The Movement for Global Change

The movement for global change (MGC) is an extremely loose network of individuals and campaigning organisations seeking to transform the way in which globalisation is proceeding. The MGC is very new having developed fully only over the last decade although its historical antecedents run much further back. There are many different critiques and solutions advanced by different elements within this movement but it is probably fair now to divide the movement very broadly into radical and moderate wings. However, it is extremely important to recognise that many individuals in this movement fall somewhere between the two wings rather than subscribing to every aspect of the ideal types described below.

The Radical Wing

Often called "anti-globalisation" or "anti-capitalist", this wing of the movement regards much of globalisation as fundamentally flawed and immoral. For the radical wing, globalisation is a process largely designed to ensure that wealthy elites become more wealthy at the expense of poorer countries. In addition, radicals also argue that globalisation undermines the working conditions and pay of workers in the wealthy countries.

The radical wing of the MGC regards transnational corporations (TNCs) as the main cause of these problems. It is also argued that TNCs now have so much power that national sovereignty and national democracy (where it exists) is significantly compromised throughout the world while indigenous cultures and diversity have been destroyed by the global marketing of uniform products across the globe over the last thirty years.

Global trade with its extensive transporting of goods across the world is also attacked as wasteful and damaging to the environment.

The solutions to these problems offered by the radical wing are various depending on which group or individual one is referring to. The chief solutions include: a strong reassertion of national sovereignty behind national economic barriers; world socialist revolution; localisation, i.e. the 'return' of economic power, and possibly political and cultural power, to small localities.

One of the key characteristics distinguishing the radical from the moderate wing of the MGC is the much greater willingness of the former to employ direct action tactics to achieve their political ends. Such tactics have been much in evidence at the large- scale demonstrations against institutions of global governance in Seattle, Prague and Genoa. Within the radical wing itself there is dispute about whether such tactics should include attacks on property – such as the destruction of MacDonalds restaurants and genetically modified crops. A small number of those associated with the radical wing also seem willing to employ violence against other individuals in pursuit of political ends although this is largely condemned throughout the movement.

Although the terms "anti-globalisation" and "anti-capitalist" are now regularly used to describe the radical wing of the MGC, they are inaccurate. While most of the radical wing can fairly be said to be opposed to economic globalisation, many radicals would support the more obviously benign aspects of political and cultural globalisation such as environmental treaties and the sharing of cultural practices such as music and food. Equally, while some radicals in the MGC may be genuinely opposed to capitalism there are others who regard free trade and enterprise, at least on a local level or in a highly regulated form as acceptable or even beneficial.

The Moderate Wing

Dispersed throughout non-governmental organisations, the labour movement, faith communities, political parties and campaign groups, there are a large number of individuals and associations campaigning for reform of the globalisation process.

The moderate wing is far less integrated organisationally and ideologically than the radical wing making it difficult to define or summarise. However, many of those supportive of this wing can probably be said to share the view that globalisation has the potential for both good and bad. The sharing of cultures, improved means of communication, international treaties on human rights, even the wealth and economic growth provided by freer trade are just some of the great benefits that globalisation has brought and may continue to bring. However, because the process of globalisation is currently controlled by wealthy elites by undemocratic means to serve their own interests, globalisation also leads to inequality, injustice and instability.

For the moderate wing of the MGC, the solution lies within reform of the institutions and rules that govern the world. The proposed reforms are multiple but some which have attracted growing support in recent years include:

• a wider cancellation of the debt owed by poorer countries to banks, governments and institutions of global governance;
• a tax on international financial exchanges, the revenue from which could be used to promote development in poorer regions of the world – commonly known as the 'tobin tax';
• a total reformulation of trade rules and the remit of bodies such as the World Trade Organisation (WTO) to allow much freer access for southern companies into northern markets and greater provisional protection for southern economies so that companies there can develop to the point where they can compete with the north;
• a stronger role for international agencies and agreements dedicated to the protection of peace, justice, the environment, human rights and the promotion of greater equality – a recent victory in this regard was the establishment of the International Criminal Court;
• a democratic reformation in institutions of global governance such as the WTO, World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), G8 and United Nations.

