Global Capitalist Intensification and Global Resistances/Visions:
World Social Forum 2004, Mumbai
--
Aaron Moore
It is difficult to sum up
and reduce the plurality of organizations, struggles and programs;
panels, meetings, and forums; demonstrations, banners, pamphlets
and slogans; shops, stalls, music and dance performances, art
installations and film screenings; and, of course, individuals,
peoples and cultures present at the 4th World Social
Forum (WSF) held in Bombay from January 16th to January
21st. But I can perhaps highlight certain tensions
at the forum, as well as what for me are key questions for the
global resistances against “neo-liberalism” or “globalization”
and imperialism, which the WSF has always served as a meeting
ground for. The current US occupation of Iraq, as well as “globalization”
- that is to say, the current onslaught by the US-led WTO, IMF
and World Bank, multi-national corporate leaders, national governments,
politicians and business interests to transform every human activity
and natural resource into a measured and owned commodity for profit
(in sum, the intensification of global capitalism) – were
central themes. In fact, unlike previous World Social Forums,
many emphasized the link between US imperialism and capitalist
globalization, as well as the need to focus our struggles against
and form alternatives to such imperialist globalization. However,
the question of how to create “another world” different from market-driven
capitalism and naked imperialism, as well as what that world might
be, served as a dividing point at WSF (and at Mumbai Resistance).
This division can broadly be described as one between social democrats,
parliamentarians and large NGOs, who in the end seek to “humanize”
or reform the “excesses” of global capitalism by working with
corporations, governments and international trade organizations,
and the social movements that refuse to compromise with revisionist
institutions and are actively engaging in struggles to build alternatives
controlled by people and in tune with local needs, rather than
the needs of profit and the market.
This division clearly came
out at one of the larger forums I attended at the WSF, entitled
“Globalization, Economic and Social Security,” at which Joseph
Stiglitz (former World Bank Senior Vice-President and Chief Economist)
and Trevor Ngwane (Anti-Privatization Forum, South Africa) spoke,
among others (including Laura Tavares, Samir Amin, and Prabhat
Patnaik). Stiglitz presented his technocratic approach to capitalist
development, one that does not push for immediate liberalization
of capital markets, privatization of social security, and dismantling
of labor legislation, for example, which he said “failed to produce
economic growth, and increased economic and social insecurity
in the developing world,” but rather, liberalizes and privatizes
the economy through a state control that takes employment, poverty
and living standards into account. In his excellent speech criticizing
Stiglitz and capitalist reformism, Ngwane reminded everyone “it
is only the struggle of the exploited and oppressed that gives
us economic security and can overthrow capitalist society.” Rather
than using vague terms like “globalization,” “civil society” and
“human rights,” and rather than merely celebrating the diversity
of struggles and “spaces,” Ngwane emphasized grassroots struggle
and planning, and said that the chief obstacle to “another world”
was capitalism itself. Through their program to commodify all
aspects of life, the capitalist class – the owners and managers
of trans-national corporations, political leaders, civil servants
of the World Bank, WTO and IMF, and national governments - are
trying to crush the struggles of those who are seeking a world
where housing, education, food and healthcare are available to
all, not just the rich. He talked about the struggle against
apartheid, which he said was not just a struggle against racial
domination but one about people taking back control over their
own land, resources, and labor from the domination of the capitalist
classes as well, who employed race as a means of wealth accumulation.
The victory over apartheid was betrayed by Nelson Mandela, he
said, who caved into the neo-liberal capitalist agenda, bringing
job losses, privatization of electricity and water, displacement
from land, death and spread of HIV/AIDS instead – in short, “capitalist
apartheid.” Rather than making deals with capitalism, which is
about making profits, Ngwane highlighted the methods of new social
movements that have no respect for the “old leaders” – for example,
instead of asking for electricity, “we reconnect our own electricity.”
