THE STILL UNCONSUMMATED MARRIAGE OF
INTERNATIONAL UNIONISM AND THE
GLOBAL JUSTICE MOVEMENT
A Labor Report
on the World Social Forum, Porto Alegre,
January 31-February 5, 2002
Peter Waterman
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/glosodia
Abstract
Combining
reports written on the World Social Forum, Porto Alegre, Brazil, January
31-February 5, 2002, this paper deals with the difficult relationship between the
international social movement of the 19th and 20th
centuries, and what appears to be that of the 21st. The paper is
written out of a 50-year commitment to and involvement with labor and socialist
internationalism, and on the basis of a 15-year academic/political concern with
the new labor and other internationalisms. Despite the sobering account of
institutional international labor's reluctance to abandon its partnership with
global corporations and the inter-state institutions furthering neo-liberal
globalization, the paper nonetheless suggests the value of an alliance of the
old and new movements in the interest of both. Along the way the paper reflects
on questions of movement institutionalization, of representation, of the
meaning today of 'Left', of the necessary movement from a logic of organization
to that of communication, of the continuing commitment of the unions to the
former, and of the necessity and possibility of a new international labor
'commonsense' coming out of its engagement with/in the Forum.
Foreword: From FSM to FSM
(São
Paulo, February 18, 2002)
In going to the Second World Social Forum (WSF II, the Forum), in
Porto Alegre, Brazil, January 31-February 5, 2002, my intention was quite
literally to follow labor's presence there, or its absence, or the nature of
its involvement in this dramatic event. I represented no one but myself. I paid
my own way. I went as a lifelong activist in the international labor movement.
I went as someone who attended his first international encounter as a
15-year-old British Young Communist. This was at a World Youth Festival, a
front for the international Communist movement, and the event was held bang in
the middle of the Cold War, in East Berlin, a half century ago, in 1951.
Between then and now I worked twice for international Communist
organizations, the first time for the International Union of Students in the
1950s, the second for the World Federation of Trade Unions in the 1960s (which,
like the WSF has the Spanish initials FSM). Both times were in Prague, and I
was there when Soviet tanks invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968 – incidentally
convincing me of the error of my belief in the peaceful transition from
authoritarian to democratic socialism. I began a 30-year-plus academic career
in labor and social movement studies. This was mostly in studies of Third
World, then international labor, later of the new social movements and
internationalisms more generally. Along the way, I discovered for myself the
value of networking in advancing a new kind of labor and democratic
internationalism.
As a pensioned - but not particularly retiring - academic, I
continue to research and write on the 'new global solidarities' and 'global solidarity
culture', to publish books and articles (in Spanish, Portuguese and Korean as
well as English), and to be involved in various internet activities. In the
last few years I have also attended academic, political and union conferences,
which I have placed, in my mind, under the rubric of 'International Labor's
Millennial Dialog'. What I had not done was to participate, more than
marginally, in either the major anti-globalization demonstrations or in those
focused on alternatives to neo-liberalism, like the first World Social Forum in
2001.
These, then, are my successive reports on WSF II, written in Lima,
Porto Alegre, or outside Montevideo, Uruguay. I have below preserved the basic
structure and argument of the originals, whilst editing the texts for errors
and repetitions, and adding some qualifying footnotes. In the interest of
readability, I have left all but minimal references to the final Resource List.
Finally, I intended to add a seventh, 'after the ball', report but this has
turned out to be a separate piece (Waterman 2002).
1. Love at Second
Sight?
(Lima, January 22,
2002)
The
major organizations of labor internationally may be making more of an impact on
the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil, January 31-February 5, this
year than they did in 2001. It is too early to talk about marriage, or even a
love affair, but the prospect of an increasing articulation between the world's
largest mass organizations and the world's most influential movement network is
of more than passing interest.
The
WSF, or Forum, became an instant symbol of the 'anti-globalization',
'anti-capitalist' or 'global justice' movement, when it took place in this
Left-governed city last year. The event was deliberately timed to coincide with
the World Economic Forum, meeting behind the razor-wire in Davos, Switzerland.
Although the WSF is actually the more civil face of the global justice
movement, it is, nonetheless, way to the left of the union internationals. As
such it is seen by the international labor movement - the major democratic
social movement of the 19th-20th century? - with considerable ambiguity.
The
Forum is energetically supported by the Central Única de Trabalhadores (CUT) of
Brazil, which is itself a relatively new member of the International Confederation
of Trade Unions (ICFTU). The CUT is also a major force within the ICFTU's
regional organization for the Western hemisphere, known internationally as the
ORIT. Whilst two other Left ICFTU affiliates from the South (Korea and South
Africa) might have been present at Porto Alegre in 2001, (alongside radical
unionists from the North), there was little presence or impact there of the
major international unions or confederations.
The
reason is that the ICFTU and its 'family' (industry-specific internationals,
regional organizations, specialized agencies, media) have long invested heavily
in lobbying the very inter-state institutions against which the Forum was
publicly protesting and proposing alternatives to, and in the face of which the
Forum was asserting that 'another world is possible'. (For this traditional
international union posture, see PSI 2001, in which the keywords are probably
'lobby', 'expertise' and 'consult' – with 'campaign' as an occasional recent addition).
Indeed, the major inter/national union leaders were in Davos, shaking hands
with the world's corporate and political elites, whilst the first Forum was
taking place in the South, thousands of kilometers away. The old international
institutions, moreover, have been either hostile, skeptical or cautious about
the global justice movement, a 'movement of movements' much wider than the
Forum, that is not only new and challenging but also seemingly unstructured and
almost literally out of control.
Whereas
the typical international union conference is a ritual affair, with major
decisions taken beforehand or in corridors, and provoking near-zero media
interest, the Forum is more like a teach-in, a happening, a festival, and is
more concerned with stimulating networking and alliances than with resolutions.
And the Forum is also a cultural event, attractive to both the corporate
inter/national media and the increasingly professional alternative
international communicators.
The
institutionalized international labor movement (which includes parties as well
as unions) has also had difficulty with the 'unrepresentative' nature of the
global justice movement. The ICFTU, for example, 'represents' some 157 million
workers worldwide. But, with the rare exception, these workers are unaware of who
represents them at international level, how they are represented by
these and what effect such representations might have. In so far as
workers are becoming active against neo-liberal globalization, they may be
drawn toward or influenced by this consciousness-raising, catalyzing and
mobilizing - if 'unrepresentative' - movement. The new movement also has an
attractive and universalistic ethical message, something the heavy dancers of
institutionalized labor have long traded in for sectoral 'influence'. Such an
attraction may be even more the case for the growing majority of 'atypical
workers', un- and under-employed, in the world labor force (Gallin 2001,
Waterman 2001d).
After
2001, a year in which the ICFTU Family alternately danced toward and away from
the global justice movement (dramatically away when as the former identified
itself with the US-led 'War on Terrorism'), it looks as if at least parts of
the institutionalized international union movement may be taking a more
positive and assertive position at Forum II. Markers, as faint as footsteps in
the sand, are the following:
·
The CUT, together with
the South African COSATU (plus the Korean KTUC and others, representing the
radical South or Left within the ICFTU), appears to be responsible for the
labor theme within the Forum. (The CUT itself is proposing seminars on unions
and the unorganized and relations between trade unions and the
anti-globalization movement!)
·
The European Trade
Union Confederation (ETUC) is apparently proposing a program of seminars at the
Forum, in the presence, or anyway in the spirit of, the International Labor
Organization (ILO), but dependent on a discourse of 'decent work';
·
Even the now-marginal
leftover of the once regionally-significant World Federation of Trade Unions
(which has shared the decline of its Communist state backers) is proposing a
pre-Forum meeting of 'class-oriented unions' to decide the position it will
take there against the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas.
These may be - to change metaphors
- simply straws in the wind. And any impact will be anyway hard to identify and
measure in the presence of 60,000 + participants, dozens of Conferences and Seminars (more formal)
and literally hundreds of Workshops (less so).
Moreover,
whilst the Forum might be labor-friendly, it is not union oriented. 'Labor' at
the Forum, will be neither confined to the unionized nor controlled by unions.
Even at the level of sub-themes, labor questions will appear under such rubrics
as Trade, Transnationals, Solidarity Economics, Migration and Human Rights. And
we can expect the energetic presence of social movements and non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) speaking on, or for, or about, women workers and women's
work, child labor, rural labor. The less-formal Workshops, moreover, already
list dozens of labor topics, sponsored by national or local unions, by social
workers, academics, and socialist parties or groups.
It
may even be difficult for interested labor movements and activists, outside
Brazil, to find information on labor organizations and issues at the Forum. The
major international union websites (including that of the ICFTU, of Global
Unions and the ETUC – for which see Resources below), whether in English or
Spanish, have so far shown little to zero interest in, or awareness of, the
Forum. The international press agencies, and even the 'alternative' news media,
are likely to be more interested in the most dramatic and colorful events, and
in speculating on the growth of, or divisions within, and the future of the
Forum and the global justice movement more generally.
There
may be labor coverage in Le Monde and Le Monde Diplomatique (which
has been energetically supporting the Forum, and collaborating in the
publication of imaginative special issues in Brazil) as well as part of the
left-liberal press internationally. And also on the alternative international
news websites. Left labor and socialist print media may, again, however, be
more interested in the nature of the event as a whole, and in the global
justice movement it has come to stand for, than in any specific union
presence/absence, orientation or impact. Time will tell. Alternatively, as they
say: Watch this (cyber)space!
With just one week to go before the World Social Forum meets, a flurry of activity – mostly on the web – suggests a growing response from the international trade union movement.
Most dramatic is the announcement that almost 20 leading figures from
the family and friends of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions,
will be attending. These include International and Regional officers of the
ICFTU (and associated international industry or functional organizations), but
also such more-radical Southern union leaders as Yoon Youngmo (KCTU Korea),
Kjeld Jakobsen (CUT Brazil), and Willie Madisha, President of COSATU (South
Africa).
This extensive participation, significantly, will be 'balanced off' by
an equally weighty (if whiter) ICFTU presence at the World Economic Forum in
New York, on overlapping dates. Whereas the latter event exists for only one
year as a summit of a 'global civil society in formation', the former is long
established as a symbol of globalized corporate capital. The WEF will be
confronted by the now customary protests of both the anti-globalization
movement and the Porto Alegre Forum. How the ICFTU Family will articulate its
traditional presence within the WEF with its new one within the WSF will be
interesting to watch.
It is also not yet clear either what the ICFTU Family's 'World Forum on
Labor and Trade Unionism' on January 31 – which includes a demonstration
('optional') in the afternoon – is itself intended to demonstrate. Nor how it
will be articulated with other labor events during the Forum. However, the
proposed participation suggests some kind of understanding between the ICFTU
Family, the (one-time Catholic) World Confederation of Labor, the Organizing
Committee of the Forum (Candido Grzybowski of Brazil) and the International
Labor Organization (Juan Somavía of Chile). The nature of such a possible
alliance, and its relationship to the global justice movement more generally,
also remains to be seen.
