Brian Holmes on Tue, 1 May 2001 14:52:19 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] counterpowers - Quebec and after |
Felix Stalder writes about the main day of protest in Quebec City: "I was a bit surprised that not even very basic ideas (i.e. tobin tax, cancellation of debt, linking democracy to literacy) seem to be supported broadly enough to provide the basis of an emerging alternative policy program. Perhaps it's simply too early, or a consequence of the movement's decentralized organization (which for me directly reflects the structure and the culture of the Internet, in its good and in its problematic aspects), but there must be ways to formulate at least general alternatives against which to measure up the status quo." I guess you mean that these basic ideas were not on the baners of the march, as concerted visible demands - the kind that could pierce through the media filters? You're right about that, and it has both to do with the decentralized, reticular organization of the whole movement, and with the complexity of the issues involved. Informing oneself then becomes difficult, in the absence of a party line - and that difficulty/absence is what our so-called leaders have relied upon over the past twenty years, to continue pushing an economic treaty program designed entirely for the interests of what, alas, must be called the "transnational capitalist class" (title of a recent book by Leslie Sklair). But I don't exactly think we need a party line... You might already know that the Second People's Summit (www.sommetdespeuples.org) aimed at defending and refining the detailed proposals in "Alternatives for the Americas" (www.web.net/~comfront/alternatives.htm), which is an extensive and detailed, point-by-point document written collectively after the last 1998 Americas Summit in Santiago, in the framework of an organization called the "Continental Social Alliance" (www.asc-hsa.org). There you have an alternative policy program. You might know that the Peoples' Summit itself was convened by two Canadian umbrella-organizations: the "Reseau Quebecois sur l'Integration Continentale" (www.alternatives.ca/rqic) and "Common Frontiers" (www.web.net/~comfront). They have many concrete proposals in specifically Canadian terms, as you probably know, which their members can tell you about or whose details you can read (the just-published book Global Showdown, by Maude Barlow and Co., is probably in every bookstore). Taking a look at the links section in the sites I've indicated will give you a dizzying feeling: you have all the reticulated offshoots of the average HTML node, but these links lead not to data banks, advertising, one-person or small-group sites, but in most cases to civic and research associations or unions with memberships, resources, constituencies, agendas, political programs, etc. As in all such campaigns since the MAI mobilization, a kaleidoscope of groups, operating on different levels, comes together on one central demand: here, that the process of hemispheric integration be taken out of the shroud of executive secrecy, and opened up to public scrutiny. The critique and the proposals generated by these groups are too detailed to put on a sign or banner, but the intensity and depth of the work being done explains the better media coverage of the substantive issues (we've seen that process in France too). Now, the "basic consensus" hasn't broken through to the media yet. But what's encouraging, in Canada as in France (no doubt in Brazil and maube Argentina as well?), is the emergence of a _mass networked movement_, in which tens of thousands of people can take to the streets on the basis of complex ideas that can't be reduced to the old party-line simplifications. Porto Alegre and the Peoples' Summit are the first expressions of an attempt to organize these myriad counterpowers, and to make them politically effective. It's a learning process, and I hope that the next time some big mistakes will be avoided: like maybe next time the "unitary march" with the unions and all that will not turn its back on the adversary, and instead be able to stage some huge, peaceful, civic, _visible_ gesture of frontal opposition to the executive branch so visibly confiscating power behind what will now be its undeniable symbol: the police line, the tear-gas cloud, the Fence. The truth must out. Capital is enclosing itself, a little more each time, as more and more citizens gain eyes to see what it is doing. The networked organizations of the counterpowers are our eyes today, from social movements to citizens' think-tanks to a new kinds of unions - even if the political structures and scales of decision that could make those counterpowers effective have not yet emerged full-blown. I think the best program is to go on gaining critical and propositional power, to force that increasingly into the media, both intellectually and visually, and then finally to make the traditional parliamentary structures respond - and to begin changing those structures, making them more permeable, more responsive to citizens and less to business lobbies. That process is now beginning, at least in Canada, in France, and I think in Brazil. It's being pushed for almost everywhere. What good are the protests then, if everything is happening in the abstract public spheres of networked communication and debate? Like the summits themselves, with their champage-and-caviar toasts and their face-to-face encounters beneath the cameras, the protests with their incredible creativity, visual stunts and tactical diversity are symbolic events that have everything to do with the maintenance or dissolution of the "status quo," of the norms our societies live by. To explain that I want to take another approach, and give you one "inside" view of how those days of protest came to pass. It would be great, by the way, if more people on this list would give such an inside view. I went to Québec as a member of Ne pas plier (Do not bend), which is a small French association that distributes graphic art productions in collaboration with social movements. We deliberately went as a network, inviting artists and graphic designers from England, Spain (the Barcelona "agencies") and ex-Yugoslavia (Skart, Emigrative Art), as well as 2 members of a French social movement (l'Apeis: the Association for employment, information and solidarity for jobless and casual workers), and a sociologist working with Pierre Bourdieu - whose recent statements on the need for a European social movement, working as a loosely coordinated but non-hierarchical network, make a lot of sense to us. We basically went to see a translocal social movement in action on a hemispheric scale, and to support it, with the aim of finding out what we could do about that sort of thing at home in Europe. We held an exhibition in a Québec city gallery called "Le Lieu," which invited us, got housing for us all (through the