Genoa: an analysis

The anti-capitalist protests at the Genoa G8 summit revealed the strengths and weaknesses of the anti-capitalist movement rather acutely. In this text we begin by outlining our analysis of the protests at Genoa; following this, we provide a broader analysis of the possibilities open to the anti-capitalist movement in the near future.

The Genoa anti-capitalist protests brought together a vast number of diverse protesters; the numbers of those attending the days of action exceeded even the most optimistic estimates. Something between 200 000 and 300 000 people arrived in Genoa to protest -in their own varied ways- against the G8 summit. Now although the numbers sound impressive, the lack of coordination between the various groups attending the protests led, in our opinion, to a weakening of the protests on the street particularly on Friday 20 July; the day when Carlo Giuliani was murdered by the state.
Friday 20 July was billed as a day of direct action. The direct action that took place was mainly undertaken by radicals associated with -or on the fringe of- the direct action groupings sometimes referred to as the 'white bloc' and the 'black bloc'. As the events of the day unfolded the distinction between the 'white bloc' and the 'black bloc' began to dissolve as both actively fought against police violence on the streets of Genoa; in this respect the 'white bloc's' doctrine of non-violent civil disobedience was dispensed with as a section of the 'white bloc' realised that militants must not tie their hands when fighting against a ruthless state apparatus. Tactical flexibility is essential for any embryonic revolutionary movement! We must be able to respond in an appropriate fashion, to whatever repressive measures the capitalist state throws at us. As the state is tactically flexible so must we be.
As to the direct action of the 'black bloc' this involved, in part, the smashing of every bank and cash point machine along the Corso Torino. To those who are attempting to discredit the actions of the 'black bloc' we can state categorically that the actions along the Corso Torino were well organised and deliberately targeted the property of banks as a symbol of our revolutionary opposition to capitalism. This propagandistic direct action ensured that the anti-capitalist protests in Genoa were reported by the capitalist media -upon which most people are dependent, and made sure that our anti-capitalist message was top of the news agenda thus usurping the pro-capitalist proclamations of the G8 leaders at the summit!
And the reason for this successful ‘hijack' of the news reporting agenda? The news values of the corporate media are centred around violence and destruction. We are not saying that we like this fact, but fact it is, and we have to work around this. Consequently, the smashing of bank windows and the subsequent confrontation with the police provided this movement with what it presently needs; that is, headlines that ensure that the anti-capitalist movement gains recognition from anyone who watches TV, listens to the radio, reads a mainstream newspaper or accesses news via the internet.
In this way, alienated and exploited proletarians who have not previously taken note of this movement can see that there is a movement fighting for the overthrow of the capitalist system; a movement that they hopefully will join, or at the very least consider joining. In short, what the confrontational direct action provides -through extensive media coverage of the action- is more airtime devoted to the movement's aims and ideals (of creating a world which is not based around the profit motive) than would otherwise have been the case. We must stress here, that the airtime we gain via the networks of the corporate media can only be created via confrontational direct action; peaceful protests which abide by the capitalist legal framework -no matter how large- do not get the vast amounts of airtime or column inches as do confrontational direct action protests.
Now our critics point out that all this airtime is filled with hostile depictions of anti-capitalists. This, in part, is true. But our response to this is that anti-capitalists, in a capitalist world -and in the capitalist media- are never going to be portrayed in an entirely favourable light. Nevertheless, as more and more summits are disrupted through militant confrontational direct action, the coverage of the confrontation that fills the headlines of newspapers and leads TV news bulletins puts the anti-capitalist movement on the map. Further, as the direct action of the movement is reported in the news bulletins, the corporate TV stations -recognising a new topic of interest for their viewers (to increase their ratings)- start to make documentaries and extended news reports on some of the issues, which the anti-capitalist movement is campaigning about! Although the tone of such reports –which we have presently seen- is hardly revolutionary, the fact that the issues are being aired at all can only increase people's awareness of the issues at hand and stimulate them to explore such issues more deeply. To recap, the media frenzy relating to the anti-capitalist movement -whether negative or positive- has come about as a result of the voluntaristic confrontational direct action which we have seen at all the days of action against capitalism from June the 18 1999 to Genoa.
On 20 July it must be stressed that those who engaged in direct action were a collection of anarchists and Marxists who can truly be called revolutionaries. Elsewhere in the city thousands and thousands of Leninists gathered throughout the day -many arriving late in the day- to prepare for the march on the Saturday. These Leninists, who we would term legal fetishists, failed to participate in the direct action on the Friday; many simply gathered together in areas such as the convergence centre (a few streets away from where Carlo Giuliani was murdered) and drank beer throughout the day of direct action! This is not to suggest that all the Leninists were inactive on this day of action –the notable exception were the ‘third world’ Leninists, but most of the larger groups simply saw the Friday's day of action as a day to gather together their members to prepare for the planned mass march on the Saturday. This failure of the larger Leninist and Trotskyist groupings to, at the very least, gather their members onto the streets to act as a backup crowd to support the activities of the revolutionaries engaging in direct action led to a situation where those who initiated the direct action could be picked up by the police far earlier and in greater numbers than might have been the case with a larger crowd on the streets. That the European Leninist organisations –who make a fetish of mass legal demonstrations- could muster thousands and thousands of people in their contingents on the Saturday march shows the folly of these groups; such large numbers of people could have acted as a diversionary crowd on the Friday and enhanced the effectiveness of the direct action which took place.
Although we recognise that revolutionaries will be martyred as this movement gains in strength and becomes more and more threatening to the bourgeoisie, a larger crowd acting as a backup force to the revolutionaries acting on the Friday would have increased our strength and would not have allowed the police to isolate us to the extent that they did on the afternoon of the day of direct action; the afternoon which saw the state murder of Carlo Giuliani.
In sum, if this movement is to develop into a truly revolutionary anti-capitalist movement then it will be necessary to revolutionise the 'revolutionaries'. Those of us who believe in voluntaristic confrontational direct action (which is propagandistic at this movement’s present stage of development) can point to the folly of these so-called revolutionaries who make a fetish of legal forms of struggle, but we must attempt to find a way to draw these 'revolutionaries' away from their dependence upon forms of struggle which are ineffective precisely because they are bound within the confines of capitalist legality. We are not looking for miracles to happen, but we do recognise that a simple linking of different forms of action -as happened on the Saturday to a certain extent- is the next practical step forward for this movement at the next summit or day of action against capitalism. There appeared to us to be too many pseudo-revolutionary groups who were all to eager to ride on the backs of those of us who engaged in the confrontational direct action on the Friday, and make political capital out of the impact which the march on Saturday 21 then had. At its worst, this opportunism has manifested itself in the proclamations of groups like the Socialist Workers Party (in the UK) and the Communist Party of Great Britain, who condemn the action of the 'black bloc' as the action of police provocateurs!1

