Reflections on the global situation
Renewal of the alterglobalisation movement

Gustave Massiah
25-06-2012

For its Monastir meeting, the International Council of the World Social Forum has planned to hold an open debate concerning the global situation. A debate that has several goals. Fundamentally, it aims to evaluate the development of social fora process and reflect upon the International Council's situation in order to assess its internal contradictions, as well as to highlight the role of the process' involvement in mass mobilizations and struggles.  Furthermore, it aims to contribute to the preparation of the WSF 2013, which is taking place in Tunis. The debate must not be limited to merely analyzing the situation; it must also focus on strengthening the process itself in order to serve social and grassroots movements. This introductory text aims to to examine the different subjects that characterise the framework of this debate: the crisis and its evolution, the new cycle of struggles and revolutions; conflicting ideas; political mobilizations and transformations; the Maghreb-Machrek region, and the current situation of the social forum process.

The crisis and its evolution

The situation that was generally know as the crisis has evolved. The WSF has, on several occasions analyzed the nature of this crisis, as have the thematic and regional social fora, and the International Council. It has already been determined that the financial dimension – the most visible one – indicates the depth of the crisis. Over and above the existing crises the food, energy, climate and monetary crises, … this crisis is characterised by four distinct dimensions: the socio-economic dimension, which is that of social inequality and corruption; the geopolitical dimension,  with the end of  the United State's hegemony in the world stage, the crisis in Japan and in Europe as well as the rise of new world powers; the ideological dimension with the call for democracy, as well as rapid growth of racist and xenophobic movements; and the ecological dimension, that concerns  the ongoing dangers posed to the planet's ecosystem.

What we are really faced by is a triple interconnected crisis: a crisis of neo-liberalism as a phase of capitalist globalization; a crisis of the capitalist system itself that combines the specific contradiction of production modes that of capital and labour, and that of the productivist model and the limits of the planet's ecosystem; and a crisis of civilization, that of the crisis of Western civilization, which requires the re-evaluation of the interactions between the human species and nature which have defined Western modernity and even provided the basis for contemporary science.

The people's resistance has exacerbated the neo-liberalist crisis. This resistance confirms the role of social contradictions in the final phase of the process of capitalist globalization. Social inequality, unemployment and precariousness have led to a decrease in mass consumption, and a subsequent crisis of “overproduction”. The process of over-indebtedness has reached its limits; the expansion of the financial derivatives market has contaminated all stock markets.  The explosion of the “sub-prime” crisis represents the shift from families’ indebtedness to that of financial institutions. The public debt crisis is the result of  the bank bailouts by the States. The reduction of budget deficits by instituting austerity measures is supposed to be a solution to the crisis; one would not affect profits, and maintain control by the global capital market as well as ensuring shareholders' privileges. Grassroots resistance is opposing this. This confrontation has become very acute in Europe, where the economic crisis has combined with the geopolitical crisis, and the future of the supremacy of the global capital market is at stake.

Nevertheless, the fact that neo-liberalism is running out of steam does not mean capitalism has been superseded. It is opening the door to a period of structural crisis, which shall be the stage for the confrontation of three possible outcomes

The strengthening of the financial dictatorship under new forms and the inclusion of the financialisation of nature; the restructuring of capitalism based on public regulation and social modernisation; or a rupture that will lead to moving beyond capitalism. These new situations will be characterised by specific connections between each of these three potential exit strategies.

The new cycle of struggles and revolutions

The hypothesis is that the people's response to the aggravation of the crisis in 2008 and to the repressive austerity measures that followed, have led to a new cycle of struggles and revolutions. The new winds of revolution that originated in Tunisia, initially spread to Egypt. It focused on the struggle against dictatorships, and subsequently spread to the whole Maghreb-Machrek region. They then crossed the Mediterranean, and made their way through Southern Europe, raising the issue of real democracy in Spain, Portugal and Greece. They regained strength crossing the Atlantic via Occupy Wall Street, London and Montreal, pointing a finger at oligarchies with the slogan “You are the 1%, we are the 99%”. It is now taking on broader forms in several countries – Chile, Canada, Senegal, Croatia – with protests against the bankruptcy of educational systems and the generalisation of debt. People in squares all over the world shout “Enough is enough!”, “Ya basta!”, “Ca suffit!” are the slogans proclaimed in Plaza del Sol in Madrid and in Plaza de Catalunya in Barcelona as  well as in many other cities, following the lead of the Casbah square in Tunis and El Tahrir square in Cairo. Economic and political power have been pointed out as the partners in the conspiracy of this crisis. This has shown up the dictatorship of financial power and the “low intensity cemocracy” to which it leads in their true colours..

