||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||| ||| ||| A N T I F A ||| ||| ||| ||| I N F O - B U L L E T I N ||| ||| _____ ||| ||| ||| ||| * News * Analysis * Research * Action * ||| ||| ||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ***** ||/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\||/\|| || * -- SPECIAL -- * August 4, 1999 * -- EDITION -- * || ||\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/|\/||\/|| * SPECIAL EDITION * * * * _________________________________________________________________ THE `NEW RIGHT,' NEO-FASCISM & GLOBALIZATION _________________________________________________________________ CONTENTS ------ X. AFIB Editor's Introduction: `Right Woos Left' Rewind. 1. Together with the New Right Against Globalisation? 2. De Fabel van de Illegal Quits Dutch Anti-MAI Campaign. 3. Campaign Against the MAI Potentially Antisemitic. * * * _________________________________________________________________ `RIGHT WOOS LEFT' REWIND _________________________________________________________________ By Tom Burghardt Editor, Antifa Info-Bulletin * * * North American readers would be well-advised to heed the warnings offered below by the Dutch anti-fascist group De Fabel van de Illegaal (The Myth of Illegality). As the left continues to meltdown, the far-right has moved in to fill the void. This is hardly a European phenomenon. Since the 1980s, neofascist and Nazi groups have attempted to seduce the left with anti-war, "pro-worker," pro-environmental and "national liberation" rhetoric. The latter has proven to be a powerful factor motivating the Quebec independence movement. Hoping to win new followers for an explicitly racist and anti-Semitic program of "America first" nationalism, groups ranging from the LaRouche organization, publishers of the "New Federalist" and "Executive Intelligence Review," the Liberty Lobby, publishers of "Spotlight," the explicitly fascist National Alliance, and segments of the so-called "Patriot" movement have excelled at equating anti-statism _per se_ with a revolutionary critique of "actually existing capitalism." All-too-readily a strata of ostensible "leftists" have embraced the far-right's reductionist dogma - "anti-statism" - and have followed neofascism's Pied Pipers towards the abyss. Such blurred thinking and bankrupt alliances are readily visible in various conspiracy theories emerging from the JFK assassination, the complex of illegal CIA- US Government activities known as Iran-Contra and most recently, organizational efforts against globalization. For further background see: Chip Berlet, _Right Woos Left: Populist Party, LaRouchian, and Other Neo-Fascist Overtures to Progressives, and Why They Must be Rejected_, 1992, Political Research Associates, Cambridge, MA. Michael Novick, "Wolves in Peace Clothing," chapter 12 in _White Lies, White Power, 1995, Common Courage Press, Monroe, Maine. Janet Biehl and Peter Staudenmaier, _Ecofascism: Lessons from the German Experience_, 1995, AK Press, San Francisco. Martin A. Lee, "A Gathering Storm," chapter six in _The Beast Reawakens_, 1997, Little, Brown & Co., New York. Eric Cartman, _The Past Is Our Master: A Brief History of the Far-Right in Quebec_, 1998, Antifa Forum, No. 3, Toronto. * * * * DE FABEL VAN DE ILLEGAAL * [The Myth of Illegality] Koppenhinksteeg 2 2312 HX Leiden, Netherlands Tel: +31-71-5127619 or 5144217 Fax: +31-71-5134907 E-mail: lokabaal@dsl.nl Web: http://www.dsl.nl/media/lokabaal/english http://www.savanne.ch/right-left.en - Monday, 2 August 1999 - ----- _________________________________________________________________ BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION: DISCUSSION REGARDING RIGHT-WING INFLUENCES ON THE LEFT _________________________________________________________________ Dear reader, We hereby send you four* articles by De Fabel van de illegaal from Leiden, Netherlands meant to contribute to a discussion about right-wing influences on the Left through the campaigns against the MAI and "free trade". We send you the articles because we think you might be interested in the discussion. We appologise for any cross- posting due to overlap in different mailinglists. Please feel free to distribute these articles further, or to publicise (parts of) them. We would be happy to receive contributions from you or others to the discussion. Best regards, Eric Krebbers Merijn Schoenmaker (De Fabel van de illegaal) * AFIB Editor's Note: Due to the length of the texts, the fourth article "New Right Seduces the Left to Sign Anti-War Declaration" will appear in Antifa Info-Bulletin, Number 215. ***** _________________________________________________________________ TOGETHER WITH THE NEW RIGHT AGAINST GLOBALISATION? _________________________________________________________________ By Eric Krebbers - October 1998 - * * * They speak of solidarity with the Indians and call for cultural diversity. They want to get rid of capitalism and globalisation. And they have read right-wing and left-wing political classics. The Dutch intellectual vanguard