related articles

How not to make friends and influence people

Those organising the ESF programme have been engaged in often fraught arguments not least over the importance of European integration and how the left ought to respond

The meeting in Paris of the international working group, which is preparing the programme for the October European Social Forum in London, was a very ‘lively’ affair.

            On May 29-30, around 40 people from across Europe met to discuss which subjects should be discussed in the plenary sessions and what the format of those meetings should be. The 20 or so plenaries are the only meetings that will be organised centrally - ie, by international representatives from across Europe - so they come at the top of the programme hierarchy.

            Although only three or four were supposed to attend from Britain, this proved too few - mainly because so many distrust the ESF leadership, composed of Socialist Workers Party and Socialist Action-related groups. In the end there were nine people representing Britain: six associated with the ‘officials’ and three with the ‘democratic opposition’: Dave Timms (World Development Movement), Naima Bouteldja (Just Peace) and Helena Kotkowska (Attac).

            We are told by a number of participants from Europe that some of the ‘officials’ did not go down too well with many participants - particularly Anne Kane (Abortion Rights/SA), Alex Gordon (RMT) and Mick Connolly (South East Region TUC). Comrades from Italy, for example, were extremely critical of the SWP and SA comrades throughout the meeting.

            Comrades from SA have this special ability to alienate almost everybody in a meeting by accusing those who disagree with them of being soft on racism/fascism/women’s oppression. And our two trade union representatives did even worse: they openly threatened to withhold financial backing if certain ‘demands’ were not met. They insisted, for example, that one of the six major themes at the ESF should be more or less handed over to ‘the trade unions’ and discuss only union-related issues.

            Some of our European comrades were understandably outraged by this threat. Pierre Barge (from the French League for the Rights of Man) and Piero Bernocchi (from the Italian union, Cobas) in particular criticised the idea that “one movement should have a monopoly on any ESF theme”.

            There are other problems which were pointed out by our European comrades: Firstly, where is this much heralded financial backing from the trade unions? So far, £50,000 from London Unison is the only official donation. Secondly, at the first two ESFs in Florence and Paris, the trade unions as well as local government bodies donated substantially more money than Ken Livingstone’s Greater London Authority and the British unions will. And they placed no demands on the organisers at all.

            Sure, there would have been ‘moral’ pressure to thank them for their support, but anybody who attended those events will have noticed that both local government and the unions participated in the event and its organisation - but without ‘demanding’ a certain amount of space for themselves. In short, they handed over the money and that was it. Not in Britain though, where (potential) financial support very much comes with political strings attached.

            The reason people quibbled so much over the actual formulation of the themes is simple: roughly the same amount of plenaries (and possibly seminars, too) will be devoted to each of the six themes. While the SWP-SA bloc always insists that plenary sessions are “not that important”, they put in a lot of time and effort into shaping them according to their liking and political objectives.

            For example, Anne Kane (with support from other ‘officials’) argued vehemently that the issue of women’s liberation should be discussed in the theme on ‘Democracy and fundamental rights’. However, the rest of our European comrades quite rightly want this theme to deal with the wider issue of Europe only. For the economistic British official delegation, Europe is of course a “non-issue”, so why bother talking too much about it? One or two plenaries on Europe will do - tops.

            Fortunately, our European comrades are not quite as ignorant of the key strategic political question that is facing left and progressive forces across Europe: the ever closer unity of our ruling classes in the European Union - and how we should respond to it.

            French and Italian comrades argued that general issues on discrimination, including the struggle for women’s liberation, should, along with the role of the trade unions, be included in an expanded ‘social justice and solidarity’ theme - thereby allowing the issue of Europe its own, separate space that it requires. Our European comrades were in the absolute majority on this issue - a majority which grew when Anne Kane suggested that anybody who disagreed with her did not take women’s liberation seriously. Female comrades from Italy and France made clear what they thought of the suggestion in that typical southern European way: tutting and hissing, accompanied by the rolling of eyes.

            Another interesting discussion took place on the theme of racism. The British bloc of SWP-SA had previously insisted that we must have a plenary on ‘Stop Euro fascism’, which they now also wanted included in the name of the theme.

            Lars Bohn from Attac Denmark quite rightly pointed out that the rise of the extreme right in Europe is authoritarian, chauvinistic and often racist - but that surely does not make it fascist. He argued it would not be very clever to alienate people by using such hyped-up and basically incorrect formulations. This was greeted with another semi-hysterical contribution from comrade Kane, who said anybody against using the word fascism “does not belong in the ESF”.

            Needless to say, the official report-back from comrade Jonathan Neale at the latest ESF coordinating committee (June 3) focused on the technical aspects of the meeting, without even hinting at any of these controversies. Intriguing, though, was what Alex Gordon had to say: firstly, he was “disgusted” that the issue of women looks like being included in “the union theme”. That showed how “the Europeans, particularly the French and the Italians,” do not take the question “seriously”.

            Then he raged against the theme on democracy, which he called “purely a propaganda exercise in favour of the EU. We in the trade unions will not accept this travesty of a theme”, which is in its current proposed formulation “a waste of time”.

            Comrade Gordon is not well placed to complain about the poor political judgement of others - our European comrades have a far better grasp of the political reality that is facing us. If anything, they have been too hesitant in pushing forward the need to form European-wide alternative structures: the ESF falls far short of the highly organised alternative space we need; the European Left Party is too loose; the effectiveness of European trade unions is still restricted by national borders.

            The six themes are now provisionally called (pending approval by the next European assembly on June 19-20 in Berlin):

l War and peace

l Democracy and fundamental rights

l Social justice and solidarity: against privatisation (deregulation), for workers’, social and women’s rights’

l Corporate globalisation and global justice

l Against racism, discrimination and the far right: for equality and diversity

l Environmental crisis and sustainable society

Bad omen

The fact that Unite Against Fascism had to cancel its festival in London, due to be held last weekend, could be a bad omen. UAF drastically scaled down a second event, which was supposed to take place in Liverpool, moving it to a smaller venue in Manchester with a few days’ notice.

            This certainly is not good news for the organisers who will have lost a substantial amount of money. It is even worse news, if one looks at the organisations behind UAF: the SWP (aka Anti-Nazi League), the trade union bureaucracy, Ken Livingstone and various organisations run or sponsored by Socialist Action.

            Ring a bell? Yes, they are exactly the same groups that are running the show in the preparations for the London ESF. Socialist Worker is surely correct when it says that the gig in the north west had to be moved because the Greater Manchester police authority cancelled the festival on May 30 for “fear of violence”.

            Surely it is also true that the London festival (June 6) was sabotaged by the police’s “demand, just two weeks before the event, for steel shielding [which] would have increased the cost of holding the carnival fourfold” (Socialist Worker June 5).

            The event was then moved to the Hammersmith Apollo and a full-day festival became an evening concert. But then, a few days later, the organisers cancelled even this gig, because Pete Doherty, singer with the main act, The Libertines, is still in rehab in France, sorting out his drug problem.

            A lot of bad luck. Let us hope that that was all it was - not made worse by the failings of those who are preparing for the ESF in such a secretive and unaccountable way l

Tina Becker