Search

Political Dissent and Practices of Security: Repression and Regulation of Anti-globalization Movements in North America This paper applies a critical Security Studies reading of anti-globalization movements in North America as new objects of security. This departs from realist concepts of security as informed by systemic constraints that are restricted to interactions between states and domestic factors are treated as the purview of foreign policy analysis. Non-state actors that work both within and across state borders are rendered invisible to the analytical precepts of traditional Security Studies. As the state is treated as the primary locus of security, the security concerns of citizens are identified with those of the state. Yet, convergences of dissent against globalization disrupt realist conceptions of the state as a unitary political community. While this problematic is only found in the interstices of conventional Security Studies, the realist paradigm is unable to address this dynamic shaping contemporary security practices. My research concerns two areas of inquiry that address the treatment of anti-globalization protest in North America, first as a threat to state security and subject to repression, and second, as an object of which to securitize through practices of regulation. New security practices posit anti-globalization movements as objects to be treated with both mechanisms of surveillance and repression, and as objects of regulation and self-regulation by constituting anti-globalization movements as internal to liberal democratic politics and as responsible civil actors in North American liberal democracy. This paper, through its consideration of contemporary state security practices, will address the central importance that anti-globalization assumes in the evolving nature of security in North America in the context of liberal democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses how global protest movements appropriate sustainable development as a subject in their agenda. Talk of sustainable development is heard within the framework of international protest especially when anti/alterglobalisation movements and World Social Forum networks discuss access to water supplies, the solidarity-based economy or, from an even more critical viewpoint, a sustainable flat growth. Anti/alterglobalists call sustainable development into question through their position with regard to the neoliberal model, which they say tends to ignore the diversity of culture and the special features of local history. As we wish to demonstrate in this paper, the question that is central to the strategic future of sustainable development is closely related to the political legitimacy of the actors who speak in the name of a broader project for a sustainable society. The content of so-called actions for sustainable development refers to projects for a society that bear a risk of once again dividing development players in the North and the South. In order to meet the challenge of political analysis of the world sustainable development agenda, we address the three following series of questions: - How is international protest organized? Who are the actors? (Part 1) - How is sustainable development envisaged at the World Social Forum (WSF)? What are the main discussions with the WSF that are directly related to sustainable development? (Part 2)- Why and how may the definition of sustainable development interest WSF actors? How do international protesters associate the issue of political participation with that of sustainable development? (Part 3) ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The term 'global justice' is being used by issue based networks/campaigns such as Jubilee 2000 (J2K) and Make Poverty History (MPH), as well as by the anti-capitalist groups broader and the World Social Forum. The focus of this paper will be to examine the links between issue based networks/campaigns, and the larger Global Justice Movement â€" a broad term used to describe a loose configuration of what have been termed the ‘movements of movements’. The first part of the paper will look at the structure of the J2K and MPH networks/campaigns and how they link to the Global Justice Movement. A network analysis will be used to identify the links between these networks of networks. The second part of the paper will compare the framing of justice adopted by the J2K and MPH networks/campaigns, and look at how the frames compare to those evolving in the Global Justice Movement. Examining the structures and frames will help us to understand the connections and interactions between two key issue based networks/campaigns and their role in the broader social movement. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is an empirical analysis of the protests that occured during the 1999 World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference held in Seattle. It is a somewhat different approach to the study of protest, as it does not rely upon survey data of protestors, but rather looks at the secondary impact of protest events upon media coverage. The time series data for the study result from the quantification of two LexusNexus searchs of the Associated Press, BBC Worldwide Monitoring, and the New York Times from 1994 through 2002. The first dataset addresses the emergence of the antiglobalization protest movment in the three new sources, and produces a useable sample of 292 articles over the period. The second dataset addresses the impact of protest events upon overall media coverage of the WTO, and relies upon a sample of 2037 Associated Press articles. The results of the analysis are generally positive. Seattle does mark the beginning of a broader protest movement against trade liberalization. There is also evidence that the WTO has greater salience in the post seattle environment. This result is stronger for press coverage in the North and South American region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Part 1: All counter-terrorism policies elaborated in the aftermath of 11 September 2001 are characterised by the introduction of numerous exceptional measures, adopted on a temporary or even permanent basis, and by the strengthening of the international co-operation networks among the law