(He was referring to the activities of the Soweto Electricity
Crisis Committee, which trains people on how to reconnect their
electricity after being shut off and also shuts down the electricity
of local political leaders in protest – see the July 2003 issue
of New Left Review for an excellent interview with Ngwane). In
perhaps the most memorable moment of his talk, Ngwane said in
front of Stiglitz, “we must work with the Stiglitzs’ of the world
but there is no solution through them, no solution under capitalism,”
which drew applause from many in the crowd.
Photo 1.
Typical crowd scene at WSF
This tension between “reformists” and
“grassroots movements” played out in various arenas in the WSF,
and served as the basis for an alternative forum across the street
called the Mumbai Resistance (MR). Calling the WSF a “supermarket
for non-governmental organizations” and a “safety-valve” for global
discontent, 311 primarily Marxist-oriented organizations held
a three-day parallel event. Seeing the necessity to focus and
strengthen the anti-globalization and anti-imperialist movement
throughout the world, and clearly and unambiguously linking the
US war on the world, state terror and suppression of dissent and
minorities, and the capitalist onslaught on the lives of peasants,
working class, tribals, women, youth and minorities, a series
of twelve seminars were held in four open-air tents on these various
aspects of imperialist globalization, culminating in a final rally.
After attending several seminars at the WSF that merely sloganeered
against “globalization” or used vague language of “human rights,”
“development,” and “democracy,” the few seminars I attended at
MR were indeed refreshing. For example, at the panel entitled
“Attack on Democratic Rights in the So-called ‘War on Terrorism,”
S.A.R Geelani vividly described his experience of being detained,
beaten, convicted in the press as a “terrorist,” and given the
death penalty under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) based
on inadmissible and flimsy evidence in the aftermath of the Indian
Parliament attack on December 13, 2001 (after a massive legal
and popular campaign, he was acquitted two years later). By highlighting
the worldwide use of anti-terrorism laws especially after September
11th to detain people based on ethnicity, religion,
and mere suspicion, to monitor conversations, meetings and records,
and to stir up a militarist nationalism and thereby shut down
any form of dissent, Geelani and others on the panel clearly showed
the link between the increasing attacks on civil liberties and
minorities occurring around the world, and wars of aggression.
At the end of his talk, Geelani explicitly linked the struggle
for Kashmiri self-determination with the struggle against attacks
on Indian democracy by the Indian government and Hindutva forces,
thus bringing out the need to focus our energies against this
increasing repression linked to so-called “wars on terrorism.”
The general feeling at MR was that US imperialist globalization
can only be pushed back through a more focused, concerted campaign
by the multitude of peoples’ movements around the world, not through
localized, single-issue movements nor bureaucratic NGOs nor vague
slogans like “Another World is Possible.” In fact, one clear
difference with WSF was the active presence of representatives
from armed peoples liberation struggles around the world, from
Nepal to the Philippines. When imperialism is becoming increasingly
aggressive, when governments are turning more and more to brute
force to crush popular movements, and when some armed popular
struggles are clearly showing success (such as in Nepal), why
does the WSF explicitly rule out armed struggle? The WSF’s lack
of focus on US imperialist globalization, and the prevalence of
NGOs and their vague language of “rights” and “development” rather
than the importance of strengthening people’s organization and
struggle were the principal critiques lodged by MR.
Photo 2.
S.A.R Geelani speaking at Mumbai Resistance. Geelani highlighted
the increasing state repression within India carried out under
the guise of the “war on terrorism.”