At another pole of the international labor movement can be found the
International Liaison Committee (ILC), a Trotskyist party that has national
affiliates all over the world, and that has been actively trying to articulate
the increasing labor protest against globalization and its various nefarious
effects on work, workers and their organizations. Its Brazilian affiliate, one
of the tendencies represented within the leadership of the CUT, has announced
that it wants to dialog with others about the Forum…but that it is also boycotting
it! The motivation for the boycott is, in large part, its adoption of 'civil
society' discourse:
The very concept of 'civil society', which is so popular
of late,
erases the borders between social classes that exist in society. How, for example,
is it possible to include in the same category of 'civil society' both the
exploited and the exploiters, the bosses and workers, the oppressors and
oppressed -- not to mention the churches, NGOs, and government and UN
representatives? (Turra et. al.
2002).
This position is supported by an extensive critique of the Forum, of its leading sponsors and strategies, of the NGOs and their state/corporate funding, and even of the 'participatory budgeting' strategy of the Left-governed host city (Cristobal 2002)! Whilst the critique may be well founded, and certainly raises questions about the nature of the Forum and the broader global justice movement, the reluctance of the ILC to join in the Porto Alegre dialog suggests other factors at play. These may lie not so much in the ILC's ideological differences with the Forum (where other militant socialists and Trotskyists will be present), as with its preference for international labor or union dialogs which it itself sponsors and controls (Waterman 2001b:17-19). Given the forceful challenge the ILC makes to the Forum, its absence is surely regrettable.
The 'center'
A third union position, if national, may nonetheless impact on the Forum, since it comes from a leader of the CUT (Freire 2002). It appears to express the position of what is the major Brazilian center and a co-sponsor of the Forum. Although written in Portuguese and published in a small (electronic) magazine, the international orientation of the CUT is familiar to the world of international unionism (e.g. Jakobsen 1998, 2001), and influential amongst both Latin American and Southern unions more generally. Freire recognizes the new generation, new collective subjects and new organizational mode of the movements 'against neoliberal globalization', and evidently welcomes them. Whilst recognizing the diverse nature of the movement, and the tension between the 'fixers' and the 'nixers' (my language) with respect to the international financial institutions, he considers that the settlement of this difference will be determined not by fiat but by the development of the movement itself. He notes the opportunities that the Forum has provided for CUT to ally itself with others, as well as the success in attracting other unions to Forum II, and the possibility of building some kind of 'global social alliance'. Finally, he stresses the possibility, precisely, that the Forum provides for further discussion and specification of the slogan 'another world is possible'.
The new world
anti-globalization disorder
These three labor movement tendencies, and unlisted yet expected others, are trying to orient themselves toward a movement that does not yet actually have a name! 'Global Civil Society', 'Anti-Globalization', 'Anti-Corporate', 'Anti-Capitalist' and 'Global Justice' represent as much projects as descriptions, analyses or an agreed-upon name.
And 'global civil society' is a term which specialists have difficulties defining, or are continuing to argue about (Anheier, Glasius and Kaldor 2001, Waterman 2001e)! 'Global civil society' is a highly-disputed discourse, with origins in anti-authoritarian struggles in Latin America and Eastern Europe, but now being recycled by corporate neo-liberalism, funded by inter-state agencies, and reduced to 'global civil society babble' by some involved in the Forum itself. What has, however, been offered to it by the anti-globalization movement is, precisely, the naming of the enemy as corporate capitalism (Starr 2000). Under such an understanding, global civil society is as much in tension with corporate capitalist globalization as with the inter-state institutions that underlie or advance this. And - pace the class-fundamentalists in the ILC - it is possible to speak of 'global civil society' without making class disappear.[1]
The WSF, moreover, does not encapsulate the global justice movement (as I am evidently preferring to call it here). Another wing or tendency is represented by People's Global Action – a major force behind, or inspiration for, the anti-globalization demonstrations that have made the movement a focus of media, corporate and (inter)state concern - not to speak of fear and loathing.
If the Forum has been largely supported by the more-militant international NGOs, Left parties and unions, the PGA and related initiatives have been more inspired by ecological, anarchist and libertarian thinking and practice (Juris 2002). The Forum, whilst rejecting both Old Left analyses, vanguardist strategies and a lobbying role vis-à-vis the international financial institutions, has proven itself open to at least the presence of less-neo-liberal inter-state institutions, which themselves are obviously hoping to incorporate the ideas and harness the energy of the Forum.
Thus, the international labor movement, which stands on the rapidly-moving conveyor belt of globalization (moving backward as well as forward and shaking workers off in both directions) is confronted with the rapidly-changing characters and scenes of a play, with many authors and names, that is being written as it goes along. The matter is even more complex. Within a dialectical understanding of the matter, the international labor movement has to be considered a part of the global justice drama, whether it sees itself to be inside or outside the movement, independent from it or autonomous within it. It is part of the drama, but so far, perhaps, only as a voice-off, or a sword-bearer, rather than as a major personage with a speaking part.
However, this is 'not your father's international trade union movement'. Because it is no longer your mother's capitalist world order. Just how different the Left, Right and Center of the international labor movement might look, as a result of participating in the Forum remains to be seen. Just as we will still have to see what kind of global justice movement might come out of a closer articulation with an international labor movement with maybe 200 million members.
Indeed, in relation to this new global-solidarity-movement-in-the-making, it may be that 'Left', 'Right' and 'Center' will no longer have the meaning assigned to them (in distancing quotes) above. They are, after all, categories of pre-industrial capitalism, derived from the seating arrangements in the Constituent Assembly of the French Revolution. The matter requires further consideration.
The
international labor leaders arrive
With a couple of days to go before the second World Social Forum really begins in this city of Southern Brazil, a major figure of Latin American unionism has already arrived. He is Luis Anderson, a leader of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and of its regional organization for the hemisphere, the Organización Regional Interamericana de Trabajadores (ORIT).
Anderson, an imposing, white-haired mulatto from Panama, is a veteran figure of Latin American unionism, from the days in which the ORIT was considered by the Left as a puppet of the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO, then known to the Left internationally as the AFL-CIO-CIA). He has, however, presided over the movement of the ORIT in the direction of the global justice movement, taking part first in a Continental Social Alliance of the Americas, in Chile (ACJR 2001), in the late-1990s, and more recently in the World Social Forum. Anderson, who is bilingual - at least - informs me that in addition to the 20 or so official delegates of the ICFTU, there will be maybe 60 more from ICFTU affiliates. Together with the CUT from Brazil, itself a major force behind the first Forum, the ORIT now apparently finds itself on the Left of the ICFTU and a leading force for articulation with the global justice movement. The reason for the interest of the ORIT in the Forum lies in the profound crisis of the Latin American trade union movement, immobilised as it is 'between union corporatism and the loss of collective imagination' (de la Garza 2001). (Should that not be the other way round?).
The labor
program
The Forum Program is a 150-page bilingual tabloid magazine! It reveals a union program that has been apparently negotiated at a late moment between the CUT, ORIT, ICFTU and related international union bodies. 'Labor' will be but one of 24 'Conferences' (delegates only) held on February 1. On the platform, in addition to earlier-mentioned organizations there will be a Filipina from the World March of Women, the President of the South African COSATU, and even someone from the shopfloor COBAS (base committees) from Italy. This is a dramatically-widened (or lowered) platform for those accustomed to traditional international union ones.
Moreover, work and workers will be the subject of at least two of the other conferences – one on transnationals (TNCs) the other on 'economy in solidarity' (solidarity economies and economics, an alternative to those dominated by market and/or state). Whereas the first of these events looks likely to reproduce the 'union plus non-union alliance' suggested by the Labor Conference, the solidarity economy one is dominated by NGOs. The notion of an alternative to the market economy is, possibly, a Forum Too Near for the international unions – although workers and the unemployed in countries like Argentina are increasingly turning to the barter economy and other forms of consumer and producer cooperation.
Then we have the less-formal 'Seminars' (open to all). There are maybe 150 of these, of which perhaps 20 are directly relevant to labor, some sponsored by international unions, others by national or even local Brazilian unions. Supported by the ICFTU and/or its regional or national organizations will be such as 'Decent Employment: Defending Workers' Rights against Globalization', 'Concrete Experiences of Changing the Trade Union Model', 'Fundamental Labor Rights in Multinational Factories', 'Unions and the Anti-Globalization Movement', etc. Others are offered on women and work, labor and the environment, peace and work.
Lastly there are 800 or more 'Workshops', being offered by anyone with a subject and a hope of public interest. Since these will be all in competition with each other (and the Seminars), and since they will be customarily in either Portuguese or Spanish or English, they have to be understood as stalls in this new international and internationalist agora (market- or meeting-place), in which we cannot know who will attend or what incidental impact they might have on the outcome of WSF II or elsewhere later. 'Labor' is scattered through here, with events sponsored by unions, NGOs, social movements, socialist parties, academics, religious groups. The workshops address such topics as: worker health, union-social movement relations, citizenship and class struggle, women and work, Japanese workers, rural workers, the future of work, a worker university, workers in the informal sector, life and conditions of oil industry workers, socialism and the revival of a revolutionary project.
Ba(s)king in
Porto Alegre
Right now Porto Alegre is either basking or baking at a temperature of 35 degrees something centigrade. Although this may accord with some Northern notion of Southern weather, the city gives the impression of being in Southern Europe rather than any other kind of south. If this is the Third World, then where, in the name of Dependency Theory, are Lima, Lagos or Luxor? Porto Alegre has had, for a decade or more a democratic socialist administration, under the Workers Party (PT), as has the whole state of Rio Grande do Sul. The local model of 'participatory budgeting', or participatory democracy, has become something of a model for much of the global justice movement - as well as for the World Bank (which may be more interested in its potential for recouping control of the world's rumbling cities). Without such local government support, there would not have even been a WSF I. Into the present one it is pouring US$ 17 million (according to Le Monde, 27-8, January, 2002)! The comparison that springs to my mind here is the support for World Youth Festivals provided by Communist states during the Cold War (and some radical-nationalist Southern ones since). But these were part of the nation-state-socialist project and subject to Communist 'single thinking' and control.
Whilst talking of funding – and influence, if not control - another US$ 650,000 has been donated by major Western development funding agencies such as Oxfam International (which includes such agencies as the Dutch Novib). And a considerable US$ 350,000 has been paid in subscription fees (my individual one was US$50). So Porto Alegre has to be seen also as a terrain disputed between the PT, the Brazilian NGOs, the social movements, the international NGOs, and then the hundreds, if not thousands, of groups and individuals who will be carrying its message home. The message, this year, may be influenced by the international union presence. But a question must remain of how any messages – union or other – will be passed back to constituencies the participants either represent or wish to address.
Communicating
the Forum
Communication will be a matter of discussion in the Seminars and Workshops, though not in the Conferences. There will, as at Forum I, be a computerized and multilingual information exchange, now called Ciranda II[2]. And there will, no doubt, be coverage in the alternative international media of the global justice movement. But what about the mass media? BBC World will be doing the World Economic Forum in New York, and staging some 'debate' around it. But, in so far as Forum II, whilst colorful and media-worthy, is unlikely to see blood on the streets, the Beeb is equally unlikely to give this seven-day event as much as five minutes of fame.
