Sunday Papers’ #3: 7th February

* The 13^th European Police Congress will meet in Berlin this month.  This will see a presentation from the head of the Copenhagen police force, discussions surround the deployment of EU security systems into non-EU countries and a, quite frankly alarming, plenary titled “What can we learn from the armed forces?” The extension and intensification of the European project continues.

* I’ve already commented on the Undercurrents article in this excellent compilation of articles from J18 and Seattle, republished by the Bristol Anarchist Bookfair Collective. Whilst debates on violence have moved beyond both the ACME collective statement on the Black Bloc in Seattle and its most vocal opponents of the time, the undercurrent critique is as relevant as ever. The last article written by David Harvie is quite academic in tone, for example try the first sentence,

“The historical geography of capitalist development is at a key inflexion point in which the geographical configurations of power are rapidly shifting at the very moment when the temporal dynamic is facing very serious constraints”.

However the quality of its analysis and the interesting questions it raises make it the most worthwhile article of the pamphlet. After laying out a brief, concise history of the past two decades of capital accumulation, an account based heavily on David Harvey, and clearly analysing the tensions within capital today Harvie moves on to discussing the potential for radical change. It’s particularly nice to see yet another author decide to call for a reconstituted Communism, demonstrated in this case with a nice, if perhaps a little unoriginal, alteration to a standard anti-globalisation slogan,

If, as the alternative globalization movement of the late 1990s declared, ‘another world is possible’ then why not also say ‘another communism is possible’?

* This is an excellent site trying to chronicle Manchester’s radical history. After reading Luther Blisset’s Q (Review coming soon) it seems I’m developing quite the passion for all things radical and historical.

* Lastly, in the spirit of constructive criticism re-read this short but interesting article posted on the Turbulence website called “What Would it Mean to Lose“. The question of defeat, of whom, by whom and why are vital if we wish to move forward onto new political terrain rather than repeating the past ten years again.

Ten Years on…

“Radical critique is not about exchanging compliments, but about looking at the limitations of movements which claim to be anti-capitalist and trying to contribute to their development. The task of over-emphasising the ’sexy and inspiring’ sides is better left to the various direct action conferences and gatherings, whose only purpose seems to be exactly that: big doses of self-reassurance and the absence of critical engagement…In the midst of enthusiasm and grandeur, the direct action movement sees a growing anti-capitalist movement everywhere. This illusion stops them from recognizing that, in its present form, the direct action movement is going nowhere.”

Undercurrent #8: Practice and ideology in the Direct Action Movement

As valid as when it was written ten years ago. Has this movement truly matured as Naomi Klein would argue? or are we still dealing with many of the same debates and problems as we were then?

Sunday Papers #2: 31rst January

Had quite a busy week this week but here are a few posts that are worth reading.

* This is a surprisingly interesting thread on UK indymedia. It starts with an (unfair in my opinion) criticism of Shift magazine, and a (fairer) criticism of Turbulence before moving onto an interesting discussion on intellectualism, the academy and its relationship with radical movements.

* The crisis deepens in Greece. Protests begin over the Greek states’ plans to impose austerity on its citizens for the security of its economy and that of the Euro-zone.

* A little more lighthearted is this insurrectionary random text generator. Very clever piece of programming with an important purpose. Not to criticise insurrectionism per se but to highlight the dangers of seductive rhetoric. Coming to a glued cash machine near you.

R

We’re All Environmentalists Now!

Even Bin Laden is jumping on the climate change wagon. As well as criticising the bail-out of the banks, U.S. imperialism and praising Chomsky’s analysis of geo-politics, Bin Laden lays the blame for climate change squarely on the doorstep of western governments.

Will we see Bin Laden sharing the stage with Galloway and co. at a Stop the War meeting near you?

R

Sunday Papers #1: 24th January

So this is a new idea that I’ve had as a way to both share my virtual wanderings and to force me to reflect more on what I come across during them. Hopefully people may find interesting articles that are worth reading on here. Suggestions and comments are (as always) welcome.