Agent Provocateurs and Agents of the State

We recognise that all revolutionary organisations are vulnerable to police infiltration. If an organisation is seeking to overthrow the capitalist system then the capitalist state will, in turn, seek to smash or neutralise such an organisation. State attempts to infiltrate revolutionary organisations are not confined to anarchist groups’ -due to their organisational structure- as a number of Leninist/Trotskyist groups have been suggesting. All revolutionary organisations are vulnerable to police infiltration and manipulation. The point is to remain vigilant, and attempt to thwart the state’s attempts at infiltration!
Consequently, we have been dismayed to see some Leninist/Trotskyist organisations resort to the polemical tactic of attempting to discredit the actions of those of us who engage in voluntaristic confrontational direct action, through labelling the ‘black bloc' as police provocateurs.
We could equally well fire back that those 'revolutionary' organisations that reject voluntaristic confrontational direct action, have been infiltrated by agents of the state who ensure that the militancy of the membership is kept in check. We do not, however, think that the trading of unproven accusations of state infiltration -in a crude attempt to discredit other revolutionary groupings- is something which this movement should be drawn into. It causes unnecessary divisions within the movement and can only strengthen our enemies, the transnational corporations and the capitalist state.
We believe that common ground can be found between revolutionaries; and that this can only be based upon each revolutionary organisation or bloc respecting the fact that although we do have our different approaches as regards means of struggle, we can co-ordinate these different approaches.
Yet to co-ordinate these different forms of struggle -and make a protest really effective, we maintain that those 'revolutionaries' who presently are only committed to legal forms of struggle must shift their position and reject their presently held deferential stance vis-à-vis the capitalist legal system! For instance, on a day of direct action the Leninists could hold a mass demonstration –their preferred form of action- without informing the police of the action in advance!
As the militancy of the anti-capitalist movement grows, we believe that the larger European Leninist and Trotskyist organisations -who we should not forget mobilised tens of thousands of people on the Saturday march (21 July)- will be forced to either revolutionise their thinking (and, in turn, action) or face being condemned as reformists by those increasingly drawn to the militancy of the movement.
If a revolution, so to speak, does take place amongst the ‘revolutionaries' of the larger European Leninist/Trotskyist organisations, then a co-ordination of different forms of struggle between those of us who engage in voluntaristic confrontational direct action and the Leninists/Trotskyists could take place. If not, then the anti-capitalist movement will eventually split and we will all be condemned to return to the dark days of left-wing sectarianism.