The exception to the rule that 'if it's not bad news, it's not news' is likely, on both past and present evidence, to be provided by Le Monde and Le Monde Diplomatique. My reference above was extracted from an eight-page supplement on 'The Other World of Porto Alegre' (Le Monde, January 27-28, 2002, pp. 1, 11-18). Although Le Monde has been closely associated with the French Tobin Tax Movement (ATTAC – now internationalizing both widely and wildly), and therefore sympathetic to the WSF, this is far from an advertising supplement.
The eight pages provide background, critical analysis, and draw attention to some of the tensions within WSF II. It provides lists of printed and electronic sources (not only French). And it has a perceptive view of the past resistance of much of the international union movement to the new global justice one, and of how this is now changing. None of which means that the 175+ million members of trade unions across the world are going to receive even some leadership-filtered account of what might have taken place here – far less the attractive graphics and question-raising information the French-reading intelligentsia can find in Le Monde.
So, whilst international union leaders might be here involved with and even in the global justice movement, it might take years - even a decade - before the global justice movement really impacts on the union millions.
It's five a.m., February 1, 2002, in Porto Alegre, host city of the Second World Social Forum, the day on which everything really begins at the major site, the Catholic University. I was woken by an unusual coolth in the hotel room, since the air conditioner had been fixed and the temperature had dropped from 36c (slightly warmer than nighttime Porto Alegre itself), to a wind-chill factor of maybe 20c. Yesterday it drizzled, providing some comfort to those who had been Sleepless in Porto Alegre, but also suggesting that we might have to be later Singin' in the Rain. God, however (who always rained on Ban the Bomb demonstrations in the UK in the 1960s), was clearly on the side of this march, and provided us with an increasingly glorious evening.
Municipal
socialism, old and new
The January 31 opening consisted of a demonstration in the city center, followed by a 5km march to a park on the edge of the estuary/lake/river that lies alongside Porto Alegre, where a rally and concert took place. This was the introduction, for foreign visitors, to the host city and to a major aspect of the event that is not revealed in the published program or declarations.
Jeff Juris, who I referred to earlier, suggests that – in comparison to the anarchist-inspired demonstrations of Seattle, Davos, Genoa and Wherever – the Forum belongs to the socialist tradition. Yesterday helped me understand why. The local forces behind the event – the municipality, the state of Rio Grande do Sul, the CUT trade union confederation, the rural-based Movimento Sim Terra (Movement of Landless Rural Workers), the Partido dos Trabalhadores (the Workers Party that governs both city and state) and the myriad other local union or party factions, are all demonstrably part of a socialist movement that is itself both old and new.
The old part is revealed by the Che Guevara icons, the references to Cuba, the red flags, the hammer and sickle of the Brazilian Communist Party, the calls for socialism from the urban and rural movements. The music, the energy, the variety – the whole urban scene here – call up some possibly mistaken memory of London or Vienna at the turn of a previous century, when labor and socialism were young, energetic, and a political factor of import in national life. And when the activists were not only municipal socialists or nationalist politicians but convinced internationalists also.
The new part was suggested by the chaotic variety of the march (which at one moment was proceeding in both directions up and down a main city avenue). The 'leadership', which included PT presidential candidate and former union leader, Lula da Silva, and former Portuguese President, Mario Soares, was eventually one or two city blocks back from the front of the march. The vanguard was occupied by children of the MST – themselves chanting socialist slogans. Whilst there was some verbal confrontation between the MST and a small group of dangerous-looking but perfectly peaceful Black Bloc look-alikes, there was no sign of PT control or even marshalling of this motley crew. This despite the fact that top leaders of the PT have been recently both threatened and killed by unidentified assassins. And that the MST is surviving despite a series of massacres. But the mounted police here were an entirely unthreatening presence, as was the overhead helicopter.
Press
coverage
The local media, press and television, is giving the Forum major attention. Local TV yesterday interviewed Luis Anderson of the ORIT, who spoke in defense of labor rights. Yesterday's edition of the local Zero Hora gave the Forum front-cover treatment, with another four or five pages inside. Its treatment draws attention to other aspects of the Forum, listing as 'major names' national and international political, governmental and academic figures, alongside those of Adolfo Perez Esquivel and Rigoberta Menchú Tum, Latin American Nobel Peace Prize winners for 1980 and 1992 respectively. It also, however, draws attention to a number of would-be notable (notable would-be?) participants, from neo-liberal national governments and the World Bank, who have been informed that their presence would be unwelcome or even inadvisable. These include the Prime Minister of Belgium and an External Relations honcho of the World Bank. Zero Hora reminds us of the various fringe events taking place here, including one of mayors involved in an international Network of Cities for Social Inclusion. And of activist judges – including the campaigning Spanish judge who nailed Pinochet, Baltasar Garzón. The paper, finally, provides the customary statistics, including the 150 nationalities present, the 1,800 volunteer supporters, and the 2.3 million Reales (around $1 million and a fraction of what was suggested by Le Monde), provided by the State Government.
Where are the
international unions?
Yesterday's opening was an overwhelmingly Porto Alegrian and Brazilian event, the city being itself plastered with a wide variety of posters, either welcoming the barely visible foreign visitors, or offering political and cultural activities, these being either within or beyond the fringe of the Forum.
Much of the international element was provided by the Brazilians themselves, since they seem to be the major force within, for example, the international rural movement, Via Campesina. Nonetheless, I saw activists and banners from Canadian unionists, from the militant COBAS Italian shopfloor workers movement, the indigenous and rural movements of Central America, and, of course, the drums and flags of neighboring Argentina. Chile was present, with banners recording the assassinated President Allende.
Standing quietly observing the demonstration I identified Frei Betto, a Brazilian liberation theologist, and Hilary Wainright, British socialist-feminist and editor of Red Pepper. Earlier I had seen Samir Amin, an intellectual survivor of the Thirdworldist movement – both political and intellectual – of the 1960s-70s, now himself heavily involved in a global justice network of more-universal reach and influence. I heard also that Juan Somavía, General Secretary of the International Labor Organization, was here – remarkable given that he could have opted for presence at the World Economic Forum in New York.
Latin American feminism, miffed at the macho blind eye to women at WSF I, announced its presence with a visually striking campaign against fundamentalism (this including the economic variety). That their hot air balloon failed to get off the ground did not prevent it from being witnessed by the assembled thousands, since its slogan 'Your Mouth, Fundamental Against Fundamentalism' could be seen across the field.
Where, in all this celebration, was the possibly small but nonetheless significant international trade union delegation? Nowhere I could see, but, then, the CUT itself seemed to be sprinkled throughout the crowd rather than marching in anything like a serried rank. And what kind of impact might this city, with its pluralistic labor and socialist culture, have made on international union officers more accustomed to protesting globalization in corridors, conferences and consultations than streets? I was later given to understand that the unionists had met together separately, as planned, to prepare themselves the Forum, in an uninspiring meeting. Uninspiring or not, the fact that there were 400 or so unionists present at an event that is now in a direct and public relationship with the International and Organizing Commmittees of the Forum is more than a footstep in the sand (for more on this event and international union participation in general see ETUC 2000).[3]
I await today's Opening Labor Conference, out at the university, for some indication of what it is going to further contribute. But the question arises in my mind of whether it would not have been more worthwhile, for international unionists, demonstrators and the local public alike, if the foreign union visitors had at least made the effort of the feminists to turn up at the demonstration and then tried to turn hot air into a visual and visible statement.
(Porto Alegre, February 4,
2002)
International labor activity at the Second World Social Forum got off
to an inauspicious start on the first working day of the 60-70,000-strong event
in Porto Alegre. Timetabled as but one of the six inaugural 'conferences'
(actually panels) within each of the four 'axes' (themes) of the Forum, labor
never got even as far off the ground as the previous day's feminist balloon.
If someone had wanted to sabotage the labor event, they could not have
done better than to put it in an echoing basketball court, with the panel lined
up in the middle, and the several hundred strong audience, behind safety
netting, twenty meters away. And then to have failed to provide the necessary
simultaneous translation equipment on time. And then, when it turned up, to
have it channel listeners to music and news from local broadcasters rather than
the prominent international labor leaders.
There was, however, no such sabotage, even if Kjeld Jakobsen, Head of
the International Department of the Brazilian CUT, was quietly cursing the
Forum organizers for dumping labor in this off-campus army stadium. Even,
however, if technical hitches had not effectively spoiled this first major
labor demonstration at the Forum, it would unlikely have been either an
inspiring or a thought-provoking start.
Not that the star performers were missing. We had, after all, Willie
Madisha, leader of the South African COSATU, Luis Anderson of the ORIT and the
ICFTU, and Kjeld Jakobsen himself, a bear-like and multilingual (Portuguese,
Danish, English and even some Dutch) figure, valiantly swimming against the
stream of techno-piranhas. Alongside these were, notably, such non-ICFTU or
non-union representatives as the American Jeff Faux, of a new international
network of union-related research institutes, and Silvia Estrada-Claudio, a
Filipina from the Left-Feminist World March of Women – an anti-globalization
campaign which has a high profile at the Forum (WMW 2002). We had here a hint
of ICFTU recognition of the import of the broader labor and feminist movement
to union struggle under globalization. Missing, however, was the earlier-listed
speaker from the COBAS shopfloor union coordination from Italy. Would the new
ICFTU pluralism have been over-stretched by this particular presence?
Finally, yes, there was Juan Somavía, Director of the ILO. His presence
amongst the union leaders and motley Brazilian and international labor
officers, suggests an implicit alliance between this inter-state organization
and the international trade union movement. The common interest of the unions
and the ILO lies in the damp fate with which both are threatened by the tsunami
of neo-liberal globalization. And the presence of these two forces at the Forum
suggests the recognition by both of the importance of this potent, or at least
potential, third force. I asked Somavía whether it was significant that he was
here rather than at the (neo-liberal) World Economic Forum in New York. 'Well,'
the diplomat parried, diplomatically, 'I'm here!'.
The really interesting thing that happened at the Labor Conference
would have been obscured for most participants by the piranhas. This was Willie
Madisha's reference in public to the COSATU contribution to the ICFTU's
'Millennial Dialog' (COSATU 2001). This 'dialog', announced at the ICFTU's last
congress, has taken place behind the back of not only civil society but of the
labor movement and even of the unionized workers themselves. (Neither the ORIT
nor the CUT have seen fit to make their positions public; indeed, it appears
that neither has made even a confidential written input into this exercise).
Now COSATU has broken the union equivalent of omertá (the mafia's law of
silence).[4]
Not that this represents more than a moderate challenge to the old
internationalism. Yet it is still a pity we could not hear it, nor any
hypothetical ICFTU response. But, as Willie Madisha said, it is on the
COSATU website. As also, I think, on that of the CUT, which apparently
identifies itself with this Southern position. What the intrepid translators
and interpreters of the Ciranda made of it can be read in Appendix 1.
As is customary at international conferences, whether labor, political
or academic, the most useful things happen in the intervals and interstices.
The morning event provided time enough for such.