* Notes from Below have posted up an interview that they have done with CJA spokesperson Tadzio Mueller. It’s quite an interesting, if short, discussion. Tadzio touches upon the need for energy justice in the Global North, ‘Diagonalism’ (as opposed to the horizontalism of the alter-globalisation movement) and what he see’s as the need for mobilisations at COP15.5 (Bonn) and COP-16 in Mexico. The concept of ‘Diagonalism’ is particularly interesting and one whose implications should probably be thought through. For example, could we and should we “work with” the Bolivian and Venezuelan state be, what would that look like and what are the likely outcomes of it?

* Principia have pointed out the existence of an excellent Facebook group dedicated to promoting a strand of Marxism related to value criticism. This is a current of thought associated with the German Krisis magazine and authors such as Moishe Postone and provides an interesting escape route from a Marxology obsessed with class struggle.

* The crisis in Haiti continues. Whilst tourists on a cruise relax on beaches thirty miles from Port-Au-Prince with cocktails in hand, the Lancet criticises the Aid agencies involved in the relief operations for focusing on media friendly rescues rather than the less glamorous support of those outside of the rubble. K-Punk discusses the post-political aspect of the crisis whilst Lenin’s Tomb discusses the racist elements of the media reporting as well as reminding us, via Klein, of the opportunities that this crisis presents for Capital.

* Finally, Shift Magazine have printed their next issue. This issue contains analysis of Copenhagen, discussions on Mutualism, an interview with Geographer Erik Swyngedouw and a rather bizarre letter from a German anarchist enamoured with the UK climate camp.

Resonance

Greece, the E.U. and the Discipline of Capital

Just seen this post from Principia Dialectica discussing  Financial Times coverage of the Greek economy. The FT are reporting that the Greek government have come under criticism by the E.U. for falsifying the extent of their debt ridden economy. As the shocks from the financial crisis continue to spread Greece is the latest state under pressure. Given the inter-dependent nature of the E.U. however, the effects of any financial crash will be more widespread.  Indeed, in a bid to buffer the Euro-zone, Greece could be kicked out within 3-4 years if this debt can’t be secured.

The costs of this will no doubt be paid for by Greek citizens themselves, indeed duties on cigarettes and alcohol have already been raised whilst the health services have been highlighted by E.U. inspectors as being highly inefficient. Further spending cuts will be needed to secure their debt and hence the value of the Euro. The welfare of Greek citizens will no doubt suffer. It’s highly unlikely, however, that the military, border and police forces will suffer from a lack of spending. Given the precarity of Greek ‘national security’ and Greece’s pivotal role as enforcer of the Schengen zone and site of struggle with a huge, popular autonomous social movement these institutions appear unlikely to be forsaken.

Could Greece become the European Mexico or Argentina? How will social movements in Greece respond to this?

The logic of Europe? Zapatero and Van Rompuy on the Lisbon Treaty

Interesting article in defence of the emerging European security project, or what they prefer to call a “renewed Europe”, by the president of the European Council (Van Rompuy) and the rotating president (Zapatero).

The key tasks that Van Rompuy and Zapatero identify are;

1)  The full implementation of the Lisbon Treaty.

2)  Increased economic integration. This is highlighted as a key task given the context of the economic crisis. It’s a very diplomatic decision to refrain from discussing the massive debts occurred by some countries, notably Greece, and the resultant economic instability that this has caused. Further economic integration will have its own problems to negotiate.

3) Take up a more prominent position within the international political order, presumably as a counter-balance to the US and China.

The development of the EU is an interesting and difficult process which we need to analyse. This will require a delicate negotiation between the twin poles of anti-EU chauvinism, as seen with the NO2EU European election group here in the UK, and uncritical, idealistic support for the EU project as clearly demonstrated by Antonio Negri

‘The (European) constitution is a means of fighting Empire, this new globalised capitalist society. Europe has the chance of being a barrier against the pense unique of economic unilateralism: capitalist, conservative, reactionary. But Europe can also construct a counter-power against American unilateralism, its imperial domination, its crusade in Iraq to dominate petrol. The United States has understood this well, and has, since the 1950s, fought like a madman against European construction.’

