Second. once you get into substance, the different, clashing interests at work in world economy will force splits, schools of thought, opposed political groups, etc. These splits have already happened, largely without debate and behind closed doors. John Cavanagh, long-time anti-globalist, calls our movement the "anti-corporate globalization movement," which obviously keeps organized labor and the big enviro ores in the game. Labor isn't against the corporations, which feed the workers. They are against certain corporate globalization practices, e.g., export platforms that grow at the expense of union jobs in the US. Big green is also not against corporations as such: they depend on big money for their grants etc. They just want the corporations to tread more lightly on nature. Meanwhile, labor is for globalization, to the degree that globalization expands US exports especially by unionized employers, e.g., Boeing. And the big unions here are more or less deaf to the demands of the antigloblist movement in the South, e.g., technology transfer and market opening in the north. I could continue in this vein, but stop with just one more example of the coming divisions, organized divisions, ideologically opposed divisions in the antiglobalist movement. South farmers by and large are threatened by especially Anglophone agricultural interests and exports. And the former tend to be very anti-globalization, when it comes to food and raw material production and exports, esp. when subsidies are involved, as they are, Australian food raw material exports excepted. The US and Europe of course scream at each other to "lower agricultural trade barriers" as well as plot how they'll share the food and materials mkt in the South, if and when WTO begins to enforce trade provisions for agriculture. South farmers therefore are objectively against (or on the other side of the food export issue) compared with small European farming and also small US farms which are highly capitalized hence highly productive. The problem with Ian's approach is that, so long as the issues are constructed the way they are today, small farmers in the US and EU would benefit from trade rules that would ruin many small farmers in the South.
This kind of thing is exactly why we internationalists, socialists, secularists, etc., need an independent organization so that we can propose independent solutions.