand the organisation based on what it wants to achieve, rather than by what “the IO tells us to do”.

Respectfully submitted, Marcos (BRA)