30.04.2003

'Open and democratic'

Luciano Muhlbauer is the representative of the Italian trade union Cobas at the ESF. He is also a prominent member of Rifondazione Comunista. Tina Becker spoke to him.

At the last ESF preparatory meeting the French comrades were not keen on the idea of networks. How is it that this time they argued for them?

We had some very useful discussions. We all agree that the social forum cannot be just one single moment every year. Just like the World Social Forum, it needs to be linked to the various movements that have developed across the world: the anti-war movement, the anti-capitalist movement, etc. The forum needs to be part of the process to remake the left. The WSF came into being because of the anti-capitalist movement in Seattle; the ESF took place in Florence, because of the events in Genoa. Now we need to develop structures of permanent action for the participants.

Why do you make such a distinction between what you call "the movement" and people who come to the ESF?

There is still a difference between the forum and the movement. In the forums, everybody who is against neoliberalism, war and racism can participate. Some organisations do not want to or cannot organise activities. Some are prohibited by their status as a charity or a trade union from doing various things. And others are simply dubious and wary of the organisations of the left. Therefore the forum should be an open space, a space where we do not take votes or agree on certain actions.

At the same time we need another space for activity and organisation within this open forum. A space where those who want to can organise joint campaigns. Just like when we agreed in Florence to organise the European-wide anti-war demonstrations on February 15. The WSF adopted it afterwards and made it a global event. Now our task is to organise a better and closer relationship between those organisational spaces and the rest of the forum.

During the seminars and the plenary sessions we should also talk about setting up networks - we do not just need moments: we need a whole process. There are some networks already organising - the anti-war network, for a start. But there are also the beginnings of some networks against racism and privatisation. There could be a lot more, because the European working class is experiencing many attacks. For example, the European Union agreed at its summit in Barcelona last year to work towards raising the retirement age from 65 to 67. We need well organised, European-wide resistance.

Do you think such attacks can be countered by loosely organised networks? Don't we need a higher form of organisation?

I think we are at the beginning of a long process. A few years ago, the majority in the European countries were in support of the neoliberal agenda of our governments. Or at least they did not fight too strongly against it. For example, there was hardly any resistance to the war against Yugoslavia. Now, the neoliberal agenda has been challenged and ruptured by the movement.

However, our movement has not been able yet to change the balance of forces. That is why we need permanent action and permanent networks. Of course, it is not enough to have such actions on a national level. We are faced by an enemy that organises on a European-wide level. If we ourselves do not organise on this level, we can never win.

It is no good just organising on a national or even lower level. The war on Iraq temporarily led to some important disagreements amongst our leaders. While we need to analyse and understand those disagreements, we must also recognise that on the big questions our ruling classes stand united - be it the so-called social democratic governments of Britain and Germany or the rightwing governments of Italy and France.

While the media are still concerned with looking at the differences over the war, they have been busy planning a united European army. We must be able and strong enough to oppose these developments. And you are right: this process must lead to the rebuilding of a strong, united, alternative left across Europe. By working together in campaigns, by organising common actions against this neoliberal agenda, we will strengthen our own forces.

This is just the beginning. I think we are building a new international. That does not mean we have to repeat the mistakes of the previous versions. But we should be clear about what we are doing. All the campaigns and joint actions of our networks must move to the level of high politics, because otherwise they will not be able to change anything.

How can we move to a new international? At the last preparatory meeting the Italian comrades voted against the French organising committee's suggestion of an elected leadership for the ESF, which would have allowed for a more accountable and transparent method of organisation.

In a political organisation or party of course you need to elect your leadership in an open and democratic way. But I think we are not there yet. There is a large diversity and plurality of organisations involved in the forum. It would be very difficult to organise representation for all these small and big groups. Not everybody would feel represented on such a body - but we want to include everybody.

Also, we want to remain flexible in a world where things change incredibly fast. If there is a new movement, we want to include them. Therefore we are strongly against having a fixed and inflexible set of representatives, as was suggested by the French comrades. Having totally open structures is maybe not the most democratic solution, I agree.

But at this moment in time we need them to include everybody. At some point in the near future we need to organise open debates about our strategies and answers for the future. At the moment, we all agree that we are against neoliberalism, racism and war.

But how do we fight it? And what are we fighting for? There is still a large diversity about how to fight neo-imperialism and war. In order to strike as a fist in the future, we need to agree on common strategies now.

A number of organisations are discussing joining forces for the European elections in 2004, including Rifondazione and the Socialist Alliance. Do you view this as part of the same process?

This is a very good development, which we fully support. I hope we will be able to present one united manifesto in the name of the 'Alternative Left' or something similar. But in our opinion it is not very easy to link this with the social movements. I think we are not ready for such a fusion yet. The social forum movement is very pluralistic and if you try to bring it into the electoral field, it will start to separate. Our movement is not in the position to speak with one voice in the forthcoming election.

But both developments are part of the same, bigger process. Both are moving in the same direction and have to fuse at some point. But not yet. In a number of countries, political parties are part of the movement - mainly in Italy, Great Britain and Spain. In Italy, for example, the movement recognises the important role that Rifondazione Comunista is playing - even groups who do not like us very much. At the WSF, for example, Rifondazione was prevented from registering its members as delegates. But the whole movement in Italy organised solidarity action and protested with one voice against this decision.

The Brazilian organisers had to give in and allow us to participate. I think this is the best solution. The movement in a country needs to decide if a political party is part of the movement or not. What matters is not your organisational form, but the content of your politics. But the French comrades are hostile to the participation of political parties in the ESF. We have had over a year of discussion on this and have still not resolved it. I am not sure if further discussion will be able to. The situation in some countries is different than in others. We cannot tell the movement in one country to start communication with a political party, when there has not been any communication before. I think it would be wrong to have a final decision on this.

The movement in each country should decide if a party is part of the process. The Italian comrades are working for the Florence solution: parties will be able to take part, but only on the level of organising workshops. We should also expand the so-called 'dialogues' between parties and movements that were started in Florence. These were very well attended and important events at the first ESF. We should not forget that we are still at the beginning of a very important development. We have to experiment with forms of organisation and undoubtedly we will learn to correct our mistakes.