The Revolutionary Subject

If we stand back from the debates about street tactics which have been raging in the last few weeks following the Genoa protests, the broader issue of which social groups we hope to draw into the struggle against capitalism presents itself. To put this another way, the anti-capitalist movement must not loose sight of the fact that the confrontations that we engage in on the streets are, at present, propagandistic. Such confrontations, given the existing strength of the movement, are not about to overthrow the rule of the transnational corporations and the capitalist state but are a form of propaganda; albeit forceful propaganda. It is precisely through such propagandistic force that wider sections of the population can be drawn into the revolutionary struggle against capitalism. But which sections of the population are likely to join the anti-capitalist movement?
Unlike the authoritarian left, who suggest that the unions in the developed world can act as revolutionary organisations as they are only tenuously integrated into the capitalist system, we maintain that the unions are far more deeply integrated into the existing system. Consequently we believe that workers struggles can only begin to develop in a revolutionary direction when they are conducted outside of the control of the union bureaucracies.
At this point we must stress that the few wildcat strikes that we have witnessed in recent years show that we have much work ahead of us to draw sections of the proletariat into the revolutionary struggle against capitalism. In this respect, this movement should have no illusions concerning how hard we must struggle to draw workers, within the spheres of production and distribution, into the anti-capitalist struggle.
The provisional integration of the proletariat within the capitalist system in the advanced industrial countries has been brought about through the development of a system of mass consumption in the post-war era.2 Consequently, the undermining of the proletariat's integration within the capitalist system rests upon turning the proletariat against the consumerist system.
The consumerist system, as it has developed in the conditions of advanced capitalism, promotes proletarians to consume more and more consumer goods through the promotion of false needs (via advertising). Yet this cycle of consumption based upon false needs can, eventually, lead proletarians to become dissatisfied with consumerism as the goods purchased can never deliver upon the promises made in the advertisements. In short, proletarian dissatisfaction with the endless cycle of consumption, which the capitalist system promotes, can lead workers to become bored with their role as consumers. And proletarians who are bored with consumerism may become receptive to the propagandistic message of the anti-capitalist movement.
Now the changes within advanced capitalist societies which we have witnessed since the re-emergence of crises of overproduction in the early 1970s, have complicated the picture somewhat. The vast majority of workers are no longer able to participate in the consumerist system to the extent that they could in consumer-capitalism’s heyday –the 1960s. At present a smaller majority of the proletariat is now able to fully participate in the consumerist system. In this sense, the ranks of marginalised social groups have swelled; groups which are unable to participate, in any meaningful sense in the consumerist system. Such marginalised groups, which are outside of the proletariat, are consequently not integrated into the consumer-capitalist system.
Given the fact that wildcat workers struggles within the workplace are at a low ebb at present, we believe that revolutionary leftist anti-capitalists should not solely place their hopes in the notion that the propagandistic force that they engage in, may draw sections of workers into the struggle in the short term. Rather, a broader perspective in relation to anti-capitalist rebellion should, we think, be adopted; such a perspective embracing the existing struggles of marginalised groups outside of the proletariat, for example that of oppressed ethnic minority groupings (i.e., the recent rebellions in Oldham and Bradford) and refugees (i.e., the embryonic stirrings of collective rebellion which have recently surfaced in Glasgow and Liverpool). In turn, other marginalised groups who potentially could be drawn into the anti-capitalist struggle, include the 'unemployed' (those seeking employment who have been forced out of the labour market as well as those who actively refuse to work), as well as students and marginalised youth groups (i.e., punks).
To summarise our position, we maintain that revolutionary leftist anti-capitalists should continue to engage in propagandistic force in an attempt, in the short term, to draw rebellious sections of marginalised groups into the anti-capitalist struggle. And through drawing these groupings into the anti-capitalist struggle, our combined strength will then be able to inspire sections of workers to join the fight against the capitalist system.

