FW: <alter-ee> (Anarchist diatribe on Naomi Klein)

debsian at pacbell.net debsian at pacbell.net
Tue Sep 26 14:39:39 PDT 2000


PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:19:53 -0700 Sender: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com

--- Original Message --- Laure Akai <cube at zigzag.pl> Wrote on Mon, 25 Sep 2000 22:23:21 +0300

------------------ ILAN!!! Ironic that you posted this; I am readying a small diatribe against this Klein who I had the great discomfort of listening to in Prague. At one point I thought I ought to by an anarchist and interrupt part of her nonsense but the facilitator was a dog and I would have been shut up by the proper party leftists in the conference.

In particular, I was upset by what she was saying about recent fuel protests in Europe. According to that bourgeois woman, we should not get at all happy about these protests, and (she was getting quite adamant) it was something TOTALLY OPPOSED to our political agenda, that we shouldn't be lowering prices on gas because we need to think of sustainability. It was the mentality of a typical upper-class liberal, with all the class ignorance you could imagine.


>From time to time she said something OK but by and large she
was one of those disgusting spokespeople that I think need to be put in their place now. After all, even she pointed out that there needed to be a stronger political agenda for the movement; she started offering 10 points, etc. and it's clear that since the activists are not bothering, some smartass bourgeois academics and commies are going to make careers for themselves by formulating a bourgeois liberal agenda for us that they will repeatedly present to the media and they will just become the intellectual "leaders" of it all.

I'm also sure that commies are using this anti-globalisation movement to update their image and breathe new life into their movements.

As far as anti-brand radicalism, it's only radical to a point, when combined with a stronger analysis. By itself, it's very common; teenagers in particular use brands for status and many who cannot do so develop anti-brand status in reaction. Very often, anti-brand sentiments merge into some type of alternative consumer elitism; any saavy consultant can tell you that nonbranded or marginal brands have a distinct, lucrative market niche. Even some major brands market products to the people who hate their main brands.

Anyway, I was leaving the counter summit talks quite upset, mostly by her, and screaming that I don't want voices like hers representing my politics. It sounded at times that she was talking for anarchists but her politics were simply not radical enough.

Went on a bit about goals for democracy and other liberal shit. Must like Bookchin.

If some of you get off on having a media friendly spokesperson, I prefer Noam Chomsky.

Akai 47


>(part two)
>
>As a teenager, Naomi Klein was a
>dedicated mall rat, fixated on
>designer labels. A bare decade
>later, the author of a life-changing
>book on anti-corporatism and the
>new politics, she is at the heart of
>the protest at the current World
>Bank summit in Prague. She tells
>Katharine Viner how everything
>turned around for her
>
>Saturday September 23, 2000
>
>When she went to university a year later, a
>major news event ensured that her
>politicisation was inevitable. "The pivotal
>moment politically for me was in December
>1989, when there was a massacre at the
>University of Montreal. A man went into the
>engineering school - he had failed to get a
>place - and he separated the men from the
>women, shouted, 'You're all a bunch of
>fucking feminists', and opened fire. He killed
>14 women. There was nothing like that
>incident in Canadian history - this is not
>America, where serial murders happen all
>the time - and it was a hate crime against
>women. It was a cataclysmic moment. It
>politicised us enormously. Of course, after
>that you call yourself a feminist."
>
>It was also at university that Klein learned
>what it's like to be attacked for her opinions.
>She is Jewish, and during the intifada she
>wrote an article in the student newspaper
>called Victim To Victimiser, in which she said
>"that not only does Israel have to end the
>occupation for the Palestinians, but also it
>has to end the occupation for its own
>people, especially its women". As a result of
>this one 800-word article, Klein received
>bomb threats at her home and at the
>newspaper office - "and to this day I have
>never been more scared for my life".
>
>"After the article came out, the Jewish
>students' union, who were staunch Zionists,
>called a meeting to discuss what they were
>going to do about my article - and I went
>along, because nobody knew what I looked
>like. And the woman sitting next to me said,
>'If I ever meet Naomi Klein, I'm going to kill
>her.' So I just stood up and said, 'I'm Naomi
>Klein, I wrote Victim To Victimiser, and I'm
>as much a Jew as every single one of you.'
>I've never felt anything like the silence in that
>room after that. I was 19, and it made me
>tough."
>
>Klein became an outspoken feminist activist
>at college, campaigning on issues of media
>repre- sentation and gender visibility that
>constituted feminism at the end of the 80s -
>she received rape threats as a result - and,
>rather than finish her degree, she dropped
>out to work as an intern on the Toronto
>Globe And Mail. She left to become editor
>of an alternative political magazine, This
>Magazine. "When I was there [in the early
>90s], I did not feel that we were part of a
>political movement in any way - in that there
>was not a left. We had to kind of invent it as
>we went along. The stress of it was the
>stress of the left. It burned us out." The left
>that did exist Klein found depressing. "The
>only thing leftwing voices were saying was
>stop the cuts, stop the world we want to get
>off. It was very negative and regressive, it
>wasn't imaginative, it didn't have its own
>sense of itself in any way."
>
>It was around this time that advertising and
>branding started to co-opt alternative politics
>and culture. "On the one hand, there was
>this total paralysis of the left. But, at the
>exact same time, all these ideas that I had
>thought were the left - feminism and
>diversity and gay and lesbian rights - were
>suddenly very chic. So, on the one hand,
>you're politically totally disempowered, and
>on the other all the imagery is
>pseudo-feminist, Benetton is an anti-racism
>organisation, Starbucks does this
>third-world-chic thing. I watched my own
>politics become commercialised." This
>imagery was, she says, a "mask for
>capitalism. It was making it more difficult to
>see the power dynamics in society. Because
>this was a time when there was a growing
>income gap between rich and poor that was
>quite staggering all over the world - and yet
>everything looked way more equitable, in
>terms of the imagery of the culture."
>
>Klein went back to university in 1995 to try
>to finish her degree, and something very
>clearly had changed. "I met this new
>generation of young radicals who had grown
>up taking for granted the idea that
>corporations are more powerful than
>governments, that it doesn't matter who you
>elect because they'll all act the same. And
>they were, like, fine, we'll go where the
>power is. We'll adapt. It didn't fill them with
>dread and depression. When I was at
>university before, we thought our only power
>was to ban something - but they were very
>hands-on, DIY, if you don't like something
>change it, cut it, paste it, download it. Even
>though I don't think culture jamming by itself
>is a powerful political tool, there's something
>about that posture that's impressive - it's
>unintimidated hand-to-brand contact. The
>young activists I know have grounded their
>political activism in economic analysis and
>an understanding of how power works.
>They're way more sophisticated than we
>were because they've had to be. Because
>capitalism is way more sophisticated now.
>
>"I think I'm lucky because I got to witness a
>significant shift, something that changed,
>and I wanted to document that shift. And it
>seemed very, very clear to me that if there
>was going to be a future for the left it would
>have to be an anti-corporate movement."
>
>And so, Seattle in November last year -
>where 50,000 demonstrators actually
>prevented a major WTO meeting from
>happening - did she expect it to be so big?
>"Oh no. Seattle surprised me with its
>militancy. It surprised the organisers. It
>surprised everyone. I mean, this was the
>States . There were all these underground
>networks of activism, and it just came to life.
>Right now, the movement is at the stage of
>grassroots ferment - and it'll either
>degenerate into chaos or it'll come together
>organically into something new."
>
>The first thing people tend to ask Klein is
>where she shops. Does she buy Nike
>trainers? Does she never nip into Starbucks
>for a grande cappuccino? Is her wardrobe
>certifiably sweatshop-free? "I'm the worst
>person to ask these questions," she says,
>"because since the book came out people
>really are watching what I buy. If I walked
>around Toronto with a Starbucks, it would
>be seen that I was endorsing that brand."
>But, she says, for anyone who hasn't written
>a book about corporations and sweatshops,
>it's a different matter. "I firmly believe that
>it's not about where you shop. I'm lucky in
>that I happen to live a few blocks from some
>great independent designers, so I actually
>can shop in stores where I know where stuff
>is produced. But I can't say that to a
>17-year-old girl in the suburbs who can only
>shop at the mall. It's not a fair message.
>
>"This is not a consumer issue; it's a political
>issue. There is a way for us to respond as
>citizens that is not simply as consumers.
>Over and over again, people's immediate
>response to these issues is: what do I buy?
>I have to immediately solve this problem
>through shopping. But you can like the
>products and not like the corporate
>behaviour; because the corporate behaviour
>is a political issue, and the products are just
>stuff. The movement is really not about
>being purer-than-thou and producing a
>recipe for being an ethical consumer. That
>drains a lot of political energy."
>
>Is this why she published in Britain with
>Flamingo, part of the Murdoch-owned
>HarperCollins, a major corporation if ever
>there was one? "To be honest, I really did
>not have my pick of publishers in Britain.
>Only one wanted the book. What I said
>when I signed with HarperCollins was that I
>was going to go out of my way to write
>about Murdoch, more than I would have
>done otherwise. I did, and they didn't touch
>it."
>
>As a populariser of the movement's
>arguments, does Klein consider herself an
>activist or a journalist? "I see myself as an
>activist journalist," she says. "I became a
>journalist because I'm not comfortable being
>an activist. I hate crowds - I know, great
>irony - and I'm physically incapable of
>chanting. I'm always slightly detached, so I
>write about it to feel more comfortable. I like
>to believe that I can be part of this
>movement without being a propagandist.
>There's a really strong tradition of this, like
>Gloria Steinem, Norman Mailer, Susan
>Faludi. I do think that there's so much
>fragmentation in this movement that if
>someone tries to work out a coherent thesis
>- even if you don't agree with all or even
>much of it - it can be helpful by making
>something more solid."
>
>In Prague, at the protests against the
>IMF/World Bank, she will be speaking at
>today's counter-summit, but she is
>concerned that the media has already
>portrayed the protesters as mad terrorists
>crossing continents with the sole intention of
>kicking some Czech police. "Months ago we
>were already seeing the most extreme
>attempts to criminalise protest. This is a
>protest about the IMF and the World Bank,
>and the effects they're having on poorer
>countries. We must not let the reaction of
>the state and the police entirely define the
>message. I'm going to Prague because I
>believe it is a crucially important opportunity
>to show the world what this movement really
>is - the first genuinely international people's
>movement."
>
>There are some who wonder, though,
>whether the IMF and corporations are the
>right target. Isn't it governments that we
>should be aiming at, since it is governments,
>initially led by Reagan and Thatcher with
>their dramatic lowering of corporate taxes,
>which gave the corporations such power in
>the first place? "I think these corporations
>are not really targets, they are metaphors,"
>says Klein. "They're being used by this
>generation of young activists as a popular
>education tool to understand the global
>economy. When I was at university, we
>were intimidated and didn't understand
>anything about globalisation. So we tuned
>out from that and turned in on ourselves and
>became more and more insular - which is
>the great irony of those years, because that
>was when all this accelerated globalisation
>was happening. We weren't watching. And
>what I see happening with, say, the
>campaign against Nike is a tactic on the part
>of activists who've decided to turn these
>companies into metaphors for the global
>economy gone awry."
>
>In other words, when the global economy is
>so huge, so forbidding, the corporations are
>an accessible way in. "When the WTO was
>created in Uruguay in 1995, there were no
>protesters outside. These trade bureaucrats
>created a world of incredibly complex
>institutions and arcane trade agreements
>written by policy wonks with no interest in
>popularising. So I believe that anti-corporate
>campaigns are the bridge: they're the first
>baby-step to developing an analysis of
>global capitalism."
>
>Indeed, an important and fascinating aspect
>of the movement has been popular
>education - groups holding mass teach-ins
>on global politics, international economics,
>the IMF, the World Bank, the WTO (the
>"iron triangle of corporate rule"); Naafta, the
>EU, Gatt, Apec, G-8, the OECD, structural
>adjustment. At Seattle, activists in their 20s
>sat for eight hours at a stretch listening to
>speakers from around the world decode
>globalisation for them.
>
>Is this a re-invention of left politics? After a
>decade in the wilderness, is
>anti-corporatism the post-cold war new New
>Left? "I think it is," says Klein, "but it's only
>at the early stages of re-invention.
>Sometimes, I think it's moving towards
>creating a global new deal, and sometimes I
>think it's way more radical than that. And it
>might be - I don't know." I mention the
>impact of the very word "capitalism", which
>had gone resolutely out of fashion until June
>18, 1999, when demonstrators staged an
>"anti-capitalist" demonstration in the City of
>London. "Since June 18, the comeback of
>the word 'capitalism' is just extraordinary,"
>laughs Klein. "It's like Santana - what the
>hell's going on? Suddenly they're talking
>about 'capitalism' on CNN, and in
>Washington there are all these little girls
>wearing caps with 'Capitalism Sux' on them.
>For a long time, the very word has been
>invisible - it's just the economy, the way the
>world works." And that change has
>happened in little over a year. "That's why I
>feel optimistic, and I'm not impatient about
>the pace of change."
>
>The trouble is, we're used to thinking that
>something that is anti-capitalist must be
>straightforwardly socialist or communist,
>which is not the case with this movement. It
>is, instead, "an amalgam of
>environmentalism, anti-capitalism, anarchy
>and the kitchen sink", says Klein - which
>leads us to the central criticism levelled at all
>the anti-corporate protests. What do they
>stand for? What are their goals? Where is
>their vision?
>
>"I think I have more patience for finding this
>out than most people," says Klein. "I've been
>following this movement for five years, and I
>know where we were at five years ago and
>I know where we are now. We were
>nowhere. That a genuine political movement
>can begin to emerge in that timespan,
>organically, on its own - it's extraordinary. I
>think a lot of those demanding a manifesto
>or a leader are people of a different
>generation who have an idea in their mind of
>what a political movement looks like, and
>they want Abbie Hoffman or Gloria Steinem
>and where are they?"
>
>Even such diverse campaigns - from groups
>fighting against Nike, or agribusiness, or
>world debt, or the Free Trade Area of the
>Americas - "share a belief that the disparate
>problems with which they are wrestling all
>derive from global deregulation, an agenda
>that is concentrating power and wealth into
>fewer and fewer hands". And the
>fragmentation of the campaigns, says Klein,
>is a "reasonable, even ingenious adaptation
>of changes in the broader culture". The
>movement, with its hubs and spokes and
>hotlinks, its emphasis on information rather
>than ideology, reflects the tool it uses - it is
>the "internet come to life". This is why it
>doesn't work well on television, unlike the
>anti-Vietnam protests of the 60s with their
>leaders, their slogans, their single-issue
>politics.
>
>When people say that the movement lacks
>vision, believes Klein, what they really mean
>is that it is different from anything that's
>gone before, that it is a completely new kind
>of movement - just as the internet is a
>completely new kind of medium. "What
>critics are really saying is that the movement
>lacks an overarching revolutionary
>philosophy, such as Marxism, democratic
>socialism, deep ecology or social anarchy,
>on which they all agree." But the movement
>should not, says Klein, be in a hurry to
>define itself. "Before they sign on to
>anyone's 10-point plan, they deserve the
>chance to see if, out of the movement's
>chaotic, decentralised, multi-headed webs,
>something new, something entirely its own,
>can emerge."
>
>No Logo has been leapt upon by some
>commentators who are thrilled by Naomi
>Klein's rejection of the identity politics of her
>youth, and so see it as anti-feminist. "This is
>not a rejection of feminism," she says. "It is
>a return to the roots of feminism - early
>feminism was very involved in
>anti-sweatshop action, and the current
>anti-sweatshop movement very much sees it
>as a feminist issue, since it is
>overwhelmingly women of colour who are
>being abused by the systems. I feel that we
>lost our way in the late 80s, when feminism
>became disengaged from its roots, which
>originally had critiques of capitalism and of
>consumerism. I am a feminist and this is a
>feminist book."
>
>This, I believe, is crucial to understanding
>both why the movement is so popular with
>young people and why Klein is so perfectly
>placed to be its chief populariser. In the 60s
>and 70s, activists concentrated their
>anti-racism and feminism on matters of
>equality - equal rights and equal pay. In
>Klein's 80s and 90s, they campaigned
>instead on issues of culture and identity:
>portrayal in the media, who gets to the
>board. But the new generation of activists is
>taking the best bits of both: developing a
>radical critique of the global economy, while
>incorporating identity politics as a matter of
>course. So, whereas Sheila Rowbotham
>was greeted with a barrage of wolf-whistles
>and guffaws when she got on stage to
>speak about education at a leftist
>conference in 1968, no one is surprised that
>this movement's main theorist is a woman.
>This is a far more inclusive movement than
>those that have gone before.
>
>There's a personal recollection in No Logo in
>which Klein talks about being 17 and
>wondering what to do with her life. She was
>frustrated, because if you wanted to be a
>traveller Lonely Planet had got there first; if
>you wanted to be an avant-garde artist,
>someone had done it all already, and put the
>image on a mug for you to take home. "All
>my parents wanted was the open road and
>a VW camper," she writes. "That was
>enough escape for them." Now it feels as if
>there is "no open space anywhere". It is as
>if this generation's culture is being sold out
>as they are living it; there is nothing left to
>discover.
>
>Her thesis is about trying to find some space
>that hasn't been bought up by anyone; trying
>to rediscover our identities as citizens, and
>not just consumers. It is about globalisation,
>and the power corporations have over our
>lives. But it is also about being 30, having
>spent your youth in a disaffected age. Her
>grandfather, the animator blacklisted by
>McCarthy, would be proud: Naomi Klein
>might just be helping re-invent politics for a

----- Sent using MailStart.com ( http://MailStart.Com/welcome.html ) The FREE way to access your mailbox via any web browser, anywhere!



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list