of the extreme right have joined their forces with the discussion magazine Studie, Opbouw en Strijd (Study, Organise and Struggle, SOS). They call themselves the New Right, after their comrades in France and Belgium. But how new are their ideas? An analysis of two articles written by the central ideologists Ruter and Veldman, published in the summer 1998 issue of SOS. Now that most of the old extreme-right parties in Holland are falling apart, a discussion is being started in SOS on building a new right. The extreme-right think tank Voorpost and the Nederlandse Studenten Vereniging (Nationalist Student Organisation, NLSV) are also joining in on the discussion. The New Right especially focuses on the weak spots of the "left liberal ideology", as they call it. They try to connect to all sorts of left-wing movements and search for possibilities to give the basic ideas of these movements an extreme-right twist. With sardonic pleasure Ruter and Veldman frequently quote "left- liberal" opinion leaders saying doubtful things, giving them an honorable place in their new-right nationalist ideology. In this way they use Tom Lemaire, Hans Koning, Albert Stol, Umberto Eco and Stella Braam to prove their own right-wing ideology right. Ruter and Veldman present their political renewal project very eloquently, and with daring and bravery, effectively shedding the old-fashioned bigot image. But basically they still heavily rely on the traditional fascist Blut-und-Boden (blood-and-soil) ideology. A CULTURAL REVOLUTION New Right leader Ruter is a fan of the ideas of Gramsci, the communist who was buried alive for years in Mussolini's jails. According to Gramsci revolutions can only succeed when the culture of a country also fundamentally changes, when the "cultural hegemony" of the elite is broken. Therefor a "cultural revolution" is first needed, and that is precisely what Ruter wants. He wants to subvert the now fashionable "left-liberal consensus". According to Ruter, that consensus is forced upon us by "grand capital" and organised by the state. Ruter wants the societal organisation and our ways of thinking to become based on his new-right nationalism. Ruter calls for an end to the "mondialisation" and sympathises with the struggle against the Multilateral Agreements on Investments (MAI). His readership is advised to get acquainted with the left-wing campaign against MAI. The nationalist students apparently liked it so much that they decided to link their homepage to that of the campaign. Ruter quotes Marx saying that the will to "mondialise" is inherent in capital itself. And global capitalism also sells culture, Ruter writes. Capital "colonises the imagination", which leads to a global "uniformisation of the ways of life" and "an uprooting of collective identities and traditional cultures". Therefore Ruter wants to curb the power of "grand capital" and calls for a "participative" or "direct democracy", just like the anti-MAI activists do. Ruter and Veldman especially dislike the thinking in terms of progress, which they say is hegemonic in the capitalist system. Veldman: "Nowadays the most fundamental political differences are not anymore between the left and the right, but between, on the one hand, the people arguing for unhindered economic growth and progress, to whom people are just consumers and the earth an object, and, on the other hand, those who, as Ruter says, "want to share the whole cosmic living space with the animals, plants and matter, and want to hand it over unharmed to the next generations." Veldman speaks of solidarity with "peoples that struggle to save their own identity and with all those offering resistance against the destruction of flora and fauna, against the limitless power and influence of multinational companies and against the international consumption society." INDIAN NATIONALISM The North American Indians are high on Veldmans list of cuddly peoples. In his long article "Indian nationalism, the hatchet is not yet buried!", he sketches the destruction of the "culture and identity" of the "original peoples" of America. This destruction is caused by the "massive immigration of people who do not care about the culture and religion of the indigenous peoples". According to Veldman, especially Christian culture and progress are responsible for the injustice done to the Indians. He likes to quote the famous Indian writer Vine Deloria jr. saying that he doesn't want any more contact with Christianity, capitalism or left-wing solidarity. It's all just import, he is said to have said. "Most Indians are nationalists, meaning that in the first place they think of the development and stability of the tribe", Deloria is quoted. Copying left-wing activists, Veldman supports Indian activist Leonard Peltier, who by now has been held captive for some 24 years. And Veldman also makes propaganda for the magazine Nanai-notes, published by the Dutch Indian solidarity movement. In this way, Veldman and the New Right want to profit from the sympathy enjoyed by this movement. "It isn't