Here was the indefatigable International Secretary of the Korean
Confederation of Trade Unions, You Youngmo, who combines the roles of
representative and translator/interpreter at such events. The Korean unions are
campaigning for the release from prison of their General Secretary.
There were several people from the COSATU-related research institute,
NALEDI, themselves part of the new international network of such. This is the
blandly - and misleadingly - named Global Policy Network (why not, for example,
Global Union Policy Network?). One of them, former South African union
officer, Alistair Smith, had been recently at a conference of a network of
southern socialist unions, the Southern Initiative on Globalization and Trade
Union Rights (SIGTUR). We speculated on its absence from the Forum, an event
that brings together unions and social movements in a manner that SIGTUR itself
claims to promote. Such curious evasions and absences suggest the confused
state of even Left unionism in the face of the neo-liberal juggernaut.
I met Tim Costello, co-author of a major political manifesto in the US,
Globalization from Below. This does not so much represent an
international union or even labor position as embrace both within a wider
social movement perspective. Tim works with an organization of 'contingent'
workers in Boston, and with a network of such support centers for the
temporary, casual, part-time and other non-unionized workers - whose numbers
are growing in the US as elsewhere. He had recently himself been to an
international conference on such workers in Ahmedabad, western India. The
organizing, internationally, of the massive numbers of globalized labor's
'others' (non-unionized or non-unionizable) in network form is, it appears,
picking up.
I met, further, Robert O'Brien, one of an increasing number of younger
generation academics, at least in the Anglophone world, taking an interest in
international unionism on the global stage. O'Brien has a sabbatical from his
university and is using it to write a book on the development of a new
international union movement in the face of globalization.
From all of these I received an impression of ferment in the world of
international labor that is hardly projected by the union organizations themselves.
The first union 'seminar' (another panel of experts reading texts at an
audience!) had been moved to a second site. The ensuing confusion allowed me to
meet up with other lost labor souls, this time a half-dozen African trade
unionists, whose ICFTU labels revealed their sponsorship. Amongst them was
longtime leader of the Nigerian Labor Congress and the Organization of African
Trade Union Unity, Hassan Sunmonu, who had had to leave behind him a major
national conflict, during which the NLC General Secretary had been arrested.
Argentina, evidently, is not the only country confronted by major labor protest
while we meet.
In the hall assigned to the seminar on 'decent work', could be found
union officers from the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC, for which see
again ETUC 2000), and from the Latin American regional organization of the
formerly-Catholic World Confederation of Labor (WCL). As also a leading Black
and bilingual woman leader, Linda Chavez-Thompson, representing here both the
AFL-CIO and the ORIT. She addressed the audience in Spanish, bringing warm greetings
from both these organizations.
'Decent
work', I finally discovered from a WCL pamphlet, is the latest figleaf behind
which the international unions are hiding their nakedness in the face of neo-liberal
globalization. The unions are – to change metaphors in midstream - grasping at
the straw of 'decent work' as something to keep them afloat in the cesspit of
'indecent work' and worklessness that globalization is increasingly producing.
What 'decent work' looks like, in the publication of the WCL, is the kind of
job that workers in industrialized capitalist countries had – or were told by
employers that they had – before neo-liberal globalization.
'Decent work' has apparently to do with 'rights' and 'dignity' and
being 'free from exploitation'. It allows a worker to be an actor in an economy
'at the service of mankind' ('mankind' here presumably embraces 'womankind').
This Social-Christian doctrine takes us back less to the 20th than
to the late-19th century and the papal encyclical on human labor.
Depressed, even before it had really begun, by another display of union failure
to come to terms with the real nature of work and workers under a globalized
and neo-liberalized capitalism (for which see Andre Gorz 1999), I decided to
seek my crock of gold at the end of another rainbow.
At the end of, well, not so much a rainbow as many agrophobia-enducing
floors and corridors, I fought my way to a seminar on unions and unemployed
workers. This was organized by the radical French union alliance, SUD
(Solidarity, Unity, Democracy). Although the official language was French,
informal translation was taking care of Portuguese, and the event was being
attended by people speaking other languages also. SUD apparently considers the
unemployed as part of the working class, and recognizes that unless they are
organized and defended, capitalist division and competition will be at the cost
of the organized. It was, however, also recognized that the French union
movement more generally addresses itself to fee-paying members than such
others.
A young Frenchwoman suggested that at least the Brazilian CUT
demonstrated a model of solidarity with the Landless Rural Workers Movement
(MST). Not so, replied several red-tee-shirted Brazilian participants. Whilst
there were cases or places of such solidarity relations, the links of the CUT
with the Workers Party (which, remember, is again promoting the charismatic
labor leader Lula as Presidential Candidate) prevents the union from
identifying itself consistently with an organization that some Brazilians
consider lawless or even revolutionary. The MST supports land invasions,
competes with a CUT rural workers union, and purportedly practices
participatory rather than representative democracy.
Whatever the case here, this seminar, with its smaller size and
participatory procedure, was the first such one I have attended that seemed to
relate to actually-existing work and workers, and to address, seriously, the
relationship that exists inter/nationally between union organizations and
social movements.
In the meantime, we have received a document distributed by the Global
Unions Group, a new alliance at international level, which includes the WCL
alongside the older ICFTU Family. (I suppose we must now call this the ICFTU
Family Plus). The statement is on 'Globalizing Social Justice', and was issued
simultaneously to the neo-liberal corporate capitalist World Economic Forum in
New York and to the anti-neo-liberal civil-society forum in Porto
Alegre. How does the Global Unions Group justify its presence within, and
address to, these quite profoundly opposed parties? Because it believes that
Trade unions are part of civil society just
as they are part of industry. In order to be relevant to their members, they
must engage in dialogue with employers for which workers toil, at the same time
as working together with others in the community. (Original stress)
The posing of a political and, indeed, moral equivalence between
'industry' (capitalism) and 'civil society' (here posed against both corporate
capitalism and the state/inter-state organizations that support or subordinate
themselves to such) might lead Forum participants to consider the international
unions as themselves fatally compromised with and/or subordinate to corporate
capitalism.[5]
This would, however, be to ignore the development, admittedly slow and
painful, of the international unions from a single and simple 'partnership'
with international capital and inter-state organizations in the past, to a
moment in which the increasing violence done to workers and unions by
neo-liberal globalization has brought them to Porto Alegre. There are other elements
within the statement that reveal a growing discontent with neo-liberalism and a
search for something, or, indeed, anything – a globalized neo-Keynesianism?
– beyond this (see the Forum speech of Jeff Faux 2002).
One small step for global justice movement; one giant step for the
ICFTU Family Plus?
Are there no international union forces coming out unambiguously
against corporate capitalism at this
Forum? A 1950s-style leaflet from the Latin American region of the World
Federation of Trade Unions might suggest otherwise. I was unable to attend its
two-day event just before the Forum. This was intended to bring the clasista
(class-oriented) unions of Latin America together to draw up a statement
attacking the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA, in Spanish ALCA). The
leaflet appeared to be an outcome of this meeting. Entitled 'Another America is
Possible, No to the FTAA!', this is a statement in which 'protest' still swamps
'proposition' (to make use of the Latin American feminist slogan, which urged,
years ago, the move from the one to the other). The condemnation cannot be
faulted – and will no doubt be endorsed in a projected demonstration at the
Forum. But the meager 25 percent of space allowed for the alternative ends with
an appeal to not so much class or socialist principles as to pre-industrial
(indeed pre-socialist) liberal-nationalist or liberal-cosmopolitan ones:
Our struggle today continues the numerous
battles carried out with exemplary resistance by the bravest sons [no
daughters? PW] of America during the last decades and that brings us together
toward the destiny announced by the Liberator Simón Bólivar, who, almost
two centuries ago, in the middle of a colossal campaign against colonialism
declared: I desire, more than anything else, to witness the creation in
America of the greatest nation in the world, not so much for its immense
territory and riches as for its liberty and glory. (Stress as original).
If one is to classify the position of the ICFTU+Family+ as stuck in the
later-20th century, would one not have to characterize that of the
WFTU as stuck in the early-19th (c.f. Bolívar 1980, Retta et. al.
1988)?
Antonio Gramsci, martyred Italian labor leader, Communist and Marxist
innovator, recommended to us 'skepticism of the intellect, optimism of the
will'. At this moment, in a Forum resounding with youth, energy, son et
lumière, here in Porto Alegre, at the beginning of the 21st
century, it is difficult for someone concerned with labor internationalism, for
half of the 20th, to bring up much of the optimism.
As the previous five parts of this report may have already suggested, I
have been both seriously overwhelmed, by the 60,000 plus visitors and 1,000 or
more events during five or six days at the 2nd World Social Forum,
and seriously underwhelmed by the international union presence here.
Labor, as already reported, had just one of 24 first day events, but it
has also had some line of activity which people more single-minded than myself
might have been able to first discover and then follow.
For example, a pamphlet produced by the Brazilian union center, CUT,
contains a 10-12 page program on 'Workers at the World Social Forum'. This
program, however, identifies over 100 different events, which means at least 20
per day, whilst the most that any human being could attend would, surely, be
three or four.
On the one hand, this wealth and breadth of CUT interest is consistent
with its energetic commitment to the Forum (at least if we take the pre-Forum
article by CUT leader, Rafael Freire Neto as indicative). On the other hand,
even a more-determined labor activist or specialist than I would be likely torn
between dishes in this surfeit of riches. And what labor sense could s/he then
possibly make of Labor @ Porto Alegre?
Moreover, I only picked up this brochure, from a tiny CUT stall, on the
third day. It was in Portuguese, and I then only chanced upon the program
buried on the inside pages, since the cover headline was 'Toward the National
Strike: In Defense of Worker Rights'. This referred to a forthcoming general
strike, of obvious importance to the CUT, but it concealed the program inside.
So the brochure would have been, at best, a guide for the numerous Brazilian
(and maybe other Latin American) unionists here. It would have been of great
value to have had on the CUT stall either the article of Freire Neto, or others
by its international secretary, Kjeld Jakobsen, or even the international
policy of the CUT that Freire Neto appears to mention. Even in Portuguese.
Whilst referring readers to the previous five parts of this report, I
should qualify the criticism there expressed by mentioning a couple of
activities on February 3. First, there was a considerable labor presence on a
major panel concerning the future of the Forum and the global justice movement.
Indonesian union leader, Dita Sari, was unfortunately not present. (She is due
to receive some Reebok human rights award for young activists, in a ceremony at
the Winter Olympics in the US shortly: one hopes her activity there will more
than compensate for her absence here). But a leader of a Mercosur (the Common
Market of the Southern Cone of Latin America) union body was present, and
revealed himself to be both committed to the Forum and critical of union
slowness or shortcomings in relation to the global justice movement. Also
present was a leader of the movement of the rural poor in distant Thailand – a
body that has been forcefully present within the global movement. I was further
given to understand that a previous day's session on unions and the informal
sector had been a more than worthwhile exercise. But I also met a trade unionist
from the UK who had evidently been interested in everything but the labor
events. And the profile of international labor here has been much lower than
that of international feminism.
