Launching the Radical Activist Network
Matthew Caygill
Radical Activists Network
‘Remaking
Internationalism: Social Forums and the Politics of Global Solidarity’
March 5th 2004
A lot of money (judging from the adverts in the
New Statesman and elsewhere) went into the public launch of the
Radical Activist Network with its forum on ‘Remaking Internationalism:
Social Forums and the Politics of Global Solidarity’ at the LSE on
the evening before the important preparatory weekend for the London ESF.
The precise background to the Network and this
forum is unclear, but seems to be related to the recent departure by
some of the leading members of Globalise Resistance. It also
clearly keyed into the discussions that have been accompanying the plans
to bring the ESF to Britain and seemed like a focus for the people who
have started to define themselves as the ‘horizontals’ in the movement
(in the sense of being opposed to what they see as the hierarchical
structures carried by the people they define as ‘the verticals’). More
generally it relates to the continuing development of the
anti-globalization/anti-capitalist movement (altermondialiste was
suggested as a better term) in the direction of the global social forum
movement (last stop Mumbai). The RAN has a very attractive vision of
itself of a network of activists in the various movements, giving each
other the space to discuss strategic and political issues, encouraging
pluralism, rejecting top-down and authoritarian models of political
organisation and calling for change to be achieved by collective
grassroots organisation, based on solidarity, equality, democracy,
openness and respect. It deserves to be welcomed and given positive
support.
The meeting itself did have a certain buzz of
excitement as more and more people arrived, clutching their sleeping
bags and clearly preparing for the weekend to come.
It did share the common fault of having too many
speakers and not enough time for discussion – several people made
contributions, loads more wanted to (and respect to Tariq Ali for giving
up on his reply in order to allow space for others).
Marco Berlinguer (Partito Rifondazione Comunista)
spoke of the movement against globalization creating a ‘radical new
subject’ and of that movement being created by the crisis of the
existing system and showing the objective necessity of finding an
alternative. The movement is still near its beginnings so we should
prioritise experiments, just as we should prioritise self-organisation
in a horizontal space and having something wider than parties and trade
unions. For Marco politics itself is in crisis (which I took to refer to
absence of participation and legitimacy in the mainstream of politics)
and he finished by calling for a refounding of politics which would be
transnational (i.e. acting at the European level), establishing new
forms of democracy, and new ways of being effective.
Annick Coupé ( SUD PTT Union, France) talked about
various experiences of radical trade unionism in France, while John
Appolis (Anti-Privatisation Forum, S.Africa) provided an analytical
context which talked about us being in a period of defeat of the working
classes, in a new phase of imperialism, marked by the dominance of
finance capital, which had created new social and class forces, and
being in a period of crisis.
Annie Porre (No Vox, France) disagreed with
Marco about there being a crisis in politics, rather it’s a crisis in
political organisation and the social movements mark a re-appropriation
of crisis in politics, rather it’s a crisis in political organisation
and the social movements are the seeds of a re-appropriation of
politics. Her emphasis was on the autonomy of movements and the need to
build alternatives. The experience that Annie focused on was that of ‘No
Vox’, a gathering of social movements created by the excluded and those
involved in a swathe of direct actions from squatting to setting up
social forums. She also spoke about ‘Intergalactic’, a network of youth
groups in France.
Tariq Ali provided a wide-ranging talk that keyed
into the tone of the event by starting with the assertion that
independents like to work differently and talking about the values of
diversity and plurality. Like John Appolis he thought we have been in a
period of defeat, but emphasised the need to map a way out, look for new
ways. We should learn from our enemies- and be internationalist. He
moved on to discuss the degeneration of democracy in the face of the
commitment of traditional social democracy to neo-liberalism and the
role of privatisation, commodification, the centrality of speculation in
economic activity. Tariq also discussed the military leg of these
developments and argued that, despite everything, Iraq had been a
‘social welfare republic’ since 1959 and this was one of the first
things being undermined by the occupation. He then moved on to discuss
migration and the likely future growth of the number of migrants trying
to get to the European Union. One of the problems we face is the absence
of ‘visible alternatives’ to neo-liberal imperialism. Developments in
Argentina since its December uprising showed how political movements can
fail to deliver. On the other hand the resistance in Iraq is the main
reason why politics in the US and UK hasn’t atrophied. Parallels with
the impact of Vietnam on the US and some partial lessons for Israel were
raised. And finally in developing our politics we need to be
participatory. Tariq quoted an article (*) on the lessons of Mumbai
which made the point that the CPI and CPI(M) were welcome to
participate, but shouldn’t do it via fronts.
All-in-all a series of very interesting
contributions, although they didn’t leave sufficient time for
discussion. What I took to be coded criticisms of the SWP went down
especially well with the audience. Participants in that discussion
included a couple of representatives of small left-wing groups in the
Leninist tradition who both raised the thorny issue of the exclusion of
political parties from the World Social Forums and the problematic
results as such parties still found ways to participate. Alex Gordon
from the RMT raised an interesting angle on trade unions and spoke about
his union opening up to the social movements. Another speaker talked
about the way that the situation for many asylum seekers was so bad that
she had to rely on the House of Lords as a possible source of relief.
Who knows whether this Network will fulfil its
potential and make a real contribution to the development of a critical
left-wing politics in this country, but I hope it does. The e-mail
traffic on various lists about the ESF process has been cheeringly happy
and optimistic since the weekend, so many of the ‘horizontals’ who came
to the RAN seem to feel that their voices and concerns about an open and
inclusive process in the lead-up to the London ESF have been met.
Socialists really do need to be aware of these issues and I think
sympathetic to the attempts to develop ‘new’ responses to the political
problems that affect us all.
* The article that Tariq Ali referred to was Achin
Vanaik’s ‘Rendezvous at Mumbai’ in New Left Review 26
(March-April 2004)
The Radical Activist Network has a web-site at
https://www.radicalactivist.net
March 2004