Alex Foti on Mon, 22 Jan 2007 18:35:57 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> act 4 radical europe: rejoinder |
Thanks to Nico and Marcelo and everybody else for taking the time to read and discuss the document. Nico says that a noborder approach is incompatible with a european strategy. In very abstract terms that might be true, but don't you think there can be wide convergence among european radicals of different stripes to finally shut down detention centers and overhaul schengen? Otherwise the call for no borders would crash against a reinforcement of border policing and increased persecution of migrants. On the unfeasibility of demands and conflicts for new welfare entitlements, I would conversely argue that today high-welfare european capitalism is the most competitive in the world: in an informational economy, protests that seek new social rights are not going to suffer from the same political countereffects which undermined the established rights of the fordist era. But before continuing, lemme point out one thing: the document is just a preliminary draft; it's an invitation to discuss it in Milano with the neurogreen mailing list, collectif flexblues, belgique (prix droits de l'homme avec bob le pr=E9caire) and consorted flexactivists & pirates from denmark: BRAINSTORM 4 RADICAL EUROPE saturday, february 17 from 10am to 8pm (with lunch on the premises; introduction and small groups in the morning; plenary session in the afternoon; concluding aperitivo; accommodation is provided) OLINDA (ex Ospedale Psichiatrico Paolo Pini) via Ippocrate 45, 20161 Milano www.olinda.org Getting back to the discussion here, two premises are fundamental to understand the document and criticize it for what it attempts to do: i) Is the generation that actually did stuff in Prague, Goteborg, Genoa interested in doing something to confront European power while it's weak and divided? ii) Is the European political space, as it's been structured over the last 50 years, a meaningful and strategic arena of conflict? It seems to us that the great radical potential for change of the enormous acts of mass disobedience and revolt we have participated in or media-witnessed is being squandered, either because not aimed at the real nerves of global power, or because remain confined within national states, thus not hitting at the real nodes of european governance (take france and denmark rebelling for social rights or the present italian refusal of US bases and so on; these struggles stay unconnected, they don't reach a critical mass transnationally). But I guess the real issue is anticapitalism today, two decades after the failure of state socialism and leninist ideology. To us, calls for widespread anticorporate action (whoever fucks up; google included;) are more effective, in the sense that they appeal to more people, than simply saying capitalism must be abolished. And sure, there is posh youth, ghetto youth, nerd youth, but we'll strive to develop a new approach to activism in blighted neighborhoods, which compensates for the present almost non-existence of leftist politics in inner/outer cities. Marcelo cogently argues that you need a succession of radical reforms to get a revolution and that ideological orthodoxy too often stands in the way of actual, participated radicalism. I think we've all read karl marx's communist manifesto, the standard for political manifestos ever since (not that a4re comes even a mile close). Well the guy was a revolutionary, but the manifesto ends with demands that seem socialdemocratic: the 8-hour day, public education for kids, mass suffrage etc. So, those who try to excommunicate a4re by focusing on its preliminary short-term demands ("our basic aims") are really judging the head by looking at the tail. Most of us have grown up under anarchopunk influences and have developed --thru ideology and praxis-- an anarchist-communist-autonomist hybrid subculture. As a result, we hate power but tend not to confront it decisively, in the sense of drastically lessening it by moving antagonistically and strategically at its contemporary rapid speeds and changes of direction. (I'm of course talking of the power of the global and regional elites on how our city, country, continent, planet is run.) There seems to be either a puritanical fear of contagion when dealing with actual power in non-symbolic ways (but we won the symbolic battle already!) or it is as if the inertia of the late 90s still guided our actions (seattle multisubject anticapitalism vs wto imf worldbank g8 as real centers of power, and they were back then; no longer). Clearly what differentiates a4re from normal radical positions on europe is that we want to twist or break the arm of brussels, but we don't pray for the eu to disappear into space. Even those among us who voted no to the constitutional treaty want more Europe and less nation-state, not less Europe and more nation-state. We think there's a crucial strategic void for antiglobalization movements acting in Europe to be filled. That of challenging EU power. For instance, stopping barroso and trichet and almunia and merkel to fuck with people, their rights, work, environment, when it's clear they have no popular support whatsoever. Nobody is yelling at them "Get the fuck out you exploiters, you hypocrites, you liquidators of Europe!". Because only the european people (meaning at the very least everybody born here) can decide on their constitution, and since we already consider european fundamental rights valid here and now and everywhere (including the right to strike and picket --the one gordon brown would like to see pulled out-- and other kool tools of protest) we are going to use them to try to bring the neoliberal house down and put something else in its place, something social and libertarian, greener and pinker. More realistically, we are gonna put all the pressure that we can on the various levels of european power to achieve tangible results on what we care about: ending the persecution of immigrants and minorities, building new social rights and cultural possibilities, expanding informational freedoms (by the way, just before the weekend, the Italian high court stated that mp3 dowloading is legal if done with no profit motive:) If you think that the european noglobal movement should act decisively against the euro elites in Berlin on march 24-25, the mega eu summit of government and state that will try to rescue elitist europe from any leftist interference from below, then we have to talk. The summit also celebrates the 50th anniversary of the european community. In Brussels and Rome celebrations will also be held. The discussion around Act 4 Radical Europe is about how preventing euro friends of nato and market conservatism from kidnapping europeans. Everything will be up for discussion in milan on Feb 17. We'd like to start building a radical, recognizable, transnational, social opposition to EU government, similar to the social opposition that movements have developed against their national governments. It seems incredible to us that in spite of being defeated twice in france and holland, euro elites want to still dispose of europe as if it were their own thing. The g8 is a symbolic target, the eu is for real. ciao, lx # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net