 |
The global justice movements have explored various arguments about national states, political parties and linkage of issues across borders. These discussions have matured to the point where clearer distinctions can be made between ‘global governance’ approaches that are based to some extent on cosmopolitan democracy theory, on the one hand, and analysis/strategy/tactics based on ‘deglobalisation’ (of capital) and ‘decommodification’ on the other hand.
Given sharp divergences (e.g. on ‘fixing’ versus ‘nixing’ multilateral agencies), the movements may not have the capacity or will to establish mutually reinforcing projects between those considered ‘tree shakers’ in the globalisation debates, with the insider-oriented ‘jam makers’. Nevertheless, some terrains and issueareas lend themselves to a much more coherent approach than we have witnessed to date, since the 1980s IMF Riots gave way to more systematic organising of global justice campaigns, from Chiapas in 1994 to the late 1990s Jubilee movement to large-scale global events such as Seattle in 1999.
Fusing these movements with anti-war movements is also a high priority. But doing so will require much more explicit attention to distinctions between ‘reformist’ and ‘non-reformist’ reforms, in the spirit of the late French social strategist Andre Gorz.
Read Publication 
|