Beyond these specificities, this new cycle of struggles calls for social justice, and the refusal of poverty, inequality and corruption. It also demands democratic systems that guarantee individual and collective freedom, and human dignity for one and all. It emphasizes the geopolitical contradictions inherent to Western hegemony, and the  increasingly sensitive issue of environmental contradictions. They highlight the social contradictions that exist between the working class and the oligarchies. These demands are common to the slogans that are shared by movements in all countries of the world, and at a global level. They renew then and widely share them in public spaces, and are presented as self-evident. They question the cultural hegemony that is required for the domination of bourgeois values and the ruling elites to prevail.

The squares have seen the birth of a new generation that is imposing its presence in public space. It's not so much youth as defined by an age group as a cultural generation that identifies as part of a situation and transforms it. This group highlights the existence of strong social transformations that spring from the education of society, and that is characterised on one hand by the brain drain and on the other by unemployed professionals. Migration has linked this generation to the world and the opened their eyes to the existing contradictions of consumption, culture and values. The results are obviously contradictory, but they reduce isolation and confinement. Unemployed professionals build a new class alliance between working and middle class children. New student movements are the result of the failure of educational systems worldwide. Neo-liberalism has not fulfilled its promise of providing employment in exchange for education, or the promise of good quality of life and consumption. Furthermore, the phenomenon of student indebtedness has seriously increased the precariousness of the situation for the new generations. 

This new generation is the one building – through its demands and inventiveness – a new political culture. It has changed the way that social structure determinants are linked: classes and social strata, religions, national or cultural references, gender and age, migration and Diaspora and territories. It is experimenting with new types of organization, through their mastery of digital and social networks, and asserting its self-organization and horizontality. It is trying to define forms of autonomy in the both movements and political bodies, and in different situations. It is looking for a way to link the individual to the collective. Perhaps this is the level in which diverse social networks generate new cultures, such as that of the freeware collectives that are able to collectively lead an offensive struggle while carefully guarding the independence of individuality. Squares are renewing with the tradition of public exchange. Both occupation and exchange are present, not for the sake of  voting, which although always necessary, is rarely enough. It's not a change of policy, but a process that is redefining politics.

The issue now is that of the relationship between the new movements and the alterglobalisation movement. The new movements have not been organized within that of alterglobalisation, although there have been many connections between both since the beginning. The hypothesis is that the current cycle of struggles corresponds to a new phase in the alterglobalisation movement. And this requires that alterglobalisation, as a historical and anti-systemic movement, be considered as having begun at the outset of the neo-liberalist movement. It has since undergone many phases: in 1980, in the countries of the South fighting against debt, structural adjustment, the IMF and the World Bank; in 1995, with the fights to overcome poverty, unemployment and the destruction of social protection; in 2000 with the world social forum process. The new movements testify to a new phase. And a new phase does not cancel out the previous ones. Each new phase extends, adds to and renews the form of previous phases. It forces them to transform. The new movements mark the transition between the last phase of the cycle that began by neo-liberalism, and the anti-systemic movements in the upcoming phase.

Ideological confrontation

The confrontation has been most obvious in the battle of ideas. The world social fora have led this battle on two fronts: one characterized by an alternative orientation, and the other characterized by immediate measures to be implemented and that concern the consequences of the crisis on the living conditions of the working class.

An alternative orientation emerged from the world social fora. Different societies and even the whole world can organize themselves following a different logic from that of the dominant logic of subordination to the global capital market.  Different societies, as well as the world, can organize themselves based on equal access to rights and equality of rights for all, from local to global spheres.

During the last ten years, the Fora have made many proposals to be applied immediately: the abolition of tax and legal havens; the tax on financial transactions; the separation of deposit banks from investment banks, the socialization of the financial sector, banning of the derivatives market, the redistribution of income, universal social protection... These are all proposals that are not revolutionary per se. They have now been called for by establishment economists and even by some governments. But these declarations fail to have any effect, because their implementation requires a break from the neo-liberal dogma and the dictatorship of financial markets. These remain the dominant forces, and they will not renounce to their enormous privileges without a fight.

During the discussion held by movements in preparation for the Rio+20 conference, there was a clash between the three possible exit strategies to overcome the structural crisis. The working document prepared by the United Nations and the member Countries focused on a vision of the “green economy”, that was totally contested by the movements. According to this vision, the way out of this crisis is through the expansion of the global market, by way of an “unlimited market” necessary ot growth. It proposes the expansion of the global market, qualified as green market, by the financialisation of Nature, commodification of living organisms and generalisation of privatisation. This approach is opposite to the premises of public and grassroots regulation. It is a mere extension of neo-liberal logic, the logic of unregulated capitalism that led to this catastrophe in the first place. 