There are now growing calls for the moderate wing of the MGC to draw these disparate ideals together and present a more integrated agenda and organisationally united face.

If a summary were demanded of the basic differences between the radical and moderate wings it may follow these lines: while the radical wing sees fundamental flaws in the whole process of economic globalisation and may also question aspects of political and cultural globalisation, the moderate wing is convinced of the great potential for good in all forms of globalisation but feels it is squandered by globalisation's domination by a neoliberal agenda and undemocratic structures.

The historical origins of the MGC is extremely complex and has yet to be written. It draws on a very wide variety of streams of resistance and campaigning in both north and south which is impossible to summarise without much more scholarly analysis. However, some key milestones can be itemised which on each occasion seem to have added momentum to the movement and raised consciousness about the need to combat the negative impacts of globalisation:

• campaigns, largely in the south, against the development programmes of the World Bank and the structural adjustment programmes of the IMF since the 1970s;
• the worldwide campaign to end apartheid in South Africa which reached its climax in the late 1980s;
• the rapid rise in environmental consciousness and global green campaigning after the Chernobyl disaster in 1986;
• the greater freedom available to progressive campaigning in the east, west and south after the end of the Cold War;
• campaigning and lobbying around a series of UN conferences on the environment, women and other issues during the 1980s and 1990s;
• the massive global mobilisation against international debt in both north and south during the 1990s;
• the series of high profile mass demonstrations against meetings of institutions of global governance in Seattle, Prague, Genoa and others.

The future for the MGC is more uncertain now after 11th September than ever before. With the USA's declaration of war on terror, the space for dissent, certainly in the USA, seems more limited. Throughout the rest of the world the MGC has found a powerful foe in the Bush administration which seems intent on establishing security solely by military means rather than through the types of progressive policies promoted by the MGC. Whether America's new policies will end-up forcing the MGC into impotent protest – as happened with much of the democratic socialist left during the latter stages of the Cold War – or whether the disruption caused by the US will invite ever larger protests throughout the world remains to be seen.

Suggested Readings:

General:

R. Cohen & S. Rai (eds.), Global Social Movements, Athlone, 2000

M. Keck & K. Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders, Cornell University Press, 1998

A. Starr, Naming the Enemy, Zed, 2000 (influenced by a radical perspective)

From a moderate perspective:

T. Alexander, Unravelling Global Apartheid, Polity, 1996

The Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood, Oxford University Press, 1995

A. Giddens, Runaway World, Profile, 1999

D. Held, Democracy and the Global Order, Polity, 1995

L. Martell et al., Social Democracy: Global and National Perspectives, Palgrave, 2001

From a Radical Perspective:

E. Bircham & J. Charlton, Anti-Capitalism, Bookmarks, 2001

W. Bello, The Future in the Balance, Food First Books, 2001

D. Korten, When Corporations Rule the World, Earthscan, 1995

J. Mander & E. Goldsmith (eds.), The Case Against the Global Economy, Sierra Club Books, 1996

A. Roddick (ed.), Take it Personally, Thorsons, 2001

Suggested Websites:

The Movement for Global Change has grown very much on and through the internet. There are thus thousands of pages associated with the movement. Below are just a few suggestions. It is advised you follow links from these pages to find a wide variety of perspectives ranging from most moderate to most radical.

Charter 99, www.charter99.org

Fabian Global Forum, www.fabianglobalforum.net

Focus on the Global South, www.focusweb.org/

Independent Media Center, http://indymedia.org/

One World, www.oneworld.net

Third World Network, www.twnside.org.sg/

Trade Justice Movement, www.tradejusticemovement.org

Urban75, http://urban75.com

Adam Lent
Editor, Fabian Global Forum

Placed on Fabian Global Forum, May 2002