Propagandistic Force

What is propagandistic force? The confrontational direct action which we have seen at all the recent demonstrations against summits -as well as days of action against capitalism- amounts to a force which acts to promote, via the mass media (however distortedly), our revolutionary leftist critique of the global capitalist system. It is through the television and radio stations of the news corporations, as well as through the large circulation bourgeois newspapers, that our revolutionary left-wing anti-capitalist critique -via the reporting of confrontational direct action- reaches millions and millions of people who would otherwise not have heard of this movement.
Our critics suggest that confrontational direct action only leads to hostile reports of the movement and thus turns people away from anti-capitalism. We disagree. However hostile the news reports of the corporate media, we believe that the more coverage this movement gains in the corporate media the better. It is wishful thinking to believe that millions of people, at this movement’s present level of development will access news via independent media outlets such as Indymedia. It is a hard fact that at present, most proletarians outside of this movement are dependent for news on the corporate media. Consequently, this movement must gain the attention of the corporate media if it is to act as a catalyst to draw radical sections of marginalized groups and workers into the anti-capitalist struggle. In this respect, forceful direct action is propagandistic (in any meaningful sense of the word) to the extent that it gains the attention of marginalized social groups and workers via the capitalist news corporations.
Once again, we must stress that the confrontational direct action which is presently taking place, cannot overthrow the existing system. It is only when we have drawn sections of the marginalised groups and workers into the struggle that direct action moves out of its propagandistic phase and begins to threaten the foundations of the capitalist system.
On a more practical level: what actually constitutes propagandistic force? In short, in the context of a mass action, this type of force may take the form of attacks against easily identifiable symbols of global capitalism such as the property of the transnational corporations; i.e., smashing the windows of McDonalds/ banks, etc. Propagandistic force may also manifest itself in the form of attacks against selected vehicles; for instance in Genoa cars were taken from an expensive car showroom and burnt. In addition to this, barricades may be constructed both as a symbol of our revolutionary resistance to capitalism and, in a more practical sense, to defend ourselves from the attacks of the police. And, as the police intervene to defend the property of the transnational corporations, propagandistic force manifests itself in the form of a confrontation with the police. In this situation, the throwing of rocks and Molotov cocktails, the burning of police vehicles, the creation of burning barricades, hand to hand physical confrontation with the state's thugs -using sticks and batons, all these things constitute elements of propagandistic force.
Finally, to hammer the message home -that propagandistic force is anti-capitalist, revolutionary and left-wing- the painting of slogans and the scattering of leaflets in the vicinity of the area of confrontation gives the corporate media plenty of opportunities for photographs, TV images and information as to why the action has taken place.

