[Nettime-bold] What the Protesters in Genoa Want

[Harsh Kapoor <aiindex@mnet.fr>]

NY Times July 20, 2001

What the Protesters in Genoa Want

By MICHAEL HARDT and ANTONIO NEGRI

Genoa, that Renaissance city known for both openness and shrewd
political sophistication, is in crisis this weekend. It should have thrown
its gates wide for the celebration of this summit of the world's most
powerful leaders. But instead Genoa has been transformed into a
medieval fortress of barricades with high-tech controls. The ruling
ideology about the present form of globalization is that there is no
alternative. And strangely, this restricts both the rulers and the ruled.

Leaders of the Group of Eight have no choice but to attempt a show of
political sophistication. They try to appear charitable and transparent in
their goals. They promise to aid the world's poor and they genuflect to
Pope John Paul II and his interests. But the real agenda is to
renegotiate relations among the powerful, on issues such as the
construction of missile defense systems.

The leaders, however, seem detached somehow from the
transformations around them, as though they are following the stage
directions from a dated play. We can see the photo already, though it
has not yet been taken: President George W. Bush as an unlikely king,
bolstered by lesser monarchs. This is not quite an image of the future. It
resembles more an archival photo, pre-1914, of superannuated royal
potentates.

Those demonstrating against the summit in Genoa, however, are not
distracted by these old-fashioned symbols of power. They know that a
fundamentally new global system is being formed. It can no longer be
understood in terms of British, French, Russian or even American
imperialism.

The many protests that have led up to Genoa were based on the
recognition that no national power is in control of the present global
order. Consequently protests must be directed at international and
supranational organizations, such as the G-8, the World Trade
Organization, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The
movements are not anti-American, as they often appear, but aimed at a
different, larger power structure.

If it is not national but supranational powers that rule today's
globalization, however, we must recognize that this new order has no
democratic institutional mechanisms for representation, as nation-
states do: no elections, no public forum for debate.

The rulers are effectively blind and deaf to the ruled. The protesters take
to the streets because this is the form of expression available to them.
The lack of other venues and social mechanisms is not their creation.

Antiglobalization is not an adequate characterization of the protesters in
Genoa (or G�teborg, Quebec, Prague, or Seattle). The globalization
debate will remain hopelessly confused, in fact, unless we insist on
qualifying the term globalization. The protesters are indeed united
against the present form of capitalist globalization, but the vast majority
of them are not against globalizing currents and forces as such; they
are not isolationist, separatist or even nationalist.

The protests themselves have become global movements and one of
their clearest objectives is for the democratization of globalizing
processes. It should not be called an antiglobalization movement. It is
pro-globalization, or rather an alternative globalization movement � one
that seeks to eliminate inequalities between rich and poor and between
the powerful and the powerless, and to expand the possibilities of self-
determination.

If we understand one thing from the multitude of voices in Genoa this
weekend, it should be that a different and better future is possible.
When one recognizes the tremendous power of the international and
supranational forces that support our present form of globalization, one
could conclude that resistance is futile.

But those in the streets today are foolish enough to believe that
alternatives are possible � that "inevitability" should not be the last
word in politics. A new species of political activist has been born with a
spirit that is reminiscent of the paradoxical idealism of the 1960's � the
realistic course of action today is to demand what is seemingly
impossible, that is, something new.

Protest movements are an integral part of a democratic society and, for
this reason alone, we should all thank those in the streets in Genoa,
whether we agree with them or not. Protest movements, however, do not
provide a practical blueprint for how to solve problems, and we should
not expect that of them. They seek rather to transform the public
agenda by creating political desires for a better future.   We see seeds
of that future already in the sea of faces that stretches from the streets
of Seattle to those of Genoa. One of the most remarkable
characteristics of these movements is their diversity: trade unionists
together with ecologists together with priests and communists. We are
beginning to see emerge a multitude that is not defined by any single
identity, but can discover commonality in its multiplicity.

These movements are what link Genoa this weekend most clearly to the
openness � toward new kinds of exchange and new ideas � of its
Renaissance past.

Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri are the authors of "Empire.''


_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold