 |
 |
You probably saw the pictures of the global elite meeting at Davos, protected by Swiss riot police (and the Swiss Army). New: this time the global elite included representatives of global civil society. You have probably seen that some people openly advocate global civil society. This development is a major background issue for the WTO and other international organisations. Now, a Greenpeace-Shell world government, is that True Progress? Is that the ideal which should inspire activists? And was it the ideal, for the Seattle and Davos demonstrators? I am no doubt cynical, but I think it is good to look behind the images of riots and broken MacDonalds windows. There is certainly a global civil society, in the sense of a coalition of international NGO's (the so-called INGO's). That includes organisations like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty, Greenpeace, Corporate Watch, the APC and so on. These organisations are seeking representation in decision-making at global level. There is already a precedent for this in the European Union. The EU has an Economic and Social Committee (ESC), which is intended as the representative of 'civil society'. It describes itself as "the European-level forum for reflection of civil society organisations and associations." In fact it continues the older west European tradition, of tripartite (business-labour-government) National Social Councils. A new section has been added, to include the newer 'civil society' organisations of the last generation. See their website... http://www.ces.eu.int/en/org/fr_org_default.htm Something like this ESC, at global level, is what international civil society wants. Greenpeace and Amnesty don't come to WTO or WEF meetings to 'smash the system', but to get onto this kind of committee. The global media are their main vehicle in this campaign: their own membership is too small and too uncommitted, to exert any power at global level. So the suspicion is, that demos like those at Seattle and Davos serve primarily the interests of the INGO's - as a means of levering their way into membership of some future 'Global Social-Environmental Council'. From what I know of the backgrounds, I think most of the demonstrators would not explicitly support such a strategy. So are they being used as cannon-fodder? It certainly looks that way, but there is no point in discussing the motives of individual demonstrators. It is more relevant to look at the use of such demonstrations, especially in the media - and how they fit into larger political campaigns. --- Paul Treanor http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/neoliberalism.html %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%