21.11.2002

Glimpse of what is possible

Tina Becker critically examines the experience of Florence and looks at the prospects for the ESF

No doubt, the European Social Forum was a great experience for everybody who made the trip to Florence. It was truly inspiring to meet socialists, communists and other politically involved people from all over the continent. While there might not be a fully developed anti-capitalist movement in Europe, as so many on the left have overheatedly claimed, something is definitely changing. Something that could be described as a slowly re-emerging class consciousness. Twelve years after the collapse of the USSR, young people are starting to question the status quo again. Is the ESF in a position to address these people with satisfying answers? No, not yet. While the Italian comrades - not least Rifondazione Comunista - need to be congratulated for an outstanding organisational achievement, we need to critically look back at those three days - in order to learn from the successes as well as from the things that went wrong. So what exactly did we witness in Florence? It surely was not a political conference: it was far too big for that. But members of the traditional political organisations of the left were in the majority. Communist and socialist groupings and trade union activists formed without a doubt the most visible sections - on the big anti-war demonstration as well as in the meetings and on the stalls inside the Fortezza de Basso. There was no sign of the 'black bloc' or anarchists in any numbers. NGOs and social democratic movements were present, but only with a few representatives. Well over 60,000 so-called 'delegates' crammed into the Fortezza. It is impossible to say how many people really turned up, as registration credentials ran out on the second day. In an atmosphere of 'creative chaos' the thousands of volunteers were busy sorting out stalls, preparing meeting halls and checking that everybody who entered the Fortezza wore their huge, red ESF credentials. The official programmes had already run out on the morning of the first day. Although the Italian comrades managed to reprint the 16-page programme that night, there were thousands of young people who wandered around the fortress on the Thursday, not knowing where or when seminars and workshops would take place. Once people had found their way into a meeting, the sheer size of the gatherings was overwhelming. Most seminars and all of the morning conferences were so big that it was not possible to intervene from the floor. Although the simultaneous translations in the big conferences were of a high standard, it was sometimes difficult to follow the contributions. When, for example, Fausto Bertinotti, general secretary of Rifondazione Comunista, used in a meeting Che Guevara's famous phrase, "Politics is a lasting passion", the German translator, obviously unaware of the quote, spent a good couple of minutes trying to work out what exactly he just said - and missed, of course, a great deal of the rest of the speech. Also, it was sometimes difficult to follow the precise nuances of a contribution. But this was only partially down to the translations. A lot of the lack of clarity resulted from the deliberate attempts by some speakers to hide behind their NGO, trade union or united front - representatives of political parties were of course not allowed to speak as such. You often had to guess what really lay behind somebody's contribution. For example, in the meeting on 'The movement and political parties' Chris Nineham spoke on behalf of Globalise Resistance, which sold itself as "part of the English anti-capitalist movement". So Chris, a prominent and long-standing member of the Socialist Workers Party, argued in this meeting as a representative of 'the movement', as opposed to a representative of one of 'the parties': "The advantage of a movement compared to a party is that it is possible to have people with all sorts of different backgrounds and ideas," he said. "That's why the Stop the War Coalition is so fantastically successful: because it has only one simple message, one simple aim." Of course, real parties do contain people with all sorts of backgrounds and ideas. It is the confessional sects which suppress differences and keep them hidden to the inner circles. Another example of the kind of confusion created by the absence openly stated politics was the speech of Bernard Cassen, president of Attac in France. He argued for "an attack on neoliberalism" and the need to "mobilise as many people as possible against this neoliberalism". To really understand what he was saying you would need to know that Attac consciously makes a distinction between anti-capitalism and anti-imperialism. It does not call itself 'anti-capitalist' and does not fight for anti-capitalist measures. By talking only of neoliberalism, privatisation and the Tobin tax on share dealings, it hopes to attract the widest possible layer of people - not only those for whom the phrase 'anti-capitalist' sounds too radical, but also those who have some affinity with Lionel Jospin and the Socialist Party in France or even the liberal centre. Consequently, Attac France does not get involved at all in party politics. In this year's elections, it did not come out with any recommendation - as if any serious organisation would abstain on such an important question. Apparently, a lot of people inside Attac challenged this, but Cassen still leads the organisation with an iron grip. Of course, it would have been naive to expect that political clarity could have emerged in this festival-like atmosphere. While this was an inspiring and fun gathering, it cannot substitute for serious political and organisational debate, which we now need to pursue. How can we now organise? How can we elect a leadership? What political campaigns should we undertake? Should we stand in elections? In the absence of an elected and accountable leadership, an 'inner circle' has taken shape as an unaccountable clique. Nobody is officially responsible for anything, which makes efficient and democratic organisation impossible. For example, although it was decided at the last preparatory meeting in Brussels at the beginning of October that "one person" would be nominated by the Italians to organise the workshops in time, this did not happen. Organisations received notification of the time and venue of their workshops only two days before the ESF started. We need an elected and recallable leadership that can organise international activities and campaigns. Such a leadership should be given the task of working out proposals on our future structure and how the next ESF - Paris 2003 - can be organised in a more inclusive and effective way. On a positive note it seems a functioning anti-war network has emerged. It will meet on December 15 in Copenhagen and has already called for international demonstrations against the war in Iraq. On February 15, all over Europe millions of people will demand 'Don't attack Iraq'. A glimpse of what is possible when our forces are united. * Call of the European social movements * Symbols * Which way for PRC? * Towards a European party * Bitter taste of SWP arrogance sours day