According to this logic, the idea that access to rights is inherently free is something to be opposed. Nature provides services (captures carbon, purifies water,...). The idea is that their free nature is contributing to the degradation of these services. To improve them, they should have a set price, defined by the market economy. They should be commodified and considered as property. The objective is to replace humankind’s rights to Nature by the concept of private property that would enable good management of Nature. This management of Nature would have to be left in the hands of large multinational financialised corporations,  who would know how best to manage it, and compensate for any insufficiency. A new offensive is in place, aiming to eliminate all reference to fundamental rights that threaten market domination. This offensive aims to submit the United Nations to the pressure exerted by multinational corporations, and subordinate international law to commercial law. The alliance between States and the major financial enterprises is marginalising multilateralism and putting international law at risk.

The second concept is that of the Green New Deal, a proposal that is defended by modernists such as Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman. They propose a radical restructuring of capitalism, which includes public regulation and redistribution of income. It is a little heard voice, as it implies a confrontation with mainstream logic, that of the global capital market which rejects Keynesian references, and is not willing to accept that any inflation reduces the increase in profits. This situation reminds us that the New Deal adopted in 1933 was only implemented in 1945, after the second World War.  

The third concept is that of social and grassroots movements; it has been clarified in the process of world social forums. Social movements are not indifferent to the possibility of improvements in employment and purchasing power, as proposed under the Green New Deal. But they consider that the current balance of power makes it impossible to achieve these goals, and that the productivist growth associated with  capitalism, even in a regulated form, cannot escape the limits of the global ecosystem and it is therefore not viable.

Social movements recommend a break: that of social, ecological and democratic transition. They put forward new concepts, new ways or producing and consuming. Some of these include: the Commons and new types of property, control of finance, well-being and prosperity without growth, the reinvention of democracy, common and differentiated responsibilities, rights-based public services, etc. The goal is that the organization of societies as well as of the world, be based on the access to rights for all. This break is in process, powered by the different struggles, for creativity springs from resistance and concrete practice of emancipation that from local to global level are paving the way for new alternatives.

Mobilisations and political transformations

Ideological confrontation is necessary. Particularly if we take the unavoidable battle for cultural hegemony into account. But this alone is not enough. And the social forum process as well as the alterglobalisation movement are confronted with two questions: mobilisation and political transformation.

How can we ensure that mobilization is such that it can confront the challenges that lie ahead? The WSF process needs to answer two questions: Does the WSF process enable the strengthened mobilisation of movements at national level and within the framework of the key areas of struggle (salaries, small-scale family farmers, woman’s rights, human rights, indigenous people, ecologists...)? Does the WSF process allow for global mobilisation to progress, compared with that of the financial powers and the global capital market, and multinational corporations, policies and international institutions? It's obvious that progress in these fields is essential, and that it requires new proposals.

How to build political openings? Here too, the question is posed on two levels: one the one hand, that of long-term perspectives and on the other, that of immediate opportunities. The movements that make up the alterglobalisation movement emphasize the in-depth transformation, the requisite transition, which entails a social, environmental and democratic break. It advocates the need to confront the financial markets, as a determinant of this transition.

In the long term, it's necessary to revisit the issue of power. If one continues to believe that the political issue is linked to seizing power at State level, preferably by means of elections, this implies remaining within the paradigm of state-parties, risking being separated from the population that no longer believes in politics. One must also question the contradictory nature of the State, an instrument of domination of the bourgeoisie and the reproduction of this model, whilst also being an instrument of general interest, of public and civil regulation. The challenges of the new revolution must therefore be defined: the definition of new social relationships, the reinvention of democracy and a new phase of decolonization.

Currently, political power is defined in situ. Movements must define, in each country and at a national level, based on the relationship with States and according to their case, the relationship with political parties and political instances. From that point of view, without forfeiting their ability to criticise, movements will have the possibility to evaluate the interest of certain regimes and influence their evolution. At a global level, the alterglobalisation movement defines its actions in the ideological battle, in the battle of ideas, for international law. The movements have a many possibilities to act, particularly at  local and greater regional level. It's essential that they conserve their autonomy, an autonomy that does not exclude direct commitments. The movements participate in the necessary separation of powers, which is the condition for the respect of individual and collective liberties that defines democracy. The challenge is how to reinvent the relationship between power and politics.

Movements are confronted by the need to define a new strategic line of thought between the issue of the urgency, that of the dictatorship of realism and that of structural transformation. this is all th emore true as the movements are also confronted by the very serious subject of new military strategies, never-ending war and systematic destabilisation.