logical that the explicit identity politics of almost extinct or destroyed minorities, and 'undangerous' mini-peoples, get a lot of praise, whilst the same set of values are distrusted immediately when supporting the vigorous nationalism of a somewhat larger people", Veldman says, simply disregarding all history books full of "minorities" being killed by "a somewhat larger people" propagating such "vigorous nationalism". SPIRITUAL GENOCIDE Veldman also tries to sell us his "vigorous nationalism" by quoting the ideas of Trudell, the most influential Indian leader of the seventies. Trudell hated Christianity and saw it as a "spiritual genocide" that not only brainwashed Indians but also the white people themselves. It all started, Trudell said, in the European Middle Ages, even before the Christian religion was exported to America. That was when the original European identity was crushed, according to Trudell. So, when Veldman says: "the Indian struggle is our struggle", he feels like a sort of Dutch Indian. He thinks that just like the Indians, the Dutch must rediscover their own identity and "in the first place become nationalists". Long-time left-wing activist Stella Braam is famous for her relentless activities within the Dutch Indian solidarity movement. In her book "Voices of the Earth" she wrote: "The land is basic to our existence. It saves the roots of their culture and the holy places of their ancestors". That quote of course made new-right Veldman very happy. "Seeing that so many well- meaning people value the culture and worldview of indigenous peoples, it is amazing that Europeans who also dislike progress and also try to recover their cultural roots and identity, get confronted with so much distrust and resistance by the people who say that they share the same values." Pre-Christian traditions and religions are at the centre of the discussions within the New Right. Researchers like Koenraad Logghe explore medieval texts for signs of the assumed original white European identity. Logghe sometimes reports his findings in SOS and the summer issue contains a very positive review of his latest book "The Holy Grail: Between Pagan and Christian Heritage." A Dutch publisher was recently stopped by De Fabel van de illegaal from marketing this book. Using this sort of research, the New Right also tries to tap into the fast-growing part of the new-age movement that specialises on "old Nordic traditions", a potential new-right constituency. A FEUDAL IDEOLOGY How new really is the New Right? At first sight the old-fashioned crude racism seems gone. Veldman even professes solidarity with indigenous people, as long as they stay where they are. He even says he dislikes the "blind solidarity with white folks around the globe", again distancing himself from extreme-right traditions. But, in the end, all remains the same. The New Right still longs for a pre-civilisational mythical past in which everyone knew his or her "natural place". They dream of a golden feudal period in which "peoples" were still "ethnically pure". According to Ruter, modern man has been "uprooted" and cut off from his "natural origins" - the "organic community". "People, wherever they live, are connected to a piece of land, a piece of the earth which they see as their own, and they are always willing to fight for the independence and integrity of it." Ruter also believes in "a right and duty of self-defence on the level of the natural society of which every human is a part, starting with the family. It is the drive to conserve ethnic and cultural diversity, against uniformization and monolithic structures". In this way Ruter's new-right nationalism ends up as an old-fashioned crude biological racism: "as social beings, humans have a natural instinctive drive to identify with others who look the same." The growing popularity of new-right ideas uncover the vulnerability of a left-wing ideology that is getting more and more vague these days. It is a shame that the New Right doesn't even have to play around with left-wing quotes to use them for their own purposes. The absence of a clear and consistent left-wing alternative and ideology might give the New Right opportunities to start attracting new generations of activists. Therefore left wing activists should be very clear about their arguments, if they decide to protest against for instance globalisation. And what they really want if they argue for cultural diversity. Hopefully not this new-right ideal of a static society, dominated by the past and a rigid vision of natural laws. Bigot ways of thinking in which the one whose ancestors have lived longest in a certain area gets the biggest say in politics and cultural matters. Left-wing activists should rather strive for a society that can change, and in which all newcomers can equally participate. The left should strive to develop autonomous internationalist cultures of struggle, such as Gramsci really envisioned. Left-wing activists should not protest against a globalisation of solidarity or a global exchange of cultures