The challenge for organized international labor became clearer to me
when I heard the Canadian anti-globalization writer, Naomi Klein, speak at the
session on the future of the movement. Klein, who has written widely and wisely
on the global justice movement, including WSF I, is not only a Great Communicator,
capable of moving audiences with a series of sound-bites that combine fresh
metaphor with a clear message and ethical appeal. She is also prepared to
challenge the Forum organizers, and the audience. She did this by reminding us
that she was the only woman on the platform (and therefore deserved double
time!), that she was critical of civil-society babble (NGOs reaching empty
agreements with state and inter-state bodies that only want to incorporate
them), that she preferred 'civil disobedience' to 'civil society'. But what she
by her performance mostly suggested was that the frontline of the (non-violent)
war against neo-liberal fundamentalism, runs increasingly through the sphere of
communication, culture, the media.
I was moved by Naomi Klein where I was bored out of my pants by even
the most forceful union speaker - though I am sure he might have been
informative for labor activists. And I am not someone inclined to worship movie
stars, movement stars, leaders, or even such icons as Che Guevara (dominant at
the Forum, but hardly representing the kind of human-being, or enunciating the
kind of message, necessary to advance the work of the WSF).
The unions seem to think that an organizational presence, reference to
their size, plus critique of globalization or Yankee imperialism, a banner or
two, or rhetorical reference to another future, is the adequate formula to
impact on global civil society here (and the World Monetary Fundamentalists in
New York?). If, however, under a globalized and informatized capitalism, the
medium and the message are increasingly inter-related, the union medium is
unlikely to move either the global justice movement, the international labor
movement, or the World Economic Forum.
Where are labor's Naomi Kleins? Its balloons? Its subversive posters
and street hoardings? Its address to the senses? Its ethical appeal? Its call
on the imagination? Its attraction to the young? (Well, mostly back in the
late-19th or early-20th century, when the movement moved
both itself and society).
The sense I am trying to make in this report can be that of only one
member of the international labor movement. Others will have to do the same
thing, to build for themselves – and hopefully transmit to both comrades and
public - their sense of Labor @ Porto Alegre. But where, how and when might
such individual or organizational understandings be brought together in some
kind of global agora, where a new commonsense could be formed? For Brazil, this
dialog might happen on web pages hosted by the Brazilian labor research center,
DIEESE. But this will, of course, be a national site, and in Portuguese (which
I can only anyway myself understand through my limited Spanish).
Anther hypothetical resource for such sense-making might be the Forum's
daily newspaper, Terra Viva. This remarkable daily is something that has
been present at all the 'alternative' international conferences since at least
that on the environment in Rio, 1992. It is produced by the Inter Press Service
(IPS), an independent, non-commercial news agency, oriented toward
'development', the UN agencies and, evidently, the world of NGOs. Appearing in
a mixture of English, Portuguese and Spanish – and not afraid to reveal at
least some of the tensions within the Forum in any of these – Terra Viva has
certainly been helpful in giving me an overview of the event. But, then, it
does have a decade of experience and 20 or so experienced professional
journalists from all over the South. And…it has to cover everything and
everybody, not just labor issues and international union leaders. So labor has
to 1) catch its eye – which it has hardly so far done, and 2) cannot depend on
this to make labor sense of the Forum.
One could, of course, turn on the TV, in the hope of finding something
from that particularly self-satisfied purveyor of objectivity and
both-sides-of-the-question, BBC World TV. February 4, in my Porto Alegre hotel
room I did just this. What we got was references to Porto Alegre but
filtered through the extensive coverage of the World Economic Forum in New
York. We here had the quite impressive sight of UN head honcho, Kofi Annan,
lecturing the WEF on the necessity to moderate its elitist and heedlessly
greedy behavior – and referring to the WSF in Porto Alegre as being just as
important as the WEF (did I dream this? I couldn't find it on any site the next
day). The only labor coverage, however, was of a woman leader of the Australian
unions – part of the ICFTU delegation to the WEF – urging the rich to introduce
a 'more fair' globalization. How fair, exactly, 'fair' might be, she did not
inform us.
I have been unable to check the IndyMedia website for Labor @ Porto
Alegre, but my guess, again, would be that it is limited. Someone had to
actually be motivated to produce the information and ideas and post them on
IndyMedia. And though I suspect that the ICFTU has a communications officer
here, I suspect, yet again, that the ICFTU or Global Unions websites are going
to provide us with official statements rather than information and
interpretation, and the kind of intellectual and visual excitement that we can
feel here. (I just checked, on the afternoon of February 5. Suspicion
confirmed).
There is one significant
labor movement oasis in this desert, though so far we need either French or
Portuguese to enter it. It was also produced before WSFII. This is a
book produced by the French activist and thinker, Christophe Aguiton. Called,
modestly, The World Belongs to Us, this provides an overview and
interpretation of the global justice movement, and includes a 30-page chapter
on labor - one of five dealing with movements. Aguiton has the right background
for his task, having been a leader of the shopfloor SUD unions in France, an
organizer of the European Marches Against Unemployment in the later-1990s and,
more recently, the international officer of ATTAC, a major force behind the
Forum. Only one of five chapters? Yes, because Aguiton, like the US writers,
Jeremy Brecher and Tim Costello, has evidently found that to get the movement
back into the labor movement, one has to first go beyond it. The chapter on
labor is, however, excellent, revealing not only Aguiton's own experience but also his wide reading.
Later – with access to the book in a more familiar language – I hope to
review it. In the meantime, I note that Aguiton's cautious identification of
'poles' within the movement cuts across the labor and, indeed, socialist
movement. They are, in this order, a Radical Internationalist, a Nationalist
and a 'Neo-Reformist' pole. The Radical Internationalist one is the one looking
beyond capitalism and the nation state, the Nationalist (mostly Southern,
Aguiton says, though it could include a lot of French supporters) looks to the
nation state as the only defense against globalization, and the Neo-Reformist
one (mostly Northern, as in the collection of Rikkilä and Patomäki 2001) looks
to 'global governance' to balance off the power of uncontrolled multinational
corporations.
In relation to these three - admittedly tentative - poles of Aguiton,
it is clear that international labor finds itself still drawn most powerfully
toward the last. Yet national and international labor movement tendencies –
also at Porto Alegre – could be found drawn toward the other poles also. The
most important point here is that labor, as such, has no pole of its own.
Farewell, if not to the proletariat, then to the Left? It would appear from the
Aguiton model that labor, as an international movement, is presently a follower
rather than a leader. (The same could also be said for socialists and
socialism, feminists and feminism, all of which can be found within, or drawn
toward, each of these poles). This book, along with one or two others (Brecher,
Costello and Smith 2000, Starr 2000), certainly provides points of reference
for those trying to understand the movement. What neither Aguiton nor the
others fully address, however, is the problem of moving from the logic of
organization to that of communication.
I do not think that we can depend on the final declaration of the
Brazilian Organizing Committee, to do this political/communicational job for
labor, or for the global justice movement more generally. The organizers' own
mandate is limited to providing us with this agora in which to ourselves spell
out the meaning of the Forum slogan, 'Another World is Possible!'. (I am
delighted to have been proven wrong. See Appendix 2, which incorporates basic
international union demands and thus provides a charter unionists can urge
their organizations to endorse, implement and help develop!)[6].
The notion that another world is possible has been a brilliantly subversive
one in the face of those who have drummed into our heads that 'There is No
Alternative'. But I am left wondering whether the effect of the 1,000 different
events is not one that leaves one or two committees, with maybe 20 or even 100
self-appointed members, to themselves determine – though behind transparent
doors - the form of the Forum.
In the meantime, and well
before the next such Forum, next year in Porto Alegre, the international union
movement has to learn this lesson: if you don't fly, you die. If it wants
advice on how to overcome its incapacity to communicate to anyone other than
itself, it could do worse than to consult the women who organized here the
media-sensitive campaign against fundamentalism, or with Naomi Klein, pro-labor
and pro-feminist, who clearly has no fear of flying.
Postscript
(São
Paulo, February 15, 2002)
Some women also demonstrate the
value of standing one's ground. About the time the Forum was winding up, Dita
Sari sent an open letter to the Reebok Foundation, giving reasons for her
decision to reject the human rights award and cash prize offered her, and to be
presented at the Winter Olympics in the USA (not reported on the international
union sites as of mid-February!). She turned it down, after consultation with
her comrades (and, possibly, some friendly, if concerned internet exchanges)
because of the sweatshop conditions Western footwear multinationals are
responsible for in Indonesia, as well as for some more Reebok-specific behavior
in the past. My regret is that she didn't come to Porto Alegre and make her
decision public here. Labor needs its heroines in international public space
much more than in prison. In the meantime, however, Dita's behaviour here
provides a model of principle and dignity to the international trade union
movement.
These lists have been built up before, during and after the Forum
(30.1-5.2.02). Relevant
contributions, preferably in the same style, would be more than welcome, and
acknowledged in later editions.
AFL-CIO. 2001. 'Remarks by AFL-CIO President John J.
Sweeney, World Economic Forum, Davos, Switzerland. January 28'.
ACJR. 2001. Globalización, ALCA y Democracia: De las Cumbres de
Santiago de Chile a las Cumbres de Quebec, Canadá (Globalization, FTAA and
Democracy: From the Summits of Santiago, Chile to the Summits of Quebec,
Canada). Santiago: Alianza Chilena por un Comercio Justo y Responsable. 207 pp.
Aguiton,
Christophe. 2001. Le monde nous appartient (The World Belongs to Us).
Paris: Plon.
Aguiton,
Christophe. 2002. O
mundo nos pertenece (The World Belongs to Us). Sao Paulo: Viramundo. 222 pp.
Anheier, Helmut, Marlies Glasius and Mary Kaldor (eds). 2001. Global
Civil Society Yearbook 2001. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 360 pp.
Anheier, Helmut, Marlies Glasius and Mary Kaldor. 2001. 'Introducing
Global Civil Society', in Helmut Anheier, Marlies Glasius and Mary Kaldor
(eds), Global Civil Society Yearbook 2001. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. Pp. 3-22.
Anheier, Marlies Glasius and Mary Kaldor (eds). Global Civil Society
Yearbook 2001. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. 195-217.
Bolívar, Simon. 1980. 'Proyectos Panamericanos (1824-6) (Panamerican
Projects), in Simon Bolívar: Escritos politicos. Bogotá: El Ancora
Editores. Pp. 97-121.
Brecher, Jeremy, Tim Costello and Brendan Smith. 2000. Globalization
from Below: The Power of Solidarity. Boston: South End Press.
Carotenuto, Gennaro. 2002. 'Documento final de los
movimientos sociales: Una cosa es hablar y otra escribir' (Final Document of
the Social Movements: It's One Thing to Talk and Another to Write), Brecha (Montevideo), February 8, pp. 16-17.
