Reformist social democracy is no longer on the agenda The anti-globalisation movement is the basis of a left alternative
Fausto Bertinotti Monday August 11, 2003/The Guardian The terrible events in Iraq marked the end of the post-war period - a period marked by the memory of the horrors of the Nazi-fascist war, when the world saw two opposing economic and social blocs pitted against each other and social struggles led to a growth of welfare benefits and the bargaining power of trade unions. The liberal constitutions were born out of the victory over Nazism and fascism. Now we are living in a new phase, in which the space for reform has been closed. As Giorgio Ruffolo (a minister in Italy's former centre-left government) wrote recently: "Through globalisation, capitalism has won a historical battle: it has defeated the reform-minded left, both in Europe and America." The consequences are there for everyone to see: reckless flexibility, extreme inequalities and the end of safety nets. The demise of reformism has changed both analyses and prospects, bringing with it the difficulty of even achieving partial results that can be woven into the social fabric and provide cohesion. This is a problem even when there are major social and public-opinion movements. In the past few months large numbers have taken to the streets, part of a worldwide movement against the war. But the war was waged anyway, without any price yet paid by the forces that wanted it. In Italy there has been a major movement around employment issues, including industry-wide strikes and general strikes, but the government still managed to pass dangerous laws such as the Maroni decree (restricting pension rights). There has been a mass mobilisation over unfair dismissal rights. And yet we lost it. In France, after major struggles, the Raffarin government is carrying on its attack on the pension system. In Germany, for the first time in 50 years, IG Metall ended a strike to extend the 35-hour working week to the eastern regions without achieving any result whatsoever. Capitalist globalisation contains deeply regressive elements that are leading to a real crisis of civilisation. The only possible response is not reformism, but rather a radical refoundation of politics as a worldwide process and thus a reconstruction of the agency of change: a redefinition of the working class. The right has won all over the world because it has strategic hegemony. In the US the Bush administration is based on military interventionism, extreme neo-liberalism and religious fundamentalism. War is no longer a one-off or exceptional event, it has become structural and "never-ending". The only possibility in the face of rightwing extremism is to provide an alternative: of peace against war and of a new model of society against neo-liberalism. This does not mean either a detailed programme or unity among existing political forces. Nor does it mean defending democracy as it currently exists. Rather, it means starting from the main resource available, which is the movement against capitalist globalisation. The anti-globalisation movement is the first movement that represents a break with the 20th century and its truths and myths. At present it is the main source of politics for an alternative to the global right. When, on February 15, 100 million people took to the streets, the New York Times referred to it as a second "world power", a power that in the name of peace opposed those who wanted war. It is no exaggeration to say that everything that has happened in the past few years has had something to do with this movement. It started from observation of the impact of neo-liberalism, going on to trace its origins and create an anti-capitalist culture. It has resisted the progressive destruction of democracy that has led one liberal, Ralf Dahrendorf, to refer to this as an " ademocratic century", holding to account those bodies - from the International Monetary Fund to the World Bank - that have deprived people of democracy and sovereignty. It has countered the crisis of democracy with embryonic new democratic institutions. It has challenged the division of political labour among trade unions, parties and cooperatives and shifted the focus of political debate from institutions to social relations, bringing feelings and everyday life back into the realm of politics. It has also tackled the theme of power, in terms not of achieving and keeping it, but of transforming, dissolving and reconstructing power through self-government. And it has challenged the model of a party leading the movement, proposing instead the notion of networks and links among groups, associations, parties and newspapers. The problem now is how to build out of the anti-globalisation movement a real democratic power able to achieve its objectives. Its greatest limitation seems to be the lack of a connection between the great issues of globalisation, war and peace and the intermediate dimension of employment and production relations. The inability to build a concrete link between the fight against globalisation and the fight against insecurity and exploitation is a shortcoming. An alternative European left can find its strategy only within the anti-globalisation movement. The key issue both for the movement and for us is the clash between peace and war. The movement has identified the global dimension of war and the fact that it is inbuilt in a system which cannot do without it. It was this conviction that turned the anti-globalisation movement into the backbone of the peace movement. Despite its remarkable strength, however, the movement did not stop the war. So now the question is: how can we build a force for peace and democracy capable of having an impact on US policy? The same kind of problems arise over social issues. Building the social roots of the movement and the reform of left politics are two sides of the same coin. In Italy, the Refounded Communists, together with others, tried to do this through the referendum on extending employment protection to all workers. We were defeated, but the referendum took its inspiration from the movement, the idea of the struggle for equal rights against job insecurity. This battle, however, has not taken on a European dimension. The European trade unions decided not to call a general strike against the war, which would have also been a boost to the fight against neo-liberalism. Now there is the chance of re-opening a Europe-wide battle over the welfare state. In the face of converging government policies, only an organisation fighting at European level can make its case. Unless they move in this direction, the European anti-capitalist leftwing parties risk disappearing in terms of political representation; and within the anti-globalisation movement there could develop a temptation to flee from politics. The forces of the European left cannot depend on social democracy. They must break away with a radical, united initiative. Not only the prospects of the left and the anti-globalisation movement, but even the existence of Europe as an autonomous entity, is at stake. * Fausto Bertinotti is national secretary of Italy's Refounded Communist party (Rifondazione Comunista) and a member of the Italian and European parliaments. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------ Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
