_____________________________________________________________ The movement & its culture - an optimistic view When thousands of anti-globalization protestors gathered recently in Prague, there were many questions still to be settled regarding protest tactics and related matters. A three-hour open meeting was held in which 3,000 people participated - and the issues were settled satisfactorily by consensus. Most of the participants had never been to such a protest before, and were not familiar with a consensus process. Nonetheless an effective collaborative space was soon established, and business proceeded in an orderly fashion. I suggest that this was an amazing accomplishment, deserving of some attention. For a 3,000-person meeting to even be attempted seems out of the ordinary, but for it to be productive seems almost unimaginable. What we are seeing here is evidence of a remarkable movement culture. This culture is based on respectful listening to all viewpoints, the use of consensus, and the belief that every individual has the same importance as every other in the decision-making process. The culture is non- hierarchical, looks to no singular leaders, and is based on no particular ideology. It comes with no meeting manual, or formally agreed procedures, but is propagated organically, in face-to-face interactions. As seen in Prague, the culture has the ability to take hold, even when many of the participants are newcomers. The culture is extremely well-suited to the needs of a diverse global movement, and participants report that it imparts a palpable sense of personal empowerment. Of particular importance is the ability of the culture to avoid divisiveness - the breaking up of movement energy into competing factions. Even over the emotionally-laden issue of 'violence' (window breaking and such), groups are able to discuss their deeply felt differences openly - and then agree to respect one other by keeping their actions separate in agreed ways. This inclusiveness gives the movement some unique strengths. Internally, it enables the movement to act with a high degree of coherence and unity, despite differences in beliefs and priorities. Externally, the inclusiveness gives the movement the potential to reach out to a wide variety new constituencies. Let us consider, for a moment, how one of the big anti-globalization protests gets organized. In the host city, various local groups work together to obtain parade routes, meeting spaces, and campground and lodging accommodations. All over the world, various groups make arrangements for their own transportation, and coordinate lodging needs with those in the host city. Meanwhile, various organizations in different places offer non-violence training courses for those planning to participate. Others prepare workshops and talks to be given as part of the event, and still others make arrangements to provide alternative media coverage. Email lists and websites are set up to distribute and exchange information about the planned actions and to inform participants about anticipated police tactics. All of these activities are autonomous from one another, with each group acting on its own initiative and making its own decisions. There is no central organization structure, and yet the activities of all blend effectively into a coherent and efficient project effort. These international events show that the movement, without a centralized organization, is capable of successfully carrying out complex collaborative projects. So far the projects undertaken by the movement have been either street protests, as in Prague, or conferences, such as the recent "World Social Form" in Porto Alegre, Brazil. But, supposing the movement grows and begins to develop a sense of direction and strategy, it will need to carry out other kinds of projects. These might include strikes (industrial actions), boycotts, university teach-ins, outreach campaigns, new political parties, or whatever - it is too early to predict. But whatever path the movement takes, its ~collective competence~ bodes well for its success. The movement culture is a ~can do~ culture. The movement culture is also a ~can survive~ culture. With its decentralized structure, the movement cannot be crippled by the arrest (or assassination) of a few key leaders, or by the closing down of central organizing points. Infiltrators and provocateurs can wend their way into the movement, but their influence is minimized by the use of consensus, and there is no leadership apparatus for them to subvert or capture. They can carry out individual acts, in an attempt to discredit the movement, but the movement culture gives them few points of leverage from which to amplify their influence further. People come to the movement from a variety of different concerns - around environmental destruction, multinational sweatshops, unemployment, the undemocratic nature of the WTO & IMF, the weakening of national sovereignty, excessive corporate power, and others. The common thread seems to be a realization that the process of globalization is worsening all the various concerns, and hence the negative media label, 'anti-globalization', seems to be fair characterization of what currently unifies the movement. If the movement is to become a vehicle for real change in our societies, then it will presumably need to develop some kind of new-society vision and some kind of political strategy. That is, the movement will need to evolve a collective understanding of where it wants to go, and how it thinks it can get there. So far, the movement has not turned its attention to these kinds of questions, at least not in the determined and effective way it has turned its attention to organizing protests. To be sure, each protest is accompanied by numerous workshops and discussions, and there was the World Social Forum - these are beginnings. The movement is very much an ~organic~ movement, growing by a natural social process, and evolving its own culture as it moves forward. It makes sense to think of the movement as an ~organism~, and the image that comes to my mind is that of a young colt. In the big protests, the colt is learning that it can kick up its heels, prance around the field, and worry the sheep. It's finding its muscles, and learning how to coordinate its spindly legs. It's not ready yet to pull a load or run a serious race. But its day will come, and meanwhile play is nature's schooling. The regime is showing very clearly that no slow-down in the globalization process is going to be contemplated. Globalization is in our face and it will remain there for the foreseeable future. The regime builds walls around its meetings, and the FTAA treaty is approved even as the protests rage. On the other hand, the movement seems to be in a strong and dynamic growth phase. New people are joining, and a variety of organizations are working increasingly together in various kinds of ad hoc alliances. The webs are weaving, solidarity is building, and there is a creative energy in the air. It seems the movement will be in our face for some time as well. The movement (switching metaphors) is currently a hotbed of glowing coals. New fuel is arriving all the time, and the regime responds only by fanning the flames. The temperature is rising and the pressure is mounting. We cannot be certain, but it seems that the movement's cultural mindset is very likely to turn gradually but decisively from an ~intent to protest~ to an ~intent to make revolution~. Already the movement is being referred to in the media as 'anti-capitalist', and perhaps we can take that as a good omen. That change of intent, when and if it occurs, will be a critical turning point for the movement. When the intent is to make revolution, then movement attention will naturally turn to the questions, 'What do we want?' and 'How can we get it?'. When these questions are addressed with the same enthusiasm and resourcefulness that are currently applied to staging protests, there is every reason to expect that effective progress will be made in answering them. One can readily envision a spiralling sequence of World Social Forums, along with countless Regional Social Forums. The consensus-based, networking culture is ideally suited to collaborative problem solving, and to eventually achieving wide-scale harmonization of views. Revolution is always a project, and a popular revolution is a collaborative, decentralized project. Our movement colt is not yet a revolutionary, but he is currently exercising just the right muscles for when the day comes. rkm http://cyberjournal.org _____________________________________________________________