COSATU. 2001. 'A Strategic Perspective on the International Trade Union Movement for
the 21st Century'. 14 pp. http://www.cosatu.org.za/index.html
Cristobal, Miguel. 2002. 'ATTAC, the "Tobin Tax", and the
World Social Forum of Porto Alegre (Brazil): Is this a Way Forward to Fight Global
Capitalism?'. Email from International Liaison Committee for a Workers
International (ILC). theorganizer@igc.org,
23.1.02.
de la Garza Toledo,
Enrique. 2001. 'Las transiciones políticas en América Latina, entre el
corporativismo sindical y la pérdida de imaginarios colectivos' (Political
Transitions in Latin America,
between Union Corporativism and the Loss of Collective Imagination)
in, Enrique de la Garza Toledo (ed), Los
sindicatos frente a los procesos de transición política. Buenos Aires: CLACSO. Pp. 9-23.
Escobar, Arturo. 2000. 'Notes on Networks and
Anti-Globalization Social Movements', 2000 AAA Annual Meeting, San Francisco,
November 15-19.
Estanque, Elísio. 2001. 'The Reinvention of Unions and New Emancipatory Challenges: From Local Despotism to Global Mobilization'. Contribution to the Project on Reinventing Social Emancipation, Center of Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal.
ETUC. 2000. 'Foro Social Mundial 2002. Porto Alegre 31 enero-5 febrero 2002: Informe de la delegación de la CES'. Brussels: European Trade Union Confederation. 9 pp.
Faux, Jeff. 2002. 'A Global
Strategy for Labor' (Speech to Labor Conference, World Social Forum, Porto
Alegre, February 1). Global Policy Network Website.
Federación Sindical Mundial.
2002. 'No al ALCA! Otra América es posible! Por la integración solidaria entre
iguales para la conquista de la justicia social y el bienestar de nuestros
pueblos' (No to FTAA! Another America is Posible! For the Solidarity
Integration between Equals for the Conquest of Social Justice and the Welfare
of Our Peoples). 2 pp.
Freire Neto, Rafael. 2002. 'O sindicalismo e os
movimentos de luta contra a globalização neoliberal' (On Unionism and the
Movements against Neo-Liberal Globalization), Ponto a Ponto Cadernos
(São Paulo), No. 4, January.
Gallin, Dan. 2001. 'Propositions on Trade Unions and Informal Employment in Times of Globalization', in Peter Waterman and Jane Wills (eds), Place, Space and the New Labor Internationalisms. Oxford: Blackwell.
Global Social Forum. 2001. 'Porto Alegre Call for Mobilization', http://www.focusweb.org/publications/2001/Porto%20Alegre%20Call%20for%20Mobilisation.htm
Global Unions Group. 2002. 'GLOBALIZING
SOCIAL JUSTICE: Trade Union Statement to the World Social Forum (Porto Alegre)
and the World Economic Forum (New York), January-February 2002'. 3 pp.
Gorz, Andre. 1999. Reclaiming Work:
Beyond the Wage-Based Society. Cambridge: Polity. 185 pp.
Jakobsen, Kjeld Aagaard. 1998. 'Nuevos rumbos en la ORIT' (New Challenges in the ORIT), in Maria Portella de Castro and Achim Wachendorfer (eds.). 1998. Sindicalismo y globalización: La dolorosa inserción en un mundo incierto. Caracas: Editorial Nueva Sociedad. Pp. 307-19.
Jakobsen, Kjeld. 2001. 'Rethinking the International Confederation of
Free Trade Unions and its Inter-American Regional Organization', in Peter
Waterman and Jane Wills (eds.), Place, Space and the New Labor
Internationalisms. Oxford: Blackwell. Pp. 59-79.
Juris, Jeffrey. 2002. 'Research Project: The Movement for Global
Resistance in Barcelona' (Draft). (On GloSoDia Group/List).
Klein, Naomi. 2001. 'A Fete for the End of the End of History', The
Nation (New York), March 19.
Le Monde. 2002. 'L'Autre Monde de Porto Alegre' (The Other World of
Porto Alegre). Le Monde. January 27-28, 2002. Pp. 1, 11-18.
Le Monde Diplomatique/Cadernos Diplo. 2000. 'Globalização e mundo de trabalho'
(Globalization and the World of Work), Diplô Brasil/Le Monde Diplomatique,
No. 1. 40 pp. September.
Le Monde Diplomatique/Cadernos Diplo. 2002. 'Que outro mundo é
possível?' (Which Other World is Possible?), Diplô Brasil/Le Monde
Diplomatique, No. 3. 50 pp. January.
LRCI. 2001. [Anti]Capitalism: From Resistance to Revolution. An
Action Guide. London: League for a Revolutionary Communist International.
40 pp.
Malentacchi, Marcello. 2001. 'A Tribune for Global Unions', March 19. http://www.imfmetal.org/imf/main/main_opinions.cfm
Monoreo Perez, Manuel. 2001. 'Propuestas para un nuevo
internacionalismo' (Propositions on a New Internationalism), in Manuel Monorero
and Miguel Riera (eds), Foro Social Mundial: Porto Alegre: Otro mundo es
possible. Madrid: El Viejo Topo. Pp. 49-55.
Mouvement National des Chômeurs et Précaires. 2001. 'Quebec, du 9 au 12
Octobre: Vers une solidarité globale' (Quebec, from October 9 to 12: Toward a
Global Solidrity), MNCP Solidarités Chômages (Paris), No. 6, Décembre
2001.
OSAL. 2002. 'Perspectivas del movimiento global
de la sociedad civil. Elaborado por el Observatorio Social de América Latina
(OSAL) Consejo Latinoamericano de
Ciencias Sociales (CLACSO)' (Perspectives of the Global Movement of Civil
Society. Elaborated by the Social Observatory of Latin America, Latin American
Council of Social Sciences).
Pianta, Mario. 2001. 'Parallel Summits of Global Civil Society', in
Helmut Anheier,
Marlies Glasius and Mary Kaldor (eds). Global Civil Society Yearbook
2001. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 360 pp.
Pinter, Frances. 2001. 'Funding
global civil society organisations', in Helmut
Anheier, Marlies Glasius and Mary Kaldor (eds), Global Civil Society
Yearbook 2001. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
'Porto Alegre
Call for Mobilization', Appendix 1 in Peter Waterman, 'Talking across
Difference in an Interconnected World of Labor: The Union/Movement/NGO
Roundtable on Labor and Globalization, Bangkok, March 2001', Transnational
Associations (Brussels), 2002.
Ponto a Ponto. 2002. 'Elementos para um balanço do II Fórum Social
Mundial' (Elements for an Evaluation of the 2nd World Social Forum),
Punto a Punto (São Paulo), No. 7, February.
Public Services International. 2001 'Stop the World? No! Shape it!', Policy,
Practice, Program. No. 2. Geneva: Public Services International. 50 pp.
Retta Sivollela, Cristina, et.al. 1988. De Bolívar a Sandino: Hombres de la Masonería
en la prédica integradora (From Bolivar to Sandino: Men of the Masons and
the Sermón of Integration). Montevideo: Ediciones America Una. 281 pp.
Riethof, Marieke. 2001. 'The
Brazilian Labor Movement on the Internet', Paper prepared for presentation at
the Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, Chicago,
February 21-24, 2001. Amsterdam
School for Social Science Research/International Political Economy, University
of Amsterdam.
Rikkilä, Leena
and Katarina Sehm Patomäki (eds). 2001. Democracy and Globalization: Promoting
a North-South Dialog. Helsinki: Networking Institute for Global Democracy
and Ministry for Foreign Affairs. 129 pp.
Schvarz, Nico. 2002. 'La relación
partidos-movimientos sociales en el eje del debate de Porto Alegre: Proponen
crear un Foro partidario internacional de izquierdas' (The Party-Social
Movement Relation in the Axis of Debate at Porto Alegre: An International Left
Party is Proposed), La Republica (Montevideo), February 9, p. 21.
Seoane, José and Emilio Taddei (eds). 2001. Resistencias mundiales (de Seattle a Porto Alegre), (Global Resistances (from Seattle to Porto Alegre)). Buenos Aires: CLACSO. 207 pp.
Starr, Amory. 2000. Naming the Enemy: Anti-Corporate Movements
Confront Globalization. London: Zed. 268 pp.
Terra Viva. 2002. '"The alternative is not civil society but civil disobedience" - Naomi Klein'. http://www.ipsnews.net/terraviva/05_alternativaeng.shtml.
ETUC. 2000. 'Foro Social Mundial 2002. Porto Alegre 31 enero-5 febrero 2002: Informe de la delegación de la CES'. Brussels: European Trade Union Confederation. 9 pp.
ETUC. 2000. 'Foro Social Mundial 2002. Porto Alegre 31 enero-5 febrero 2002: Informe de la delegación de la CES'. Brussels: European Trade Union Confederation. 9 pp.
Teivainen, Teivo. 2002. 'Democratizing the World: Reflections After Porto Alegre', Helsinki: Network Institute for Global Democracy. (Draft, 31.5.01).
Trías, Ivonne. 2002. 'II Foro Sindical Mundial: Si la gente quiere'
(2nd World Social Forum: Brecha (Montevideo), February 8, pp. 16-17.
Turra, Julio et. al. 2002. 'Open Letter to
the Trade Unionists and Activists Participating in the World Social Forum 2002
in Porto Alegre, Brazil: Is it possible to put a human face on globalization
and war?'. Email from International Liaison Committee for a Workers
International (ILC). theorganizer@igc.org,
23.1.02.
Waghorne, Mike. 2000. 'Getting a Seat in the WTO Restaurant', Transnational Associations (Brussels), No. 4, pp. 163-72.
Wahl, Peter. 1998. 'NGO-Transnationals, McGreenpeace and the Network
Guerilla: On Some Recent Trends in International Civil Society' (Shortened translation
of an article published in the German quarterly, Peripherie, No. 71).
Email received February 2001.
Waterman, Peter. 1999. 'International Labor's Y2K Problem: A Debate, a Discussion and a Dialogue', Working Paper Series, No. 306. The Hague: Institute of Social Studies.
Waterman, Peter. 2001a. 'Emancipating Labour Internationalism', [Contribution
to, 'Reinventing Social Emancipation', a project funded by the MacArthur
Foundation. www.ces.fe.uc.pt/emancipa/en/themes/index.html].
Waterman, Peter. 2001b. 'Trade Union Internationalism in the Age of
Seattle', in Peter Waterman and Jane Wills (eds), Place, Space and the New
Labor Internationalisms. Oxford: Blackwells.
Waterman, Peter. 2001c. 'Learning to Talk across Difference in an
Interconnected World of Labor: The Bangkok 2001 Roundtable of Trade Unions,
Social Movements and NGOs on Labor and Globalization'. Transnational
Associations.
Waterman,
Peter. 2001d. 'Shall the Last Be the First? The Internationalism of Labor's
Others'. (Incomplete draft outline). 6 pp.
Waterman, Peter. 2001e. 'Sobre la
exportación e importación de la sociedad civil en tiempos de globalización',
(On the Import and Export of Civil Society
in Times of Globalisation), Nueva
Sociedad (Caracas), No. 171, pp. 120-31.
Waterman, Peter. 2001f. 'The ICFTU, the WTO and the Anti-Corporate
Movement: Still Sitting on the Razor Wire?'. http://groups/google.com.group/GloSoDia/
August.
Waterman, Peter. 2002. 'After the 2nd World Social Forum in
Porto Alegre: What's Left Internationally?'. 35 pp.