Yet rather than being an organization
that establishes a coherent, all-embracing program and strategy,
the WSF states that it is “an open meeting place for reflective
thinking, democratic debate of ideas, formulation of proposals,
free exchange of experiences and inter-linking for effective action,
by groups and movements of civil society that are opposed to neo-
liberalism and to domination of the world by capital and any form
of imperialism, and are committed to building a society centred
on the human person” (WSF Charter of Principles). And while some
may call this affirmation of a plurality of struggles as unfocused,
divisive and diversionary, I could not help but think that this
de-centralized gathering of people who are mobilizing around issues
ranging from genetically-modified crops and their effect on third-world
agriculture to violence against sex workers and hijras
to privatization of water and electricity was indeed the very
strength of the anti-globalization movement. I had the feeling
that the logic of capital, which seeks to commodify all aspects
of life, and employs various institutions such as patriarchy,
race, caste privilege and sexual discrimination, was under attack
from many different angles and directions. Why centralize all
these dynamic energies fighting for control over land, dignity,
work and health beneath unified strategies and principles? While
I felt that big NGO, revisionary discourse occupied a large space
at the WSF, which indeed diverts struggles from organizing around
eliminating the root of “globalization” itself – capitalism –
the gathering of both revisionary organizations and more grass-roots
organizations into one space was a positive thing. Why should
people artificially isolate themselves from institutions that
are increasingly present in people’s lives and politics? Why totally
abandon the language and institutions of “human rights,” “civil
society,” “democracy” and “development,” when many people are
politically engaged through this language (or do not even have
this much)? Why not push and engage the Stiglitzs’ and big NGOs
of the world while remaining adamant and uncompromising about
grassroots organization and total control over our lives and production?
The expansion of the scope of the WSF
from trade and economic issues to include women’s issues, dalit
and tribal rights, sexuality issues and imperialist war, was a
positive element as well. Some thought, however, that this constantly
increasing scope contributed to WSF’s lack of focus on what “the
people” should unite and fight against, which is US imperialism
and its neo-liberal capitalist agenda around the world. Yet if
capitalism seeks to reduce every aspect of our life to a measured
and owned commodity, why not challenge this logic on the basis
of the multiple ways in which we are affected by it, which might
also be through racism, sexism or casteism? Structures of racial
discrimination, patriarchy, and caste oppression, while not completely
having their origins within the logic of capitalism, are related
and affected by it.
Many might
disagree with my emphasis on capitalism as the primary axis of
oppression. After all, patriarchy is a system in which men benefit
from the subjugation of women; caste is an institution where upper
castes benefit from the subordination of lower ones. Both operate
under different logics than capitalism and the class relation
of capitalist and worker. But by themselves, sexism and racism
are not the main organizing principles of worldwide production
and distribution. Capitalism, however, is, and subordinates society
into a system where issues of race and sex revolve around the
logic of profit. To give an example from a WSF talk at the panel,
“Globalisation and Social Exclusion: A Dialogue between Academicians
and Activists,” Bina Agarawal discussed gender exclusions in terms
of land ownership. She showed how capitalist globalization relies
on and even exacerbates gender inequality. Rural displacement
caused by the flood of subsidized staple crops from the North
and the rise of cash-crop agriculture in the South has forced
men to work in the cities, leaving women with most of the farming,
in addition to housework and childcare. The land, however, usually
remains in the man’s name and is passed to the son, often leaving
women vulnerable in the event of abandonment or husband’s death.
She also gave the example of the current trend in India towards
“de-centralized” tribal management of forests, which fences off
lands from women, making them travel farther to gather firewood
or forcing them to use weeds and crop dust instead, causing severe
health problems. Thus, the displacement of men from the countryside
to factories/informal sector in the city and the fencing off of
forests in the name of “de-centralized management” relies on and
even worsens the sexual division of labor and lives of women since
they are forced to do even more unpaid, dangerous work while assets
and wealth remain in the hands of men. Agarawal’s presentation
was an excellent example of showing how global capitalism is employing
and worsening sexual inequality in the favor of capital and profit.
The focus I am arguing for
and found somewhat lacking at the WSF was this focus on a newly
intensified global capitalism as the main organizing force that
takes away control over people’s houses, families, lands, and
labor, and exacerbates sexual, racial and cultural oppression.
MR, on the other hand, while bringing out this focus on capitalism
and the necessity for grassroots organization, was too narrow
in its focus and indeed often simply derisive of the energies
of various organizations engaged in concrete local struggles present
at the WSF. Is there not a way to maintain and strengthen the
powerful diversity of struggle present at WSF and MR while at
the same time focusing their energies on capitalism and imperialism?