local network OQP2001) and helped us in many ways. The English friends brought along the mask project, which four of us developed early on in Montreal with the help of some very generous people, teachers and students, at Concordia university. Some 3,500 of these "masks" - bandannas printed with a laughing face on one side, a gagged face behind cyclone fencing on the other - were silkscreened by hand, at personal expense and with the help of twenty or thirty other people. They were all given away free by the first day of protest. Ne pas plier itself brought mostly stickers (a few hundred thousand) for the "exhibition," which was conceived as a temporary agit-prop center in support of the movement. The stickers included slogans mostly in French, saying things like _upstanding utopian_, _Money World_, _the media are awake, citizens can sleep_, _artists, touch reality_. Another showed the earth as a hamburger, waiting to be consumed. Another said "free" in various languages. Our idea was to play the gift against the totalitarianism of the economy, to practice a dispersive art, to spark off conversations through the act of giving signs to strangers - an act which could be performed by anyone, since we gave quantities to people we didn't know. The images we distribute are all enigmatic, they ask people to think, to speak and to play. The city was flooded with them, everyone seemed to love it, it was a fantastic pleasure to do. And all around us, people were doing similar sorts of things. By the nature of it, the work in the street brought me closest not to the Peoples' Summit, not to the unions or the research groups, but to the local activist groups: OQP2001, who struggled to organize logistics on the ground in Quebec City, and the anarchist alliances, CLAC and CASA. With Ne pas plier we also tried to make contacts with popular education groups and elements of the more traditional cultural and workerist left - something which I plan to continue doing, during future trips to Canada. In the demonstrations by the fence though, what you saw most was anarchy. So what's the anarchist program? Right-thinking people are always deploring them for being apolitical, spontaneous, violent - not me. I think diversity of tactics is the key. Mass protest movements, including direct confrontation, are at the heart of any chance we may have to transform society today, and the anarchists seem to know that, maybe better than the others. In these actions, where art has a central role to play and everyone can act artistically, three things happen at least, which can change your life. The first is that you touch the concrete limits of your rights: you face the police, the gas, the fence, you feel the worst of the system in your own body, and you need that. Touch the state and be radicalized. It's a way to get beyond the cool media screen, to verify what oppression is, to better imagine how it works far away, behind the screen. It was clear that people needed that, and particularly clear in the stories of everyone who left the unitary march to climb the stairways up to the fence and find out the real protest was there. The second thing is solidarity, mutual support: we're all here to help each other, with almost nothing on our backs, no armor, no hierarchies, and when someone has the courage to throw the tear gas cannister back at the police, you love that someone. Love on the barricades. You can talk to anyone in the crowd, say things you never said for years to your colleagues or even your friends, you can act collectively in simple but essential ways. And the third thing is freedom, the freedom of the city. Walk on a freeway, dress in an outlandish costume, give away your art, build a bonfire on the street at night. Dance in the streets. The power of the drumming, hundreds, maybe thousands of sticks and stones on the roadside barriers, beating out a wild, threatening, supportive, joyful, dionysiac rhythm that could come together at times into an incredibly sophisticated beat: that's something you can never forget, you carry it within you. The carnaval is a counterpower too. Quebec City looked a lot like the beginning of what I'd seen the end of back in the early 70s: a countercultural movement with powerful, articulated politics. We know how that older movement was dismantled, not only through its own internal contradictions, not only through the secret police picking off key people (as they're already doing now), but also by channeling rock music and other spaces of freedom into commodity practices. What I see today, in the wake of that, is a situation where the only party in town, the only one that can really get you high, is 100% political. Quebec City, my friends, was the biggest party you've ever seen, the beginnings of a new political party. It was collective dionysian political theater. And everyone knows it. There was no real violence: almost no gratuitous smashing of private property (some would say not enough broken banks), no deaths as there might easily have been, not even many broken bones. That level of sublimation was deliberate, and Canadians can be proud of forcing compliance from their cops, who simply were not given the right to break bones and kill. Because the idea is not for us to become the terrorists they want us to be - the idea is to go somewhere we've never been before, to change politics, to change life. To express the violence of contemporary capitalism, to make it real here and now where the power is, and to go beyond it in the same movement. We don't know what "the revolution" will look like. But we know so many things, about the nature and structure of exploitation and domination in the present, about the way it is ideologically supported and engineered to bypass any democratic political process, about its key points of weakness, about the new possibilities for organization and the sharing of both information and decisions - and about the course of radical democratic and socialist movements of the past, about the traces and resources they've left in our societies and our hearts, about the political and social rights we've gained collectively over centuries, rights that the state can't take away without losing all its legitimacy and increasing the force of the movement, as it is doing right now. We know all that, and that's why no one is allowed to dominate, no one's in control. But more and more people are starting to play the great revolution game: carefully, with love and intelligence and urgency and foresight, and with the sense that if you make the right moves now, someone else may surprise you tomorrow. As 60,000 people surprised us, beyond all hopes, and in ways we still have yet to thoroughly understand, last week in Quebec City. So that's my "inside" view. I'd love to hear more from others. Happy May 1st, and good luck to our friends in London. best, Brian Holmes _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold