----
Ian,
I vaguely in the pre-Seattle posting a query as to what kind of local organizing was being done on this issue, and I think got what (at the time) seemed a satisfactory response from you. (I can't remember the details.)
But by post-Genoa period it had increasingly came to seem to me that the whole movement was capable only of a sort of forced (i.e., stunted) growth. That was focused when (on another list or lists) I read posts from activists talking about how the decision to hold some "global" meeting in some isolated location in Canada "plated into our hands" (not exact phrase, but something like that) because there was _such_ limited access that it would be easy for small numbers of activists to block the delegates from getting there. I don't remember the details accurately enough to claim accuracy here, but whatever the details were, my response to them at the time was that a 'movement' with this kind of thinking was not going anyplace. The prominence of the various 'black blocs,' not only in the demonstrations but in leftist discussion afterwards reinforced my feeling that this was a movement was made up (MOSTLY) of activists with with no base.
And most importantly -- I _never_ heard any reports of mobilizing demos and forums in localities prior to the big demos or well attended and reported and widespread local support demos on the day of the big demos. But that of course is exactly what has been happening from October 2001 on, and it is still continuing. The writer of the following, which I quoted in an earlier post, is the local Green Party organizer: I'm not familiar with his exact history, but he clearly has political experience which gives him a sense of what a mass movement might be:
*****
> > >* Bring the troops home NOW!
>
>I would agree that BNCPJ should (if possible) become a cosponsor of the
>event, advertise it locally, and recruit people to attend.
The message about this Chicago event has now, almost completely independently, worked its way to SJS, SPAN, BNCPJ, and the Greens. Clearly, this is something all of the groups should work together on.
It is not easy to get a lot of people up to Chicago at noon on a Tuesday. Are there any thoughts about what sorts of actions we might be able to take here?- ____
*****
The key thing here (for me) is the doing support actions here. And the seizing by a number of people (not marxists, nor revolutionaries, just active left liberals) of the Chicago Call as an occasion for local outreach. Probably there were some such calls for the Seattle etc rallies, but no one ever wrote of them that I know.
So! This is _my_ 'reason' for simply passing over the "globalization is pretty popular" post with a duh! What else is new. The anti-globalization movement had its turn, and the world has gone on.
[QUALIFICATION TO ALL OF THIS: That movement was a tremendous success in one crucial way: undoubtedly the number of cadre available for the current anti-interventionist movement was substantially enlarged by the anti-globalization activity. That is also the main victory of the anti-apartheid, central american solidarity, and other splurges of activity in the '70s, '80s, & '90s. If the present movement goes flat or outlives its time, it will have served both to preserve cadre and generate new cadre. This is not a small thing, and for that reason, plus the literature generated, the "anti-globalization movement was a success, though not perhaps in its own terms.]
Carrol