Antonio Negri, liberation magazine, 13th May 2005.

It’s really important that the radical left begin discussing the issue of Europe, how we deal with it and what it means for social movements that occupy its territorial space. As a start it’s clear that this process is neither completely good nor completely bad but is entwined in the contradictions of social organisation within the capitalist mode of production.

Over the next week or so I’ll be trying to collate some articles that have already been produced discussing radical approaches to Europe.

Cop-enhagen: Seattle’s coming of age party?

So I’ve finally managed to translate some of my scribbled notes from the week I spent in Copenhagen and mixed that with some of my scattered thoughts to produce some kind of comment piece. If anyone has written or knows of any other articles on the week please let me know and I can link them here. It’s vitally important that we learn from Copenhagen.

The build up to this years UN conference on Climate change, the COP-15 in Copenhagen, was huge. Both mainstream and alternative media were abuzz with predictions and discussions on the conference and the ,almost obligatory, counter-mobilisation. Many months were spent deliberating over whether to shut the conference down or try and enter (with the latter winning out). Would this, as Naomi Klein  argued, be the culmination of the alter-globalisation movement? Would this be another Seattle? Would we witness a fully formed social movement to challenge an emerging round of capitalist accumulation based upon responses to ecological, economic and social crisis (for a brief outline of this read Tadzio’s Mueller and Alexis Passadakis 20 theses on Green capitalism)?

In the end the conference, unsurprisingly, failed to come up with a deal which could be called progressive in any dimension. Climate Justice Now labelled the talks “a complete betrayal of impoverished nations and island states, producing embarrassment for the United Nations and the Danish government”.  Many, including Mark Lynas in the Guardian, blamed the newly industrialising countries, whilst, in an interesting confluence of opinion, states from the South (including China and India) and many progressive movements placed the blame squarely at the feet of the Northern states. Although the political economy of the deal and the power relationships which it reflects are in themselves fascinating, as well as vital for understanding the political terrain upon which we operate, this post won’t focus upon them.

Outside of the conference many protestors and demonstrators found themselves at the wrong end of preventative laws which had been rushed through in the eve of the summit. These laws allowed the police to declare any demonstration illegal and then to arrest any of its participants without even making the demonstration itself aware of this. As well as furnishing the police with the means to control most demonstrations, these laws allowed the police to declare entire sections of Copenhagen searchable. Many of us over there regularly felt powerless when faced with a police force operating within a state of exception, outside of the regular rule of law. These laws, married with a militant and aggressive police force, were a contributor to the relative lack of confrontation on many demonstrations, such as the large Friends of the Earth demonstration on the Saturday which saw a large portion of the black bloc kettled and “preventatively detained”. However, once again this post will not dwell on the police presence. A ratcheting up of police repression should be expected as social and ecological crises deepen, except for the unique situation here in the UK since the death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 in April.