World Confederation of Labor. 2002. 'World Confederation of Labor and
Decent Job'. Brussels: World Confederation of Labor. 2 pp.
WMW. 2002. 'World March of Women Building the World Social Forum'.
Montreal: World March of Women. 4 pp.
Internet Resources
ATTAC www.attac.org
Brecha (Uruguayan left weekly) info@ie.edu.uy, www.universitario.edu.uy
Ciranda (2nd Forum
Information Exchange) http://www.ciranda.net/
COSATU http://www.cosatu.org.za/index.html
DIEESE en@dieese.org.br,
www.dieese.org.br
Focus on the Global
South www.focusweb.org
Global Policy Network tavirgan@epinet.org, www.gpn.org
Global Solidarity
Dialogue Group/List http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GloSoDia
Global Solidarity
Dialogue Website http://www.antenna.nl/~waterman
Global Unions: World Social Forum and
World Economic Forum 2001 http://www.global-unions.org/wef-wsf.asp
IBASE ibase@ibase.br
ICFTU: Pages on World
Social Forum and World Economic Forum 2001 http://www.icftu.org/displaydocument.asp?Index=991214591&Language=EN
IndyMedia (USA) http://www.indymedia.org/publish.php3
Labour News Network [See link on
LabourStart below]
LabourStart http://www.labourstart.org/
Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais
Sem Terra (in English) www.mstbrazil.org
National Labor and Economic Development
Institute www.naledi.org.za
One World http://www.oneworld.org/
Oxfam www.oxfam.org.uk
Ponto a Ponto ponto.a.ponto@uol.com.br
Riethof, Marieke. 'The Brazilian Labor Movement on the Internet',
riethof@pscw.uva.nl, http://home.pscw.uva.nl/riethof
Terraviva www.ipsnews.net, www.portoalegre2002.net
World Confederation of Labor info@cmt-wcl.org, www.cmt-wcl.org
World March of Women Marcha2000@ddq.qc.ca, www.ffq.qc.ca
World Social Forum
Website
http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/eng/index.asp
World Social Forum-Forum Social Mundial List
http://groups/yahoo.com/group/wsf-fsm
Appendix 1
Fórum Social Mundial - World Social Forum
Proposals
towards another world / Programme of the WSF2002
The
conference about labor, which was discussed on February 1st, closed
the debate with a primary consensus: It is necessary that world trade unions
build alliances with each other and also with the other social movements. This
idea had already been launched at the Forum of Trade Union Confederations,
which occurred on January 31st, in Porto Alegre.
One
of the conclusions achieved at the conference was that neo-liberal economic
globalization develops at the expense of growth of unemployment, wage reduction
and reduction of rights, and consequently worsens living conditions. It is time
to change this situation.
“
We have criticized this process, but that’s not enough. It is necessary to develop practical work
and bonds of solidarity”, declared the president of CUT (Central Union of
Workers), João Felício, who coordinated the conference.
“
There are countries that have up to seven groups, which represent the
dispersion of our resources and energy. We must get together and put an end to
the prejudice against non- governmental organizations too”.
Yet, he proposed
objectivity in action:
“
We have to identify the workers priorities and be ready to answer them.”
The
proposal, with different tones and contributions, was reiterated throughout the
morning. Willie Madisha, from Cosatu- the central union of workers of South Africa-
defended a leadership role in the fight for global social justice.
“
It is necessary that a revolutionary trade union force rise, with a social,
political and economic agenda. And solidarity is essential to build alliances
against the Washington Consensus”, he asserted.
Basing
his ideas on the South African experience that fought Apartheid, Madisha
believes that in order to meet the interests of great corporations, to which
many governments are subordinated, it is necessary to find a common base of
action for the globalization of rights. In his opinion, fundamental steps
towards this aim are the identification and exposure of the ones who actually
retain power and decide the current world directions, and the control of
financial funds and efficient measures for distribution of income.
These
steps could benefit from using experiences like the participatory budget in
Porto Alegre or the people’s budget that is discussed in South Africa.
“There
will be resistance from local and global elites, who have their hearts where
their money is, in a Swiss bank, for instance. But we must accept the
challenge. Or else, they will lead us to a social and ecological disaster”, he
warned.
The
representative of the World Women’s March, Sylvia Estrada-Claudio, put forward
the need of the trade unionism include on its agenda the defense of human
rights, especially women’s.
“They
are the last ones to be hired, the first to be fired, have the worst job
positions and incomes and are the majority of the informal sector. In addition
to that, they are minority in the fields of power and decision, including the
trade unions movement. To have a full picture, they are threatened at home, at
work and on the streets”, she reported.
Sylvia
urged the trade unions movement to offer women and youth, another discriminated
class, real means of demanding rights.
“Unless
this democracy is achieved, all the talk about another possible world is
empty.”
According
to her, the vision of a new society includes equal conditions at work,
protection of informal and domestic labor, warrant of freedom to women’s trade
unionism, promotion of the division of tasks and complete support to family,
with child care, community kitchens, etc.
“States
must put an end to patriarchal values and violence against women must stop
everywhere, in war or in peace”.
The
representative of CTA’s youth (Central of Workers of Argentina), Pablo Reyner, talked
about the situation in his country, a great victim of a policy that ignores the
interests of citizens and labor.
”We
have been living a model of social exclusion that led us to this point”.
The
director of the Global Policy Network, Jeff Faux, confirmed the damage that
neoliberalism has caused to the world in the last 25 years.
”
Even in the NAFTA area, there was a decrease of income and a rise of
informality that stamps out rights, a common occurrence in rich and poor countries alike“, he said.
He
denounced how fallacious the theory is that growth, which was supposed to be
generated by the Washington Consensus, would solve all problems.
“The
IMF says that a rising tide lifts all boats. Unfortunately, all statistics show
that, for the last 25 years, inequality has only grown and that the
concentration of income has brutally worsened”.
Faux
believes that the fight for changes should be based on the two great advantages
of workers:
“They’re
the majority everywhere and are essential. It is possible to imagine a world
without financial investments, but not without workers.”
“Placing
decent labor in focus of the response to globalization” is also the thesis of
the general director of OIT (General Organization of Labor), Juan Sornavia..
“The
current model is weak because it does not answer to the people’s demands. It is
necessary to put ourselves against it and create one that will ensure social
justice”.
He
considers fundamental among the points fundamental to this process the end of
the exploitation of children.
Traduçao por:
Mariana de Lima Medeiros
Appendix
2
II Ciranda – 07 Documento - Call of social movements 08/02/2002 22:18
Call of social movements
1) In the face of continuing deterioration in the living
conditions of
people, we, social movements from all around the world, have
come
together in the tens of thousands at the second World Social
Forum in
Porto Alegre. We are here in spite of
the attempts to break our solidarity.
We come together again to continue our
struggles against neoliberalism
and war, to confirm the agreements of the last Forum and to reaffirm
that another world is possible.
2) We are diverse - women and men,
adults and youth, indigenous peoples,
rural and urban, workers and unemployed,
homeless, the elderly, students,
migrants, professionals, peoples of
every creed, colour and sexual
orientation. The expression of this
diversity is our strength and the
basis of our unity. We are a global
solidarity movement, united in our
determination to fight against the
concentration of wealth, the
proliferation of poverty and
inequalities, and the destruction of our
earth. We are living and constructing
alternative systems, and using
creative ways to promote them. We are
building a large alliance from our
struggles and resistance against a
system based on sexism, racism and
violence, which privileges the interests
of capital and patriarchy over
the needs and aspirations of people.
3) This system produces a daily dram a
of women, children, and the elderly
dying because of hunger, lack of health care
and preventable diseases.
Families are forced to leave their homes
because of wars, the impact of
"big development,
"landlessness and environmental disasters,
unemployment, attacks on public services
and the destruction of social
solidarity. Both in the South and in the North, vibrant struggles and
resistance to uphold the dignity of life
are flourishing.
4) September 11 marked a dramatic
change. After the terrorist attacks,
which we absolutely condemn, as we
condemn all other attacks on civilians
in other parts of the world, the
government of the United States and its
allies have launched a massive military
operation. In the name of the "war
against terrorism," civil and
political rights are being attacked all over
the world. The war against Afghanistan,
in which terrorists methods are
being used, is now being extended to
other fronts. Thus there is the
beginning of a permanent global war to
cement the domination of the US
government and its allies. This war
reveals another face of neoliberalism,
a face which is brutal and unacceptable.
Islam is being demonized, while
racism and xenophobia are deliberately
propagated. The mass media is
actively taking part in this belligerent
campaign which divides the world
into "good" and
"evil". The opposition to the war is at the heart of our
movement.
5) The situation of war has further
destabilised the Middle East,
providing a pretext for further
repression of the Palestinian people. An
urgent task of our movement is to
mobilise solidarity for the Palestinian
people and their struggle for
self-determination as they face brutal
occupation by the Israeli state. This is
vital to collective security of
all peoples in the region.
6) Further events also confirm the
urgency of our struggles. In Argentina
the financial crisis caused by the
failure of IMF structural adjustment
and mounting debt precipitated a social
and political crisis. This crisis
generated spontaneous protests of the
middle and working classes,
repression which caused deaths, failure
of governments, and new alliances
between different social groups. With
the force of "cacerolazos" and
"piquetes," popular
mobilisations have demanded their basic rights of
food, jobs and housing. We reject the
criminalisation of social movements
in Argentina and the attacks against
democratic rights and freedom. We
also condemn the greed and and the
blackmail of the multinational
corporation supported by the governments
of the rich countries.
7) The collapse of the multinational
Enron exemplifies the bankruptcy of
the casino economy and the corruption of businessmen and
politicians,
eqving workers without jobs and
pensions. In developing countries this
multinational engaged in fraudulent
activities and its projects pushed
people off their land and led to sharp
increases in the price of water and
electricity.
8) The United States government, in its
efforts to protect the interests
of big corporations, arrogantly walked
away from negotiations on global
warming, the antiballistic missile
treaty, the Convention on Biodiversity,
the UN conference on racism and
intolerance, and the talks to reduce the
supply of small arms, proving once again
that US unilateralism undermines
attempts to find multilateral solutions
to global problems.
9) In Genoa the G8 failed completely in
its self-assumed task of global
government. In the face of massive
mobilisation and resistance, they
responded with violence and repression,
denouncing as criminals those who
dared to protest. But they failed to
intimidate our movement.
10) All this is happening in the context
of a global recession. The
neoliberal economic model is destroying
the rights, living conditions and
livelihoods of people. Using every means
to protect their "share value,"
multinational companies lay off workers,
slash wages and close factories,
squeezing the last dollar from the
workers. Governments faced with this
economic crisis respond by privatising,
cutting social sector expenditures
and permanently reducing workers'
rights. This recession exposes the fact
that the neoliberal promise of growth
and prosperity is a lie.
11) The global movement for social justice
and solidarity faces enormous
challenges: its fight for peace and
collective security implies
confronting poverty, discriminations,
dominations and the creation of an
alternative sustainable society.