enforcement agencies, the intelligence services and the judges. Relying on the assumption that some guarantees offered by the law with regard to civil rights and liberties are not compatible with an efficient fight against the new terrorist threat, exceptional measures are presented nowadays as absolutely necessary for the protection of the Western societies. Yet, the diffusion of this model of governance all over the Western countries has provoked numerous critics within both their political world and their civil societies. This paper aims therefore to analyse the public debate produced on that issue through the study of the media discourses held by the main supporters of the exceptionalism thesis and their rivals. The analysis will focus on the discourses held by politicians, experts and opinion leaders. It will seek to highlight the discursive mechanisms adopted in order to justify or to discredit the exceptionalism thesis. For this purpose, it will rely on the content analysis of the press discourses held in France, the United Kingdom, Italy and Greece since September 11, 2001. Part 2: Following the attacks of September 11 2001, many States whose France adopted a series of measurements to prevent and fight against the terrorist threats. Gradually, in the speeches as in the practices, these measures widened to include forms of dispute and spaces social for which they neither beforehand nor were officially intended. Then, in particular through the example of the antiglobalization movement, our study points how can this exception reinforce or on the contrary weaken the social cohesion? One can then put forth the assumption that this exception can be read within the meaning of illiberal practices exerted in a liberal mode in the name of the protection of freedoms. This hypothesis is based on the study of the adoption, in several European countries during last years, of multiple laws in various fields (internal security like LSQ and LSI in France, question of borders also). While being based on the study of the produced legislative texts, of the documents emanating of the antiglobalization movement and the discussions with various actors, the purpose of this research will be to study the antiglobalization movement with the prism of the exceptionnalism and social cohesion, while insisting more particularly on the emergence of new police practices and the apparition of attacks against the fundamental laws and public freedoms constitutive of the democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the global justice movement becomes an increasingly powerful force against the detrimental effects of globalization, it is important to understand the opportunities and constraints of the movement and the specific organizations within it. This paper provides a brief overview of the status of the movement as a whole and locates the opportunities and constraints of selected social movement organizations (SMOs) there within. The global justice movement tends to be typified as consisting of only social movement organizations (SMOs) that are visible in the protests against global economic institutions. This paper argues that SMOs with lower profiles that have in-depth knowledge of local and/or national justice issues are an important complement to the transnational social movement organizations (TSMOs) with higher public profiles. The data is based on four interviews from a snowball sample of activists working for SMOs (one in India and three in Washington, DC), as well as participant observation of the September protests in Washington, DC against the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Respondents said that a lack of resources is the biggest constraining factor in the full advancement of their goals. They also stressed the need for a long-term approach to social change as well as the value of fostering relationships as key to movement building and using momentum from past achievements on which to construct future endeavors. Both primary and secondary data suggest the importance of analyzing movement and organizational opportunities according to their long-term struggles rather than judging "success" or "failure" against external criteria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper tests the outsider agitator, resource mobilization and cooptation theses to explain differential involvement of social movement organizations (SMOs) across two global justice protest episodes. The first episode, the 1999 "Battle in Seattle," seriously disrupted the World Trade Organization's (WTO) ministerial meetings. In 2000 another protest was mobilized in Washington, DC to target the IMF and World Bank (IMF/WB) Spring meeting. The "outside agitator thesis" asserts that main actors in each episode were radical "outsiders," "resource mobilization" hypothesizes that resources better predict involvement, while cooptation theory hypothesizes that elite ties and mass memberships dissuaded some organizations from involvement in the second protest because the first so clearly challenged elite interests. Data were collected in two-stages: 1) a sample frame of 1209 U.S. organizations was constructed from both protest documents (e.g., event flyers and calendars) distributed during each episode and registers of organizations that signed electronic petitions endorsing each episode; and 2) a stratified random sample was drawn of 197 organizations in which surveys were sent to 186 SMOs with available contact information. 127 respondents returned the surveys for a response rate of 68%. Central findings are that well-resourced and formalized organizations more likely participated onsite in the first episode, but that resources were less important in shaping onsite participation in the second. Outside agitators rushed into the movement during the IMF/WB protests, although in a peripheral fashion by electronically endorsing the second episode. The findings are inconclusive that cooptation prevented well-resourced groups from being involved in the second episode. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper asks, first of all, to what extent the World Social Forum has become a global process. The second question is to what extent this process has a political direction. In other words, in what sense, if any, the World Social Forum can be considered a global movement of counter-hegemonic movements? The paper analyzes the implications of holding the main annual WSF event of 2004 in Mumbai, India, after three first years of Porto Alegre events. The globalization of the WSF should, however, not be seen merely in terms of moving the main annual event to another continent. The mushrooming of local, national, regional and thematic social forums in various parts of the world can be considered more crucial for the globalization of the globalization protest movements. Decision-making within and between the various WSF-related events has become an increasingly difficult issue. The paper engages with the dilemmas geographical expansion places for the WSF´s attempts to be political and non-political at the same time. Struggles over who should represent what in the governing bodies of the WSF offer examples of these dilemmas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the intersections between feminism and the so-called ‘anti-globalisation movement’ and considers their implications for theorising movement politics in international relations. The first part explores the reasons behind the relative marginalisation of overtly feminist voices within the anti-globalisation movement. It focuses empirically on processes of identity and knowledge construction within the two movements, stressing the need to interrogate movements as sites of power and hegemony as well as of potentially emancipatory politics. It also points to the complicity in processes of marginalisation of our theoretical framings of these two movements. The second part explores ways in which interconnections between the two movements are being, and could be, constructed. Drawing on case studies of feminist activism at the World Social Forum in Mumbai and of women’s community activism in Hyderabad, the paper offers empirical evidence of incipient activist coalitions and shows how these challenge dominant theoretical framings of movement politics and point to alternatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Collective action and social movement protest has become commonplace in our 'demonstration-democracy' and no longer surprises the media or the public. However, as will be shown, this was not the case with the recent anti-globalisation protests that attracted demonstrators from countries all over the world. The battles of Seattle, Washington, Prague and Genoa, with an unforeseen mixture of nationalities and movements, became world news. Interestingly, the new media seemed to play a crucial role in the organization of these global-protests. This chapter maps this movement-in-progress via an analysis of the websites of anti-globalisation, or more specifically anti-neo-liberal globalisation organizations. It examines the contribution of these sites to three different conditions that establish movement formation; collective identity; actual mobilisation and a network of organizations. This, ongoing, explorative research indicates signs of an integration of different organizations involved and attributes an important role to the Internet. However, whilst both our methodology and subject are evolving rapidly, conclusions, as our initial results show, must be tempered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Beginning in Seattle in 1999 anti-globalization protests accompanied every WTO, World Bank, IMF and G8 meeting. However, when in April 2005 the International Financial Institutions held their meeting in Washington, DC, only few hundred protesters came. This paper analyzes the changing face of the anti-globalization movement and investigates why the mass protests of just a few years ago have dissipated. The paper explores four hypotheses to account for this change. One: the new communications technologies that allowed for easy cross-border mobilizing meant that over the long-term sustaining the movement was difficult since few personal linkages and relationships between participants were created. Two: the lack of a unified message made sustaining the movement difficult. Three: the World Bank and other global actors such as Multinational Corporations successfully employed divide and rule tactics, meeting enough of the movements demands to make many participants reluctant to continue mobilizing and protesting in the streets. Four: the movement proved difficult to sustain in its original form because of the very different agendas of the Northern and Southern groups. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes one of the central dilemmas of democratization within the WSF and, more broadly, within the global justice movement at large: Whether the WSF as it has been conceived and practiced effectively promotes a ‘Movement of Movements’ where a ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the relationship in elite discourse between premillennial theology and anti-globalization, anti-government regulation, anti-secularization and pro-Israel policies ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the aftermath of the anti-globalisation campaigns, formal forums, such as the World Social Forum at Porto Alegre and the rolling series of the European Forums have been set up, in order that a variety of interest groups could formulate alternatives capable of challenging neoliberal hegemony. Academics have responded positively to these movements, arguing that they represent either a convergence of critical social movements, in the manner which RBJ Walker (1998) identified, or the emergence of a counter-hegemonic project (Amoore, 2005).In this paper, we provide a critique of the World and European Social Forums and argue that rather the basis of a coherent form of resistance, the various forums fail to adequately construct a viable set of principles necessary for (to use Gramsci's terms) a war of position against the current global order. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the end of the Cold War, debates on "global justice" or "cosmopolitanism" have not ceased to attract the attention of writers in philosophy and the social sciences. Yet only a minority has engaged in a discussion of what an agenda should be for the reform of existing world economic institutions. In this work we explore a recent argument on the extent to which global justice principles may shape the workings of the World Trade Organization and Bretton Woods lending institutions as interpreted by Robert Hockett. We suggest that his "new institutionalist" defense of actual trade and financial regimes as potential cosmopolitan agents misses an important part of their reality. In particular, absent in his legalistic scrutiny is an apprehension of the role powerful states have played in shaping structures and policies of the organizations over time. We argue that a cosmopolitan critique needs to engage in a discussion of basic flaws in Bretton Woods and WTO's democratic governance that conspire against the realization of moderate egalitarian values. We finally discuss what democratizing reform proposals could realistically be implemented to reduce this deficit. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since its inauguration in 2000, the World Social Forum (WSF) has been heralded as an ‘open-space’ for civil society in which the disparate groups that make up the anti-globalization or Global Justice movement can gather and ‘articulate’ possible alternative worlds (Tormey, 2004; Fisher and Ponniah, 2003). As an unstructured forum the WSF has allegedly provided a platform where traditional international union groups can meet with a variety of progressive civil groups in order to contest neoliberal hegemony and propel a multilayered counter-hegemonic project of the form (to quote Machiavelli and Gramsci) of a ‘Post-Modern Prince’ (Gill, 2000; Hardt and Negri, 2000). Yet despite these claims towards anti-structuration â€" the Forum has serious shortcomings that has (in its short history) already rendered it meaningless as a serious expression of counter-hegemonyFollowing criticisms by Chandler (2004) and Worth and Kuhling (2004), this article will argue that the WSF is more exclusive than inclusive in its nature. Rather than being the expression of the anti-globalisation movement, the forum has become a funfair for the expression of ideas from academics and NGO/governmental workers, that has led to a form of elitism that the forum attempt to avoid at its inception (Biagotti, 2004). Thus, rather than creating any form of inclusive participatory ‘open space’, the article will conclude that the WSF has become an elitist tool for NGOs and certain developing governments (such as Chavez’s Venezuela and Lula’s Brazil) to maintain â€" rather than to counter â€" any form of transformation within global civil society. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rawls's "law of peoples" (as described in both the essay and the later book) extends his political liberalism from the domestic to the international sphere. Does political liberalism provide a solid foundation, however, for global-justice claims? I argue here that it does not, because its approach to moral justification is impoverished. Specifically, international political liberalism envisions an overlapping consensus of liberal and decent-hierarchical peoples on a law of peoples that guards human rights and global peace, but it cannot offer principled reasons why the scope of toleration should not be further extended to include indecent peoples (e.g., those that fail to respect human rights) and the content of the law of peoples correspondingly weakened. A political liberal might counter that any such extension/weakening would be "unreasonable," but this response would be vacuous because political liberalism has no independent criterion of reasonableness: Rawls in his essay says that "whenever the scope of toleration is extended…the criteria of reasonableness are relaxed"—in other words, reasonableness is relative to the scope of toleration and the width and content of overlapping consensus—and political liberalism gives no compelling reasons why a narrower scope should be preferred to a broader one. I go on to consider two further responses that political liberals might offer, showing that they are also inadequate and point to the profound poverty of political liberalism and "Reformation liberalism" (Galston) more broadly, whether in the domestic or international political context. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This qualitative study focuses on ordinary (rank-and file) participants in the "Anti-Globalization Movement" (AGM). Perhaps what is most interesting about the AGM is that it has, at various points, been characterized in the mainstream media as anti-corporate and even anti-capitalist. At a broad level, I am interested in asking whether the anti-globalization protesters are solely interested in winning concessions for their individual groups (however conceived), or conversely are they aiming to radically transform larger social structures? My research attends to issues of activists? levels of consciousness as they launch their critiques. Specifically, I ask whether broad-based anti-systemic consciousness is possible and if so, what is its place in theories of collective action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the last several years, there have been numbers of mass demonstrations against the institutions of global capital, specifically the WTO, G-8, World Bank, IMF etc. Such movements and mobilizations have indeed been made possible by the ability of the Internet to allow a new communication medium that allows the emergence of virtual public spheres and the mobilization of ?Net Armies?, internetworked social movements seeking alternatives to the now hegemonic Neo-Liberal form embraced by Trans National Capital sustained by consumerism as its hegemonic ideology. Such movements, in a short time, have already had major impact upon the world scene. As the most recent meeting of the World Economic Forum, the elites of TNC have indicated greater awareness of the dysfunctions and grievances of the current system. At the same time, the World Social Forum has now emerged as the major site for articulating critiques of the current system and formulating alternatives. The fundamental problematics for the future asks to what extent can TNC reform itself and yet sustain profits. At the same, can the alternative positions of the WSF, find impact within TNC without compromising its stance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]