and ideas. And most certainly not against progress. The real struggle is about the direction in which we are going to progress, and most important: who is going to decide about that. ***** _________________________________________________________________ DE FABEL VAN DE ILLEGAL QUITS DUTCH ANTI-MAI CAMPAIGN _________________________________________________________________ By Eric Krebbers and Merijn Schoenmaker - July 1999 - * * * De Fabel van de illegaal has played a very active role in the campaigns against the Multilateral Agreement on Investment and the World Trade Organisation in the Netherlands since the end of 1997. The sympathy of the extreme-right for the campaigns has been bothering De Fabel for a long time. Intensive discussions have led us to the conclusion that this interest is not a coincidence, but is caused by structural flaws in the campaigns. In June 1999 De Fabel therefore decided to quit the campaigns against the MAI and the WTO. In the following articles we explain why. We invite all those who are interested to co-operate in the research and discussions to develop explicitly left-wing analyses and campaigns connected to international solidarity. MAI NIET GEZIEN?! At the end of 1997 De Fabel van de illegaal together with several other organisations initiated the grassroots activist network "MAI niet gezien?!" (MAI, didn't see it/MAI, don't want it) in the Netherlands. De Fabel van de illegaal ran the secretariat of the network. "MAI niet gezien!" has produced and spread tens of thousands of leaflets and posters and organised dozens of public meetings, street actions, occupations, etc. Since the beginning of 1999, we have started to transform our campaign against the MAI into one targeting the Millennium Round in the WTO. We have spread the "declaration of members of the international civil society against the Millennium Round" to hundreds of NGOs and grassroots organisations in the Netherlands. We were co-ordinating the sign-ons for organisations in the Netherlands and were planning further actions. UNDOCUMENTED PEOPLE De Fabel van de illegaal is a radical left grassroots organisation that strives for a socialist, feminist, and anti-racist society. The main activities of De Fabel consist of anti-fascist work and involvement in the struggle of undocumented people against the racist government policies of selection, exclusion, detention and deportation. We saw our involvement in the anti-MAI campaign as a way of putting international solidarity into practice and of making a connection with the struggle for open borders and the support for both political and economical refugees. On top of that we thought that the anti-MAI campaign could enable us to connect the radical left-wing struggle in the imperialist countries in the North with the struggle of left-wing movements in the countries in the South. De Fabel therefore also sought contact with Peoples' Global Action against "Free" Trade and the World Trade Organisation (PGA), an alliance of various radical movements mainly in the South. SECONDARY PROBLEMS As time went on we became aware that the political character of the campaigns against the MAI and the WTO is not really left wing. The campaigns can easily fit into a conservative and nationalist agenda. Through our antifascist activities we came across an article by the right extremist Ruther in the summer 1998 issue of the Dutch new-right magazine Studie Opbouw en Strijd (S.O.S.). Ruther opposes "mondialisation" and sympathises with the struggle against the MAI. He even recommended the anti-MAI campaign by "MAI niet gezien!" to his readers and explained to them how to subscribe to the electronic mailing list. His comrades from the new-right Dutch student organisation were so enthusiastic about our campaign that they linked their web site to that of "MAI niet gezien!". See also our article "Together with the New Right against globalisation?" The problem with the international anti-MAI campaign is that clear anti- patriarchal and anti-racist positions are absent. Racism and sexism are considered to be secondary issues. De Fabel van de illegaal cannot accept this. In September 1998 "MAI niet gezien!" organised the seminar "Globalisation of poverty". In the workshops and in the reader much attention was paid to international population policies, forced sterilisation programs, illegalising of migrants and refugees and the situation of women in the free export processing zones (FPZ). In an extensive response containing a critique in solidarity of the founding manifesto of the Peoples' Global Action, De Fabel made a plea for integrating anti-capitalist, anti-patriarchal and anti-racist analyses in the campaign against free trade. See also our article "Peoples' Global Action, an inspiring network of resistance". NATURAL ORDER In the reader we made for the seminar, we published the article "Development as colonialism", written by Edward Goldsmith, the editor-in-chief and owner of The Ecologist. A few months later we discovered that Edward Goldsmith is a regular guest at