Social movements energetically condemn
violence and militarism as a means
of conflict resolution; the promotion of
low intensity conflicts and
military operations in the Colombia Plan
as part of the Andes regional
initiative, the Puebla Panama plan, the
arms trade and higher military
budgets, economic blockades against
people and nations especially against
Cuba and Iraq, and the growing
repression against trade unions, social
movements, and activists.
We support the trade unions and informal
sector worker struggles as
essential to maintain working and living
conditions, the genuine right to
organise, to go on strike, to negotiate
collective agreements, and to
achieve equality in wages and working
conditions between women and men.
We reject slavery and the exploitation
of children. We support workers
struggles and the trade union fights
against casualisation, subcontracting
of labour and lay offs, and demand new
international rights for the
employees of the multinational companies and their affiliates, in
particular the right to unionise and
space for collective bargaining.
Equally we support the struggles of
farmers and peoples organisations for
their rights to a livelihood, and to
land, forests and water.
12) Neoliberal policies create
tremendous misery and insecurity. They have
dramatically increased the trafficking
and sexual exploitation of women
and children. Poverty and insecurity
creates millions of migrants who are
denied their dignity, freedom, and
rights. We therefore demand the right
of free movement; the right to physical
integrity and legal status of all
migrants. We support the rights of
indigenous peoples and the fulfillment
of ILO article 169 in national legal
frameworks.
13) The external debt of the countries
of the South has been repaid
several times over. Illegitimate, unjust
and fraudulent, debt functions as
an instrument of domination, depriving
people of their fundamental human
rights with the sole aim of increasing
international usury. We demand
unconditional cancellation of debt and
the reparation of historical,
social, and ecological debts. The countries
demanding repayment of debt
have engaged in exploitation of the
natural resources and the traditional
knowledge of the South.
14) Water, land, food, forests, seeds,
culture and people's identities are
common assets of humanity for present
and future generations. It is
essential to preserve biodiversity.
People have the right to safe and
permanent food free from genetically
modified organisms. Food sovereignty
at the local, national, regional level is
a basic human right; in this
regard, democratic land reforms and
peasant's access to land are
fundamental requirements.
15) The meeting in Doha confirmed the
illegitimacy of the WTO. The
adoption of the "development
agenda" only defends corporate interests. By
launching a new round, the WTO is moving
closer to its goal of converting
everything into a commodity. For us,
food, public services, agriculture,
health and education are not for sale.
Patenting must not to be used a
weapon against the poor countries and
peoples. We reject the patenting and
trading of life forms. The WTO agenda is
perpetuated at the continental
level by regional free trade and
investment agreements. By organizing
protests such as the huge demonstrations
and plebiscites against FTAA,
people have rejected these agreements as
representing a recolonisation and
the destruction of fundamental social,
economical, cultural and
environmental rights and values.
16) We will strengthen our movement
through common actions and
mobilizations for social justice, for
the respect of rights and liberties,
for quality of life, equality, dignity
and peace. We are fighting for:
- democracy: people have the right to
know about and criticize the
decisions of their own governments,
especially with respect to dealings
with international institutions.
Governments are ultimately accountable to
their people. While we support the
establishment of electoral and
participative democracy across the
world, we emphasise the need for the
democratisation of states and
societies and the struggles against
dictatorship.
- the abolition of external debt and
reparations.
- against speculative activities: we
demand the creation of specific taxes
such as the Tobin Tax, and the
abolition of tax havens.
- the right to information
- women's rights, freedom from violence,
poverty and exploitation.
- against war and militarism, against
foreign military bases and
interventions, and the systematic
escalation of violence. We choose to
privilige negotiation and non violent
conflict resolution. We affirm the
right for all the people to ask
international médiation, with the
participation independant actors from
the civil society.
- the rights of youth, their access to
free public education and social
autonomy, and the abolition of
compulsory military service.
- the self determination of all peoples,
especially the rights of
indigenous peoples.
In the years to come, we will organise
collective mobilisations such as:
In 2002:
- 8 March: International women's day
- 17 April: International day of
peasant's struggle.
- 1 May: Labour Day.
- 7 October: world day for the homeless.
- 12 October: cry of the excluded.
- 16 October: world food day.
Other global mobilisations will take
place:
- 15-16 March: Barcelona (Spain), summit
of the EU.
- 18-22 March: Monterrey (Mexico),
United Nations Conference on
Financing for Development.
-
17-18 May: Madrid (Spain), Summit of Latin America, Caribbean and
Europe.
- May, Asia Development Bank Annual
Meting, Shanghai, China
- 1 May: "International day of
action against militarism and peace"
- End of May, 4th preparatory meeting
for the World Summit on Sustainable
Development , Indonesia
- June: Roma (Italy), world food summit;
- 22 -23 June: Sevilla EU summit
- July: Toronto and Calgary(Canada), G8
summit.
- 22 July: USA campaign against Coca
Cola
- September: Johannesburg (South
Africa), Rio+10.
- September, Asia Europe Meeing (ASEM),
Copenhagen
- October: Quito (Ecuador), Social
continental forum "A new integration is
possible"
- November: Cuba, 2nd Hemispheric
meeting against FTAA
- December: Copenhagen (Denmark), summit
of EU.
In 2003:
- April: Buenos Aires (Argentina),
summit of the FTAA.
- June: Thessaloniki EU Summit
- June, France, G8
WTO, IMF and World Bank will meet
somewhere, sometime.
And we will be there!
[1] One presumes that the ILC,
like Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Mao, Gramsci and Che manage to talk about 'the
nation', and even defend some kind of 'nationalism' without making class
disappear: so why the problem with civil society - national, global or whatever
– except that it cannot be found in some Trotsky Lexicon?
[2] The Ciranda, which was a major disappointment to me last year when I was trying to follow the Forum from Europe, continued to disappoint when I was trying to follow it this year in Porto Alegre. The idea looks good, and so does the site. But, despite its intention to pool journalistic reports, it seems incapable of either taking stuff in or putting much of it out. Its archive of longer papers, moreover, only reinforces the feeling that there is a glass ceiling at the Forum, with insiders and outsiders, and the insiders deciding which outsiders are to have access to the Ciranda, or that we (outsiders) are to have access to. One major problem here, as elsewhere on the Forum sites, is that we get no access to any human being responsible. Or, in the exceptional case that a name is provided, we get no answer! Compounding the problems for communication specialists were, this year anyway, the totally inadequate public internet facilities. With around 50 monitors for – let us guess – 5,000 users, sending or checking email from the Forum site required lengthy queueing. It is difficult to believe that some swinging Brazilian service provider or computer company would not be willing to provide more access than this to an event largely dependent on and even stimulating the brave new world of the internet.
[3] This detailed and informative 9-page report-back, which only appeared on February 13, suggests that – the ORIT apart - the ETUC may be that part of the ICFTU Family most favorable to the WSF. The ETUC has itself initiated or taken prominent part in street protests and therefore seems unafraid of at least the most moderate and structured part of the global justice movement. In considering the potential of such radicalism, however, two caveats are in order, these also applying to the radical position of the ORIT: 1) this may remain a leadership position, or be modified by more conservative national unions within the confederation; 2) it may remain a confidential position, rather than a public and a campaigning one.
[4] To avoid misunderstanding, either outside or inside the leadership of the ICFTU Family, this is meant to be a joke. The customary secrecy surrounding relations between the ICFTU and its members is something accepted by even the radicals. If the COSATU here went public this was, I suspect, not so much with the intention of breaching even an unwritten rule as due to the more transparent culture of the latter. For a more deliberate breach of ICFTU etiquette, see Jakobsen 2001, where the International Secretary of the CUT compares the operations of the ICFTU to the Bolshevik or Comintern model! Since I have worked within this latter model, I can assure both the ICFTU and Jakobsen that this is not the case. It remains, however, a glaring anomaly that the ICFTU can claim to be the world's most democratic international movement, and identify itself with hegemonic neo-liberal doctrines of good governance - which surely include transparency - whilst signally failing to practice either itself. One further example: we are not informed of the extent to which the 'development' or 'solidarity' funding of the ICFTU and its members is actually state, rather than union funding (which certainly was a Communist practice). Here the ICFTU reproduces the state-dependency of the NGOs it continues to criticize. But such state-funded development-funding agencies make no secret of the balance between state and public funding of their activities. And whilst we do not know how much the ICFTU spends on attending the meetings of the International Financial Institutions (and where this funding comes from), the World Social Forum makes no secret of its funding.
[5] If not fatally compromised, then the unions remain profoundly ambiguous about capitalist globalization and the necessity for unionism to follow rather than contest it. The Public Services International and one of its leading officers, Mike Waghorne, have been in the forefront of international union cooperation/confrontation with both the International Financial Institutions and those involved in the World Social Forum. This does not mean that the PSI is the most advanced of the ICFTU Family, except in publicly expressing, or unintentionally revealing, the profound ambiguity common to the international unions. Waghorne's extensive pre-Seattle paper was entitled 'Getting a Seat at the WTO Restaurant' (Waghorne 2000). This metaphor, worked out in excruciating detail throughout the paper, is doubly problematic. In the first place it reveals the extent to which the unions still depend on admission to and acceptance at the elite chomping grounds of labour's most ferocious enemies. In the second place, this has to be the most insensitive, if not provocative, metaphor in recent labor and social movement writing. At the very moment at which the ecological, consumer and farmer movements are condemning the McDonaldisation of food, that young militants are throwing bricks through its windows, and that McDonald's is barricading its restaurants, here is an international union leader begging for a seat in the WTO restaurant. Waghorne's metaphor runs out of steam at the point at which the unions are valiantly deciding for themselves which food they will eat – not whether to organize the restaurant's workers, far less to turn it into a worker self-managed, multi-racial, gender-sensitive and ecologically-friendly eating place! If readers feel that I am making a meal out of a metaphor (and a paper which Mike later told me was already 'outdated'), then how about the title of PSI 2001? This is 'Stop the World? No! Shape it!'. The suggestion that some unnamed but clearly ridiculous others want to 'stop the world' would be misleading and offensive, if it were not both laughable and self-damaging. It is laughable in the face of the generally expressed demand of the global justice movement for 'another world' – i.e. one not determined by the interests of anti-worker, anti-ecological, unethical and, indeed, anti-human corporations. It is self-wounding in so far as it is rather the international unions that want to keep these corporations and inter-state institutions in existence, and that any 'world-shaping' the international unions have achieved over the last decade lies largely in the eye of their office-holders. (I have been led to believe, for example, that the ICFTU Family privately recognizes that, despite decades of activity and tens of thousands of dollars, its 'Labor Rights through lobbying the IFIs' policy has failed). Given that the PSI, of all the International Trade Secretariats, has the most direct need of public support internationally, and that it is the one most likely to receive such, the insensitivity to the feelings of the most active and labor-friendly part of the public suggests just how far the ICFTU Family has to go in getting full and friendly service at – or in helping to design - the Global Justice Restaurant.
[6] However, in the absence of a source, authors or signature, this statement might give readers the impression that it was a declaration of the Forum as a whole. It was not. Like one from the previous Forum (Global Social Forum 2001), it was produced by an alliance of movements attending the Forum. For more on the present declaration, see Schwartz 2002.