At the WSF Opening Plenary Session, the author/activist Arundhati
Roy called on us to “turn our gaze on Iraq” as the “inevitable
culmination” of imperialism and the project of neo-liberalism.
As a focal point for global resistance, the invasion and occupation
of Iraq has continued to serve as a unifying point for a multiplicity
of struggles around the world. How can we forget the millions
that were out on the streets on February 15, 2003 in cities all
around the world, and the continuing pressure still being put
on governments over the sending of troops, the lies presented
as reasons to go to war, the tremendous human cost of the war,
and the refusal to give back sovereignty to the Iraqi people?
At MR and WSF, Roy called for everyone to jointly adapt a proposal
that concretely linked Iraq and the US capitalist agenda, which
any group, no matter what their focus, could contribute to. Pick
out two corporations that are profiting from the destruction of
Iraq, she said. List every project they are involved in and locate
their offices in every city and country across the world. Go
after them and shut them down. I interpreted this to mean doing
things like holding massive rallies at these companies’ offices
rather than just at Trafalgar Square in London or the Lawn in
Washington DC. Or shutting down their electricity/water, blocking
their flow of goods and services, bombarding them with phone calls,
e-mails and faxes, or even occupying them. Maybe do the same
to anyone who does business with them. Or launch massive publicity
and media campaigns. The ideas are endless. In short, instead
of just focusing on the state, why not focus the immense creative
energies of the diverse movements on capital, which is the principal
driving force behind the invasion of Iraq? (In addition to awarding
large reconstruction contracts to US companies, the US government
has already created laws in Iraq allowing for 100% foreign ownership
of any public or private enterprise/service, zero controls on
capital flight, flat income tax, etc.). As Roy succinctly put
it, “The issue is not about supporting the resistance against
the occupation…We have to become the global resistance
against the occupation.”
Aside from my question
of focusing more on capitalist commodification of our lives, and
linking this to the immense number of struggles on the ground,
another question revolved around how to organize and engage people
politically on an everyday level. While everyone might be affected
by capitalism and “globalization” in some way, these words are
still quite abstract and need to be articulated and linked to
everyday life, feeling and locality. What are some effective
ways of doing so? Here is where some aspects of the cultural/media
programs, exhibits and panels at the WSF were suggestive. After
being bombarded with the same repetitive slogans, banners and
endless “tribal” drumming and dancing day after day, “Prima Donna”
- the name of the song-dance performance by a group of transsexual
and homosexual performance artists, people living with HIV\AIDS,
and sex workers from Malaysia who call themselves Sexy Divas –
was one of the highlights of WSF. Refusing the status of victim
and the marginalization that accompanies it, they let loose a
barrage of wonderfully modified, glamourized pop-rock tunes from
Tina Turner to Britney Spears and dazzled the audience with their
colourful costumes, ranging from sparkling lounge gowns to white
leotards to bright peacock plume feather dresses. In between
dance-moves they put forth their message of gender and sexual
freedom, protection of sex-workers, and stigmatisation of HIV/AIDS.
At one point in the show, they were rushed by the crowd and showered
with flowers and kisses. On the whole, an excellent indicator
of how cultural performance can begin to mobilize at the level
of feeling, style and fun – away from the tired old methods of
lecturing, sloganeering, leafletting and demonstrating. What
if this show and message were to be put on in places such as the
surrounding slums of Bombay?
Photo 33.
