anti-globalization movements: goals and strategies

First some clarification.

anti-globalization its called too many things. But the lowest common denominator of the resistance is what could be loosely called 'The monocultural urbanocentric pattern'

In other words, 'globalization' in abstract its not a enemy because its completely amoral, as all instruments are. The enemy can be defined as the cultural pattern that makes use of the globalized technical resources for the transmission of influence to constrain the social community relationships around itself


Given these clarifications of what movement im talking here, lets proceed.


Even if goals are more or less precise, as are across all the anti-globalization movement. However, as across all of them, paths are currently beyond blur.

First some review about what is happening right now. Main Media have recently shown that 'free speech' its just an expression. In a recent planified campaign to develop consciousness on the american public around the way mass psichology is playing an increasing compromised role in the market, they shamelessly refused to play on air the ads of the campaign. According to their alleged reasons, they dont want to even consider 'issue oriented' material. Besides this, there is the fact that in America, democrat's party has induced itself into a perfectly aseptic political margination, leaving the way open for america's democracy to grow inside a narrowing unipartidism, which would be the first solid evidence that America is moving into a totalitarian Cuba-like society, where 'free' speech is allowed only when it doesnt have anything meaningful to say.

Maybe its because both countries use the public fear as the key strategic element of his State Security agenda?

This means other fronts must be opened (unfortunately, in a progressive but coordinated way), and I think i have something to contribute in this aspect.


The only two really autonomous systems in the current stage are the media and the financial system. All the rest, as the political elite, and the so called 'military complex', are just prolongations of the above. Note that the current so cheerfully celebrated representative democracy doesnt produce not even a nearly resembling autonomous system, but one that is blindly directed by the financial subsystem (thru campaign finance) and the media subsystem (thru campaign propaganda).

If we dont produce a third autonomous subsystem, precisely in the political arena, what we can achieve is small.

There is a slight chance (or a big one, depending on the optimism) of changing this situation dramatically. The key to this is something that is incredibly (suspiciously) poorly knowed and studied but enormously promising, such as the continuous election system. This system consists in that each voter can directly pick one president and the corresponding deputies (representatives), just like the current system, but very unlikely the current system, the voter does this vote update any time of year. At the moment he does his update, the status of political support for his previous candidate drops by one and his new candidate raises by one. In this way, now for representatives keep their office, isnt enough to 'obtain' power, but to keep it. Now citizens not need to go to feastful carnivals each 4~5 years, but they exercise the will when they feel they have to. Technically this system is awfully easy to implement (think about how secure and reliable is borrowing money from the bank, but now with public scrutiny on it).

Think now about how that would chance the situation of defenselessness of the enraged citizen against the hegemonic parties representatives. Currently, there are two facts that determine that his opinion will be sistematically minoritarian (if you have read about Neumann spiral silence theory, even if you dont fully agree with her, you will have an insight in what im going to tell you) the first fact would be that currently the citizen cannot withdraw its vote if he later regrets from his unthoughtful choice. Its like having bought food to later discover its rotten, and dont having the right to get a refund. This means the politicians have the right to scam us and laugh in our faces for our sistematic stupitidy. The second fact would be that since in this so-called 'democracy' citizens can exert their right so scarcely, that they are unwilling to experiment with their vote, giving hegemonic, stablishment parties the winning side from the start (in some countries must wait up to 5 or even more years to exert his 'right', and damn! without even a 'satisfaction guaranteed' sticker)

The third fact would be that political system would become truly dynamic and their variations would be finally independent of the other two (financial and mediatical) subsystems.

There is no doubt that if anti-globalization movement would asimilate this as a mid-term goal, there would be a chance for political power to become truly public, removing the monopoly that holds the Media subsystem of the public political opinion's management. Once at that stage, the evolution of the will of societies as a whole will have a few less ties. This system is a real chance to rebuild democracy from the root, and in the meantime, would give the whole anti-globalization movement a concrete, politically powerful, reform proposal.


Greetings,



ChllQ