The success of the London Forum

 

Sunday afternoon's demo - one hundred thousand people against the war and liberalism - confirmed what we had written in the past few days: the European social Forum of London was a success. With many internal problems, with difficulties, delays and misunderstandings, but a success none the less, also shown by the twenty five thousand people attending in the end. How striking, therefore, the enormous lack of media attention by the Italian press. A lack of curiosity - perhaps due to the absence of violent clashes and teargas - that should make us reflect on the present system of media information but that at the same time reveals a political distance between an "establishment" that is increasingly entangled in the [alchemy/deception] of the "palace" [government bureaucracy], and the spirit that moves the young generations. In London we saw many young people, a lot of desire to participate - not always fulfilled - a great desire not to throw away the most interesting political novelty of the first few years of this century. The fact that we did not find any trace of this in the Italian newspapers, perhaps with some regular critiques, is a sign of the times.

Our positive judgment, obviously, does not hide the difficulties that did agitate this Forum. An organization that was not up to the standard of the event, a certain rigidity, gave rise to small disputes that were strongly emphasised in some circles and that Haidi Giuliani, interviewed by our newspaper, defines as «a lot of noise over nothing» In the sense that the essence of the event does not change: the movement still centres around the search for one's political space and, with this strong tool in hand, equips itself with the means by which to launch its own initiative. Then there are the contradictions: for example, speakers in the assemblies are always male, white and fifty-year olds - a thing that provokes unease in young people and women; trade unions are sometimes committed and sometimes not; the inclusion [or otherwise] of a variety of experiences is not always exemplary - and it must be said that the representatives of the Italian movement always know how to say the right words about this, as shown by the handling of the final assembly. All this is a push towards the self-reforming of the Forum: it will be discussed on 18 and 19 December in an assembly in Paris and, presumably, also at the various national levels.

But, indeed, the substance remains unchanged: this political space, a gigantic popular university, is still capable of being the engine of initiatives and mobilizations at the international scale. Especially important, therefore, is the proclamation of the European Day on 19 March because it responds to two fundamental requirements: ensuring that the original path of the movement, the critique of capitalist globalisation, and its subsequent phase, opposition to the war, are recomposed in a single vision. Thinking of ourselves, truly, as a European movement, capable that is to say of giving ourselves one appointment to represent the convergence of our objectives. Already it had happened in Amsterdam, in 1997, a date that is counted amongst the premonitory warning signs of the global movement. If it succeeds again it will be a new occasion.

The problems are not few on the road ahead, but indeed they are ahead and were not removed. The first one concerns the relations with European trade-unionism: will be really be able to make the necessary convergence or will the divisions prevail? The answer is totally in the hands of the CES [European trade union confederation] that has still not got an unambiguous position on war and neoliberalism. In London there was a strong British participation, a significant presence of the Cgil [Italian trade union confederation], however the convergence [of policies], as underlined in an article by Frances O'Grady of the British Unions, is still being built and must not be unidirectional, that is to say from the movement towards the unions, but also in the opposite direction.

Secondly there it is a problem of democracy, and of effectiveness, inside the movement itself. The proclamation of the assembly of Paris in December is an awareness of this problem: the people making the decisions are still few and this can create a detachment, a dispersal. The political space designed by the Forum should be followed by many other spaces, thematic, local, transversal, centred on permanent campaigns that allow the different subjects to intervene and to make more decisions.

Finally, there it is the political problem. A good editorial in yesterday's "Guardian" reproaches the British political elite for their absence from the forum and underlines how from the experience of the ESF we can expect "the emergence of a genuine new politics of the European left". The success of the Respect meeting, the presence of living forces of the alternate left within the Forum, tell us that this possibility is now there [the writing is on the wall]. And largely depends precisely on the behaviour of this left itself.

by Salvatore Cannavò

19 October 2004