The Maghreb and Mashrek regions

The WSF will convene in Tunis, the source of a new cycle of struggles and revolutions. The Mediterranean insurrections are the bearers of revolutionary hope. We must recognise that we are living a revolutionary situation, a situation that takes place “when those at the bottom no longer wish to be governed, and those at the top are no longer able to govern”. What is new about this cycle of revolutions is that it is a work in progress: nothing is predetermined. We are going through a period that incites public discussion on revolutions and ruptures. Some aspects are becoming clear.

The length of time required for revolutions is long and by no means linear. Ruptures are not definitive. Some situations are manipulated so that the people's uprisings become civil wars. Popular revolts against dictatorial regimes that are confronted by bloody repressions that also open the door to all sorts of dominant and environmental powers. And they make it hard to perceive long-term challenges when faced with dramatic situations.

Beyond this democratization, which is a necessary stage, an alternative solution to capitalist globalization is currently evolving. This solution must address social, environmental, geopolitical and democratic contradictions. Another key challenge is the new phase of decolonization that would correspond to a move forward from the stage of States' independence that characterized the first phase of decolonization, and lead to the achieving of self-determination. This new decolonization phase of decolonisation is not limited to the rise of the so-called emerging countries, rather is builds upon the convergence of movements that has progressed within the space of the World Social Fora. This new phase of decolonization will address subjects such as the finite nature of natural resources, particularly water, climate, biodiversity, the control of raw materials and land-grabbing.

part of this new process is still searching for its path at a regional scale, and will only become visible one generation down the road. In southern Europe, about thirty years ago, regimes allied to neo-liberalism took advantage of the fall of dictatorships, clearly showing the limits of democratisation. This situation unmasks the European failure and the way in which Europe has developed that now needs to change. Latin America began to free itself from dictatorships less than thirty years ago, and democratisation gave way a period of bourgeois democracies. These regimes implemented neo-liberalist growth systems that correspond to the dominant logic, while establishing more or less limited democratisation. The United States went from controlling dictatorships to using new control methods of the bourgeois democracies. But throughout this process new social and civil movements have developed; they have modified the situation in many countries and in the Region, paving the way for new evolutions.

Other examples allow us to reflect on upon the long and chaotic period of revolutionary change. A glance back over these periods allows us to remember that revolutionary events, are frequently followed by a swing in the other direction, and even of restoration. The mobilisations that happened between 1965 and 1973 around the world, led to a return from the desire for freedom to individualism, the passion for equality turning to elitism, the love of the universal lost in Westernisation, imagination channelled by commodification.  All revolutions are incomplete, but their impetus is continuing to grow throughout the freedom movements.

In the Maghreb-Mashrek region, contradictions will increase between the efforts of conservative regimes and new social as well as civil movements that will rise during this new period. This is the perspective in which we need to consider the evolution of political Islam. And also, in this situation and in all the regions, that the reality of migration demonstrates the high level of racism and xenophobia of all society, a reality that is exacerbated by the crisis. this is true of many societies, and rejecting foreigners endangers cohesion of them all.

The situation of processes concerning the world social fora

Alterglobalisation is a historical movement that prolongs and renews all previous ones: the movement for civil and political rights, workers' movements, decolonization, the movement for the renewal of democracy. And the movement also needs to renew itself. The death throes of neo-liberalism, together with the will to progress, will lead to a new phase of capitalist globalisation accompanied by a new logic, contradictions and new anti-systemic forces.

The social forum process is spreading. New political culture is influencing initiatives and mobilisations beyond the process itself. Self-organised activities, the search for forms of authority that are not based on hierarchy, the diversity in the convergence of movements, have now become acceptable references.

The thematic fora strengthen the strategic orientation, which is that of equal rights and mobilisations against capitalist logic. They are bearers of a new generation of rights (Nature's rights, freedom of movement, food sovereignty, …). They propose public politics. They allow for the exchange of concrete emancipation practice. The objective is to now start building a different world, based on the alternatives and ruptures required to achieve it. The list of thematic fora, both regional and global is getting longer; around fifty are planned for the 2012-2013 period.

The national and regional fora are exploring new paths of political transformation and opening the subject of the evolution of regimes and relationships between movements and States. New post-neo-liberal policies are being developed. They are not anti-capitalist but they are exploring alternative autonomous paths to the global capital market (export duties, nationalisations…), and possibilities of partial redistribution of wealth. They result in the fragmentation of the social movement. The autonomy of social movements is still a priority, including in negotiations and when providing support to certain regimes.

One more subject is left to discuss: the evolution of the International Council and its role.

The alterglobalisation movement cannot be reduced to the social fora alone. There are new movements on the rise that are becoming very relevant. As well as new initiatives underway, such as we saw with the mobilisations against the G20 and the People's Summit at Rio+20. Using the process of World Social Fora, the objective is to think about how to move towards a new phase, and commit to a deep renewal of the alterglobalisation movement.