Strange Bedfellows - Thoughts on the G20 Summit and the Anti-Globalisation movement

Extremists at opposite poles need each other much more than apparent animosity would indicate. Hezbollah needs the apartheid laws and bombings of the right wingers in the Israeli parliament to justify their attacks just as the parliament needs the rocket attacks to justify their policies and bombings. Islamic terrorists need the zeal of Christian fundamentalists and vice versa. And as much as they would hate to admit it, the violent anarchist minority (such as the Black Bloc) that show up at World trade meetings to smash windows and burn cars desperately rely on the exclusionist policies of the economic status quo.

In a world described in images and thirty-second sound bites it is the phenomenon of the spectacle that decides global public opinion. A recent cover of Maclean’s magazine shows a picture of a burning police car with a Black Bloc activist jumping in front; the headline – “Lock them up”. The anti-globalization movement is losing the battle of the spectacle, and thus global public opinion, thanks to the mindless violence of a tiny minority in their ranks. When people look back at the G20 meeting in Toronto, they won’t remember the policies decided upon by the World leaders, or the alternatives and valid arguments presented by the protestors – they’ll remember that burning police car.

Make no mistake, during the summit there was limited coverage of police violence against peaceful protestors. Brief shots of citizens being tasered, beaten, and tear-gassed were shown on the airwaves. However, two factors rendered these images moot. For one, the mainstream populace is always more accepting of ordered institutional violence than its chaotic, anarchistic opponent. People want to see the police maintaining order by whatever means necessary rather than balaclava-wearing goons smashing clothing stores, banks, and whatever they take to be their enemies. Secondly, the images of police violence played side-by-side with images of the Black Bloc. By visual association the protestors are found guilty. The media companies thrive on spectacle – it’s their bread and butter. Add to this the fact that the companies are owned by large corporations with vested interests in the global meetings. A media bias is at work. Need proof? Every year there is coverage of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where the big economic players decided the rules for the next year. Every year there is no media coverage of the World Social Forum, where activist groups meet and propose alternatives.

In my opinion, the cause of the anti-globalisation movement is just. The very name of the movement affects their cause. It suggests that they oppose inevitable global economic trade. This makes them appear irrational in their goals. Many members have adopted the ‘Global Social Justice Movement’ in replacement, but it hasn’t caught on – even with the activists themselves. The aims of the movement are clear – these economic meetings are completely exclusionary. They exclude representatives from the poorer nations on whose backs they ride; workers’ movements; indigenous movements; environmental movements; women’s’ movements; and a host of others. The summits decided the economic destiny and livelihoods of millions without asking for the opinions, or, God forbid, the participation of representatives of these millions. The protestors are there to make a stand and demand that their voices are heard. If the destinies of millions are being decided by a few, the voices of resistance will be heard.

The problem is, they aren’t heard. The movement is denied access to mainstream media and we are left with a violent spectacle. The movement is presumed irrational and public opinion turns against them. The movement relies of guerilla media, the internet, and hot-spots of liberalism like university campuses, to communicate. It gets the word out surprisingly effectively to a few, but still keeps them marginalized to the mainstream middle-class.

As Canadians, citizens of a democracy, it is not just our right but our solemn duty to question authority. The summit organizers rely on public apathy to pass their decrees and send the police out into the streets. It is our duty, each and every one of us, to see past the media slurs and the violent spectacle to get at the heart of the matter. We must investigate and leave no stone unturned in our quest for the truth of these summits. Global inequality of all kinds is perpetuated by the malice of a few and the apathy of millions. This investigation will expose us to things we don’t want to see. It is a road to psychic discomfort and perhaps the realization that we are all at fault in our accepting ignorance of World affairs. In the final say it is up to us to force real change and give a voice to the silent millions suffering under global economic policy. At the same time, it is up to the movement to make a stand against elements within their own ranks and completely disown the Black Bloc and other violent anarchistic segments. All they accomplish is the swaying of public opinion away from true socioeconomic justice and the justification of police violence. And the G20, among others, rely on them more than anyone else to help railroad their policies. We are already seeing the effects of these policies in Western nations. In the end, it’s up to us to speak – not to be spoken for.