Perhaps the most important political “event” for our movements took place away from the streets and inside the social centres, crash spaces and people’s kitchens. Copenhagen can probably be called the first international meeting of various national movements. Here we met and began to develop and shared language of climate justice with which we can move forward, together. These discussion were not without difficulties but it was encouraging to see them tackled with a spirit of openness. For example when the mind numbingly boring topic of violence/non-violence surfaced yet again at the CJA open plenary in Christiania all the responses, from both floor and panel (comprised of Naomi Klein, Michael Hardt and Tadzio Mueller) started with the assumption that a diversity of tactics was necessary although they all argued that the action consensus (or agreement) had been decided that violence wouldn’t be employed on the “Reclaim Power” action. It was also positive to see that the understanding of non-violent resistance was of a far more confrontational brand than that espoused by many NGO’s and liberals. As Tadzio Mueller put it in the plenary session, it’s about “seeing the gaps in the police lines” rather than not even testing them.  This coming together of people from various places and political traditions required an unusual amount of openness in order to succeed. Interesting tensions were brought into conversation and made productive rather than fetishised and turned into rigid differences. I witnessed NGO representatives have open discussions with European militants and Argentinean picquetero’s running workshops on demonstration security. At times it felt like an exciting, unbelievable experimental laboratory in which we could try and develop a truly hybrid politics. It really did feel like something very exciting was happening there in Copenhagen with regards to the shared politics of our movements, the large turn out of environmentalists at the No-Borders demonstration and the mix of participants from both global North and South on the agricultural action days are testimony to this. It now makes sense to talk about an, albeit embryonic, global climate justice movement. It waits to be seen whether this energy can be translated into our everyday practices and politics. It would be a disaster if we have to wait for the next COP’s in Mexico or Bonn for this global aspect to re-emerge. I hope we’ve learnt our lessons from the summit hopping trend we saw in Europe about 10-15 years ago. Whilst many of us left feeling energised and optimistic for the year ahead, summits are no substitute for building strong, sustainable movements within our own communities.

So, all in all, a positive start was made over in Copenhagen. Tensions and differences are being brought into positive conversation and these will need to continue back here in our local contexts. Questions of how radicals can co-operate with liberals, or whether they even should, how Northern and Southern movements can engage with each other and the fetishisation of indigenous peoples and struggles (the chant of “No Borders, First Nations” on the No Border demo was particularly disconcerting) all need discussing and acting upon in the coming period.

Was this the alter-globalisation movements coming of age party? In short no. Whilst having obvious elements of continuity, Copenhagen is the first truly global coming together of progressive movements under the banner of climate justice. As such the political foundations needed for coherent, co-ordinated action are still being lain. This is not the continuation of the alter-globalisation movement but the start of something different, with its own politics, potentials and difficulties. We cannot equate Copenhagen with Seattle, no matter how convenient the decade anniversary of the event is.

For another good analysis of Copenhagen (No doubt to be added to in the coming weeks) check out this post. It’s an interesting and well written, if not a little bit more critical, account from Copenhagen. I’d agree with the author that a non-violent movement takes time to build and that Wednesday could have gone better, but many in that demonstration were experiencing police repression for the first time. It appears that this article has kicked up an interesting discussion on indymedia UK.

Also, someone called Olivier from the climate caravan has written a rather rosier account of the week here. The idea of permanent peoples assemblies in local communities is an interesting one. I’d be interested in finding out the experiences that movements and communities in latin America (Argentina and the picqueteros springs first to mind) have had with peoples assemblies.

Podcasts from Historical Materialism, London, November, 2009

Infinite Thought has kindly flagged this excellent collection of podcasts from the recent historical materialism conference in London.

I haven’t listened to any of these yet but I’m particularly looking forward to listening to Erik Swyngedouw and (recently released) Tadzio Mueller speaking in session VII on Ecological crisis, and Holloways presentation which appears, presumably, to be about his new book, Crack Capitalism.

Also, as is probably obvious, I made it back from Copenhagen (relatively) unscathed. I’ll be trying to pull out some of the various thoughts and experiences that I had whilst over there and mull over them here for your collective appreciation and (hopefully) discussion. Until then all I can say is that from the movements perspective Copenhagen was a very encouraging event and it will be interesting seeing if we can move on from this.

Res0nance goes to Copenhagen

sorry about the lack of content recently, I’ve been busy with various other things. However, my bag is packed and I’m off to chilly Copenhagen tomorrow. I’m hoping to try and keep people updated with what is going on but no promises.

some Copenhagen links

A) An excellent mobilisation magazine dealing with the possibilities and implications of a new round of Green Capitalism, a round which Copenhagen looks likely to be helping to implement and that most environmentalists seem unaware of.

B) An excellent daily update on happenings within the summit. It’s a great way of keeping abreast of the conference itself.

normal, (in)frequent service should resume upon my return

Res0nance