If the anti-capitalist movement is serious about challenging the very foundations of the global capitalist system –to usher into existence a libertarian communist society- then a multifaceted critique of imperialism must be incorporated into the politics of the movement. Protesting against the economic imperialism of the WTO or the World Bank is one thing, seeking to overthrow the world imperialist system is quite another. In other words, those protest organisations/groupings that seek to challenge the economic imperialism of the WTO, World Bank and the IMF, may seek to bring about the abolition of these institutions, but they can incorporate this demand within a reformist agenda as the abolition of all of the aforementioned institutions would not lead to disappearance of the capitalist system.
If the anti-capitalist movement is not to be led into this cul-de-sac of reformism then the movement must recognise that the imperialist character of contemporary capitalism cannot simply be reduced to the activities of international economic institutions such as the WTO, the IMF and the World Bank. These institutions are culpable in the imperialists’ scheme to dominate the globe, but they are not the only institutions which serve to perpetuate the power of the transnational corporations and the large imperialist states’ (the US, Japan, the EU).
To further explore this issue we shall now give a brief outline of what we believe are the central features of capitalism’s imperialist phase of development.
In short, we believe that capitalism entered its imperialist phase sometime around the beginning of the twentieth century. As industrial capital became increasingly intertwined with banking capital the result was the emergence of finance capital (a form of capital not theorised by Marx but by R.Hilferding). In this new phase of capitalism's development, large companies/businesses (monopolies) increasingly came to dominate the economies of the most industrially advanced capitalist countries. In such a situation free competition became supplanted by monopoly control of the economy (via the establishment of cartels –to fix prices, to divide markets between large enterprises, etc).
In their search for larger profits large companies/businesses sought to extend their operations into the underdeveloped countries where there existed a plentiful supply of raw materials and new markets for their products. This resulted in the imperialist scramble for territories and a carving up of the world amongst a handful of powerful states'.
With the emergence of the Soviet Union, and its backing of the anti-colonial movements in the colonial territories, the dominant imperialist countries lost parts of their empires. Following the collapse of the USSR, however, the most industrially advanced capitalist powers sought to re-colonise the ‘third world' though extending neo-liberal policies into underdeveloped countries which had -to a greater or lesser extent- successfully gained their independence.
The large imperialist states' -the US, Japan, the EU- have managed to impose neo-liberalism onto the underdeveloped countries, through utilising such institutions as the IMF, the World Bank, and GATT (now the WTO). If this has not worked, then military force has been used to attempt to kick a rebellious country into line. In the case of Iraq the US and Britain have joined together to continually bomb the country since the ‘end' of the Gulf war in 1991. In the case of Yugoslavia NATO forces have bombed various parts of the country in an attempt to ensure that its political leadership will become subservient to US interests in the Balkans.
Clearly, then, the imperialism of the advanced capitalist countries (including the activities of both the state and corporations) cannot simply be reduced to the activities of international economic institutions, but rather encompasses a far wider set of institutions (i.e., military, political); all of which contribute towards the global dominance of the transnational corporations and the large capitalist states’.
Consequently, we maintain that if the anti-capitalist movement takes on board a multifaceted critique of imperialism (i.e., of economic, political, cultural, and military institutions) then the movement will be able to decisively progress in a revolutionary direction. In this connection, anti-capitalists should continue to engage in direct action at the summits of economic institutions such as the WTO, IMF and World Bank, but should also seek to broaden the scope of the movement and disrupt summits of such bodies as NATO as well as the UN (which has become a tool of US foreign policy); institutions which are deeply implicated in the imperialists' attempts to dominate the globe.

Anti-Capitalist Prisoners

Finally, we believe that the movement must keep up the pressure to ensure that those activists presently being held in various prisons throughout the world, following anti-capitalist demonstrations, are not charged and are released. In the case of those who have already gone to court and have been sentenced we must push for their unconditional release.
To further these aims we must use direct action –on global days of action- to demand that the prisoners are released. Attacking the property of the transnational corporations based in a particular country, to pressure a particular state is one way of proceeding. As well as this the buildings housing the embassy or consulate of a state holding anti-capitalist activists could be targeted.
In future, when people are arrested on a day of action we must converge en masse to their place of detention as soon as this is known. This has, in the past, ensured their prompt release. But this must be done quickly!
In sum, the anti-capitalist movement must not turn its back on the prisoners but must engage in direct action –on global days of action- to pressurise states' into releasing those detained for fighting against an unjust, exploitative, class based order!

SMASH CAPITALISM
SMASH IMPERIALISM

FOR LIBERTARIAN COMMUNISM

1 See Socialist Worker no 1759, 28 July 2001 & Weekly Worker no 394, 26 July 2001.
2 See Herbert Marcuse –An Essay on Liberation (1969).

arch/ive/ief (2000 - 2005)