international meetings of the New Right, the intellectual elite of the neo-Nazi movement. In 1997 the complete editorial team of The Ecologist left the magazine because of a political conflict with Edward Goldsmith over ethnicity and gender issues, and because Goldsmith was unwilling to end his collaboration with the New Right. Goldsmith makes a plea for a green policy that will re-establish a "natural social order" and "the traditional relations between people". "The real problems are caused by the disruption of natural systems as family, society and the ecological system", he wrote recently in The Ecologist. Only when the human relations are again organised by "the laws of Gaia" is a stable society possible according to him. Goldsmith describes some political conflicts as "natural" or "ethnic" problems. He believes "different ethnic groups" cannot live together in one country, and is a supporter of Apartheid and ethnic cleansing. For example in Ruanda or in Northern Ireland. Goldsmith sees the Northern Irish Catholics and Protestants "as two different ethnic groups", which should be set apart. He also is a fan of Ataturk's who, according to Goldsmith, "separated Greeks and Turks very successfully, although there was a terrible outcry at the time and it undoubtedly caused considerable inconvenience to the people who were forced to migrate. But should we not be willing to accept measures of inconvenience in order to establish a stable society?" NEW RIGHT IDEOLOGIST The love between Edward Goldsmith and the New Right is closely connected to his plea for re-establishing "the natural social order" and the separation of "different ethnic groups". Goldsmith makes a connection between ecological thinking and the conservation of traditional cultures and identities. Comparing human societies with biological organisms, Edward Goldsmith even argued: "What is today regarded as prejudice against people of different ethnic groups is a normal and necessary feature of human cultural behaviour, and is absent only among members of a cultural system already far along the road to disintegration." Many people in the New Right see Edward Goldsmith as one of their most important ideologists. A few years ago, Goldsmith was a speaker at the conference for the 25th anniversary of GRECE, the think tank connected to the extreme-right Front National in France. At the end of 1997, Goldsmith was the main attraction at a meeting of TeKos, the think tank of the extreme-right Vlaams Blok in Belgium. The Belgian ex-anarchist Guy De Martelaere wrote about this in his occult new-right magazine Gwenved: "The conservative-ecological thesis of Edward Goldsmith received enormous interest and approval from the new-right public, who is yet to discover the green thinking. Alain de Benoist, one of the foremen of the 'Nouvelle Droite' (New Right) and GRECE, and Luc Pauwels, editor-in-chief of TeKos, are heading more and more in the ecologist direction, inspired by contacts with and ideas of Edward Goldsmith. The European new-right alliance Synergies Europennes has even adopted Goldsmith's theories into their ideology with regard to ecology and globalisation. Recently the millionaire also wanted to join the French right-extremist party Mouvement Ecologiste Independant for the 1999 European parliamentary elections. DEFENDING NATIONAL CULTURE The new-right ideologist Edward Goldsmith is also an influential person in the international NGO and activist circuit. Goldsmith is the manager of the James Goldsmith Memorial Foundation and subsidises international campaigns against the European Union, the MAI, the WTO and genetic engineering. Additionally, Goldsmith is the president of Ecoropa and a member of the board of directors of the International Forum on Globalisation (IFG). The IFG is a mixture of left- and right-wing opinion leaders and unites foremen and -women of Ecoropa, the International Society for Ecology and Culture, the Council of Canadians, the Third World Network and Public Citizen. The IFG describes itself as "an alliance of sixty leading activists, scholars, economists, researchers, and writers formed to stimulate new thinking, joint activity, and public education in response to the rapidly emerging economic and political arrangement called the global economy." The IFG was set up in 1994 to develop strategies to "reverse the globalisation trend and redirect actions toward revitalising local economies." Half way 1997 the IFG initiated the international anti-MAI campaign. During the next Ministerial conference of the WTO in November 1999 in Seattle (USA) the IFG will organise a counter conference at which among others the new-right ideologist Edward Goldsmith is invited to give a speech. In a recent IFG briefing the Council of Canadians advises NGOs and activists to give the issue of defending national culture a more prominent place in their campaigns against the MAI and the WTO. LEGITIMISING AUTHORITARIAN INTERESTS The fluid organisational and ideological transition between the New Right and the campaigns against the MAI