|
What do the uniting slogan of the US Social Forum (USSF)--"Another world is possible, another US is necessary"--and the social forum itself tell us about progressive movements and the Left in the United States today? As a contribution to the many conversations and dialogues at and following the USSF, we'd like to put forward this assessment and some questions for consideration.
First, for the sake of clarity, we would like to define a few terms that we will be batting around, as these concepts are central to our take on social transformation and revolutionary change in the 21st century.
Social-movement activists, the social-movement Left and the organized or party Left
We recognize that of the thousands of activists who attended the US Social Forum, not all of them are part of a conscious or subjective Left. While the majority of USSF participants are part of progressive social movements, critiquing problems and developing strategies to address those problems, not all participants are imbued with a vision of "another world" that would require a break with the existing system, something that is essentially anti-capitalist and revolutionary. There are social-movement activists, and there are social-movement activists who are part of and representative of the social-movement Left.
The social-movement Left shares an awareness that the essence of our struggle is against the system of capitalism and other interlinking systems of oppression. This analysis has been central to the more traditional forms of Left organization, whether they be Left parties, cadre or socialist organizations. The social-movement Left becomes active and organizes in the social movements, prioritizing the work within social-movement groups that function to carry out campaigns and the call for demands of an organized base. Often they are the initiators and organizers of some of the most vibrant and innovative projects and initiatives occurring in the US today.
The social-movement Left made up a significant sector of the organizing core of the USSF. Because of the conscious individuals and organizations shaping the process of the USSF, it set a foundation to raise the level of consciousness of the social-movement activists. This consciousness, as we believe we are witnessing, leads to an understanding of the links between the oppression and exploitation of all and therefore a different practice within the social movements. Also present were leftist individuals and organizations that for lack of a better term could be defined as the "party" Left. These are leftists whose roots draw on some of the revolutionary currents of the past century. Many of them self-identify as socialist or with socialist organizations.
 Thousands took part in the march at the beginning of the USSF.
The National Planning Committee (NPC) for the USSF, the body charged with building and organizing the forum itself, was very intentionally established to represent a broad cross-section of grassroots organizations and movements, in particular those led by and rooted in communities of color. Women-of-color leadership was particularly important.
This was reflected in the composition of the USSF itself, attendance and participation of significant numbers of working-class people of color, queer people and women. The character of the USSF itself, and therefore the identity of US social movements following the forum, will continue to be defined by this composition. The significance of this should not be underestimated. It would not have occurred if it were not for the deliberate organizing of the NPC and local committees, which implemented outreach and recruitment plans in order to ensure the participation of individuals and organizations that otherwise would not have the resources to attend the USSF.
This is not to overlook the fact that there is much work for social movements and the Left to do--that poor and working-class people are not engaged in these movements in a mass way and that it is the responsibility of our movements to develop strategies that allow us to work in a principled way with the working-class and oppressed communities in the US.
 The joint workshop on building revolutionary organization had a huge overflow crowd.
People are looking to engage around strategies, solutions and vision, not simply just problems. This was demonstrated by the resonance of tracks like "Right to the City," which highlighted strategies that challenge gentrification and displacement while building power for working-class communities of color. This was also shown by the strong attendance at workshops such as "Another Politics is Possible: Living the Vision from Below and to the Left" and the workshop that FRSO/OSCL organized with other Left organizations on "Revolutionary Consciousness, Strategy, Vision and Organization in the 21st Century." Over 200 people, mostly from the social-movement Left, attended this workshop on revolutionary strategy and organization (and it would have been much larger if we had had a bigger room).
There was a real interest in understanding the strategic role of the South and Southwest, self-determination and the national question, as evidenced by the large number of sessions on Katrina and the Gulf Coast, Building Multiracial alliances in the South and Southwest and, in particular, the strong attendance at the workshop, "The Future of the Black Liberation Movement: Katrina and the Gulf Coast, the Black Belt South, and the Black Nation."
What does all this tell us about where the social-movement Left is at? Why do conversations about vision, strategy and organization strike a nerve? We believe that those who broadly identify as left understand that we need new theories, practice, strategies and organizations in order to defeat the system and all its intersecting oppressions to create revolutionary change. There is not a lot of space within our current work and social movements to do that--to draw lessons from the work and the history of revolutionary practice and organization. The space to have these discussions and raise questions--like how can we really get to the point where another world is possible--is a task that the organized Left must engage with, but only respectfully and in concert with independent social-movement organizers and not divorced from the mass work with people engaged in struggle.
The binary between theory and practice continues to exist, despite the effort of many on the social-movement left to bridge the two, calling for practice that is informed by theory and a broader vision for social transformation, and vice versa.
The idea of "horizontalism" among others, has gained a lot of traction with social-movement activists and organizers in the US, following the development of the theory and practice in social movements around the world. Marina Sitrin, author of Horizontalism: Voices of Popular Power in Argentina, provides this definition: "Horizontalidad does not just imply a flat plane for organizing, or non-hierarchical relationships in which people no longer make decisions for others. It is a positive word that implies the use of direct democracy and the striving for consensus, processes in which everyone is heard and new relationships are created. Horizontalidad is a new way of relating, based in affective politics, and against all of the implications of 'isms.'"
The critique from which horizontalism grows--as it is related to the crisis of socialism and the lack of democratic practice in many Left movements historically--is one that cannot be lost. This is a critical political question as we strive to model a type of practice that is democratic and effective. Certainly an important lesson is that no organization can take the place of the revolutionary creativity and initiative of the working class and oppressed people engaged in the struggle to build a new society. The revolutionary organization must place itself at the service of the movements as a facilitator of the revolutionary practice. We strongly believe that it is important for all of us, whether we are in an organization or not, to engage in questions of structure, organization, leadership and democracy.
However, we would like to offer a critical examination as well, based on direct experience with the use by some of a guise of democracy and consensus to manipulate and control the organizational process, resulting in a tyranny of structurelessness. Many examples from practice within social movements and Left organizations tell us that, if anything, lack of structure leads to a lack of democracy and hidden hierarchical, problematic dynamics.
If you are interested in a more in-depth look at many of these questions and our thinking about revolutionary organization-building and Left refoundation, check out FRSO/OSCL's new pamphlet, Which Way is Left: Theory, Politics, Organization and 21st Century Socialism .
Opportunities and challenges following the USSF
As the structure of the social forum process is not necessarily set up to facilitate next steps, it is the responsibility of the participants and, we believe, conscious left forces to ensure that the excitement and momentum seen at the USSF can be sustained to lead to stronger, more effective social movements. We believe both the social-movement Left and the organized Left play an important role in this, bringing experience in day-to-day struggles, analysis, theory and vision.
The opportunity arises for a continued cooperation of those organizations to work together not only to organize the next social forum but also to consider other collaborations and projects that allow for coordination amongst different sectors of the movement.
Local and regional networks, such as city and regional social forums, can be organized to take up the issues addressed at the USSF. The challenge facing the Left is not only the building of these formations, but also constructing them as instruments that will enable workers and oppressed peoples to assert their power.
There is a continuing challenge in how we can really unite the various struggles of oppressed peoples in to a concerted struggle against capital. How do we avoid the danger of movements fragmenting into separate struggles? What is the "other world" that we are talking about? What does it look like?
We believe that many of the programs, tracks, plenaries and discussions at the USSF provided hints towards what another world--one that we must start imagining if we are to begin taking steps towards it--would look like. True reconstruction and self-determination in the Gulf Coast. An economy built on solidarity and human needs, rather than profit. A roof and healthy food for all people. A world without trans- and homophobia. Access to health care for all.
|