“Prima Donna” song-dance performance by the Sexy Divas from Malaysia
WSF included screenings of many documentaries
and short films in two movie halls. Film/documentary makers from
all over the world showed and discussed their works, which covered
everything from the Gujarat genocide to the traffic of women for
the sex trade in Kosovo to Columbian resistance hip-hop. However,
in terms of how to relate to people effectively on an everyday
level through cultural practices, one of the most suggestive films
I saw was Unlimited Girls by Paromita Vora. Narrated through
an unseen character called Fearless and centered around her conversations
in an internet feminist chatroom with characters such as Devi_is_a_Deva,
Attila_the_Nun, and Marxist Usha, Unlimited Girls takes
one on a wonderfully confusing journey through the immense variety
and rich history of feminism in India, as well as the tensions
within it. It shows the ongoing process of someone defining for
herself what it is to be feminist today through her encounters
with all sorts of characters, besides those in the chatroom.
We meet a class of college women watching a video on sex, a cop
who makes “women’s upliftment films” that will teach women not
to break men’s hearts and drive them to suicide or violence, older
feminist leaders discussing the histories, events and background
of feminism in India, and college boys talking about “flirty”
women. Through the lively chatroom conversations, encounters
and interviews on everything from dowry killings, men burning
their lovers, domestic violence, sexual harassment, relationships,
love, and sex, we are shown the vibrant “unlimitedness” of feminism
actively being defined in front of our eyes. The film gets away
from identity politics (we never see the characters of the chatroom,
just the computer screen…a made-up TV commercial in the film comically
advertises “feminist detectors”) and shows that rather than being
a unified set of principles, feminism is the everyday conversations,
arguments, struggles and encounters of the different people that
shape it. As a way of introducing a younger generation to feminist
issues and histories, it was a wonderfully refreshing film that
did not seek to shove some agenda down our throats or just simply
document sexism and patriarchy. Rather, through its form and
content, it posed questions and sought to stimulate dialogue and
conversation so that people will actively form their own feminisms.
There is so
much more I want to talk about – the impressive, organized, passionate
presence of Korean organizations, a fantastic Sarai panel
on the necessity to engage with the “gray sector” of the media
economy (the world of pirate VCDs, DVDs, music, software, recycled
hardware, video clubs, internet cafes, etc.) that play an important
role in peoples’ everyday lives, Orissa Development Action Forum
and their project to build a small, water power electric generator
that uses local geographical knowledge, employs local adivasis
and is linked to other development projects such as women’s training
programs and after-school centers. But since I am really trying
hard not to write a “long list showing how diverse and plural
WSF was”-type of article, I will just end with one thing emphasized
to me here: the importance of global activist communities and
networks and the necessity to constantly build and maintain these
through dialogue, continuing contact, organizing periodic events
and joint projects and just getting together informally. The
most stimulating part of the WSF experience for me was just travelling
with the members of the Alternative Law Forum (ALF) in Bangalore.
The conversations and arguments during and after WSF on everything
from “what politicised us” to our ideas of what “another world
is possible” means to how sexy Prima Donna was or how overwhelming
and tiring shuffling through WSF was at times was the highlight
for me. Sharing information on the massive series of neo-liberal
reforms in rural administration, law, education and health care
in Japan, as well as the new Japanese militarism; learning about
ALF’s work with hijras and sex workers, legal rights training
programs, and research on the effect of WTO and state intellectual
property laws on the “gray media market” was incredibly stimulating.
In my mind, it was part of a process of building a network or
community not in any “united we stand” sense or “principles and
charters” sense but more in terms of a looser international network
of friends that exchange information, resources, contacts, and
experience, which we can utilize in each of our local efforts
to fight state repression, organize unions, write articles, teach
or whatever. Tokyo, Bangalore, New York, Colombo – we are located
in different sites and engaged in different struggles yet are
there to help each other out when necessary.
Photo 4.
Alternative Law Forum and friends on the way to Bombay…
In short, two messages were driven home
to me through this WSF experience. The necessity to constantly
organize, connect, and create these international “communities,”
especially when capitalism is making its assault on a global level
as well. And most importantly, the necessity to organize, connect
and identify with people at a local, person to person, grassroots
level, and to do so with some more focus and vision – the focus
of capitalist commodification of all our lives and resources,
and visions of other non-capitalist worlds.
HOME