and the WTO shows the vulnerability of the leftist movement and ideology in its ongoing crisis. According to the New Right the major political conflict in society is not any more between the left and the right. One of the strategies of the New Right is to look for conservative and nationalist tendencies in supposedly left-wing ideologies and to adopt these ideas for their own growth. Nicholas Hildyard, one of the former editors of the Ecologist, warns about this in the article "Blood and Culture: Ethnic Conflict and the Authoritarian Right", which was published by The Cornerhouse in January 1999. "A platform shared with authoritarian interests inevitably legitimises those interests, giving them a credibility that they might otherwise not enjoy." He argues: "Anti-racism should be placed at the centre of movement building, not tacked on as an optional extra." Hildyard ends by stating: "The alliances that progressives enter into will inevitably influence the outcome of their opposition, (...) for whom we chose to walk with ultimately plays a large part in determining where we end up walking." We think this description characterises very well what has happened since the start of the international campaigns against the MAI and the WTO. The motives of the former editors of the Ecologist to leave the magazine have been known for a long time by organisations co-operating with Edward Goldsmith, but so far very few groups have followed their example. Instead, many groups are still defending Goldsmith by relativising his collaboration with the New Right. This is unacceptable for us. We don't see any common ground with organisations that refuse to clearly distance themselves from the political ideas and praxis of Edward Goldsmith and the New Right in general. LACK OF LEFT WING POSITIONS During last year De Fabel van de illegaal has tried to integrate anti-capitalist, anti-patriarchal and anti-racist analyses in the campaigns against free trade. Now we have to conclude that it has not worked and will not work. The problem lies in the focus of the campaigns: free trade. Ideologically separating and criticising international or foreign capital simply does not fit into left-wing politics. Our criticism of the focus of the campaigns that we have tried to formulate is described in more detail in the article "The campaign against the MAI is potentially anti-Semitic". We are still expanding on this. De Fabel will not continue a campaign which, because of a lack of left-wing positions and analyses, contributes to preparing the ground for a further growth of the New Right. We have therefore decided to discontinue our involvement in it. In the coming months we will do further research on how big the organisational and ideological influences of the New Right is in the international campaigns against free trade. We will publish a number of articles and hope to contribute to an international discussion about these issues. Hopefully such a discussion will contribute to the development of clearer left-wing analyses and campaigns in the field of international solidarity. We think it will be crucial for the survival of the radical left to make a serious effort to integrate anti-patriarchal, anti-racist and anti-capitalist analyses and make them together the core our politics. ***** _________________________________________________________________ CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE MAI IS POTENTIALLY ANTISEMITIC _________________________________________________________________ Eric Krebbers and Merijn Schoenmaker - July 1999 - * * * The Dutch antiracist organisation "De Fabel van de illegaal" (The myth of illegality) and other left-wing organisations involved in the international campaigns against free-trade agreements like the MAI, regularly get compliments from the extreme right. Although unwanted, these compliments are not accidental. The critique of free trade has long been a speciality of the extreme right, and has proven to easily turn anti-Semitic. We will all become "slaves" to the "international capitalists living on the Riviera", the Dutch National-Socialist Party (NSB) ideologist Hylkema said in 1934. Free trade would bring the Dutch factories and farms down. Dutch goods would be pushed off the domestic market by cheap imports, he feared. The only chance for survival was a fascist economy, he wrote. "We should control our national household in such a way that our people will not perish, when this group of people without a fatherland starts flooding us with imports. We don't want our factories to close down because Eastern coolies work for a few dimes a day." Hylkema called for resistance against "the trade and bank world, which still speaks of the principle of the open door. But the farmers feel that if things go on like this, the end is near." "But don't think that the import trade capital and trust capital will save us then. They are extremely mobile. In one aeroplane they can bring billions in paper money across the border in just a few hours. Holland can then be bought by international speculators for a couple of guilders and we will become a poor and dependent people", the angry fascist wrote. If Hylkema, half a century later, had been able to surf the Internet, he probably would have been pleasantly surprised looking at some of the anti-MAI homepages. Hylkema's present-day successor Ruter certainly is very enthusiastic about them. Ruter is the main ideologist of the Dutch new-right think tank Voorpost. He advised his readers to check the Internet pages of "MAI niet gezien?!" (MAI, didn't see it/MAI, don't want it), the Dutch anti-MAI campaign. The new-right Dutch Student Organisation even linked their homepage to that of the anti-MAI campaign. The Dutch fascists are not the only ones interested. The German Republicans and the French Front National also turned against the MAI. In some countries the New Right even popped up at left-wing campaign meetings. THE STATE AGAINST GLOBALISATION? For some time now extreme-right intellectuals have been working on renewing fascist thinking. The ideas and concepts of the current campaigns against free trade seem to be of good use. These are not specifically left-wing and even seem to be easily integrated into the traditional extreme-right worldview. For instance, take a look at the very fashionable concept of "globalisation of the economy", which is very central to the international campaigns against the MAI. This concept implies that capitalism is originally a local system, and has only recently begun to spread its tentacles around the world. But in fact capitalism has from the start been a global system, and has been able to evolve only because of the plunder of the southern parts of the globe. By pointing to this so-called globalisation as our main problem, the anti-MAI activists prepare our thinking for the corresponding logical consequence - the struggle for "our own" local economy, and as a consequence also for "our own" state and culture. Some movements in the South that also fight against free trade draw exactly that conclusion. Taking their situation into account, it may be understandable, but it is certainly not emancipatory. In the rich countries, promoting a struggle against globalisation could create a fertile ground for the extreme right to grow. Fascists have always valued a self-sufficient economy. "No imports of things that our own people can produce, are happy to produce, are able to produce very well. Because there is no better worker than the Dutch worker", Hylkema thought already. Sixty years later, new-right Voorpost ideologists write about the "globalisation of American capitalism" and call for "a large-scale people's capitalism and small-scale worker participation", because that would offer the best "guarantees for the safeguard of our own industries." In it's first pamphlets "MAI niet gezien?!" wrote that the agreement "would put up enormous barriers" for states to "direct their own economies". But according to new-right ideologist Ruter, "the political elite doesn't even want to guide or decide any more - they gave up their power, only to serve an economic system that, because of its hegemony, doesn't need the specification 'capitalism' anymore". Notice that both the anti-MAI activists and the new-right ideologists think the state and the capitalist economy are separate entities. In reality they are completely interconnected. The modern state and capitalism develloped at the same time and pre-suppose each other. They are symbiotic twins. States create the social and physical circumstances for the continually changing capitalism and that is precisely why they are working on agreements like the MAI, together with the companies. The anti- MAI activists with their resistance against the "globalisation of the economy" run the risk of ending up calling for a strong state. Already, some of them are speaking in positive terms of the Malaysian state, which is supposedly curbing the free circulation of capital. But Malaysia is close to being the prime example of a modern fascist state. PRODUCTIVE VERSUS SPECULATIVE CAPITAL? Traditionally, left-wing thinkers have pointed out the dividing line between capital and workers as the main political economic conflict. However, when activists start using concepts like globalisation, they tend to start thinking in terms of a conflict between "local capital" and "international capital", in terms of good "productive capital" and bad "trading and speculative capital". But production and trade are inseparable parts of capitalism. And both parts of capital grow by stealing from the labourers (both paid and unpaid) and by plundering nature. Regularly, the international anti-MAI campaigns have used the image of the small local company being destroyed by a large foreign, if possible American, multinational. Many activists call for investment in regional companies or in social projects that would bring jobs and positive prospects. Such investment is also believed to bring more economic stability than the "casino capitalism" that is held responsible for the recent large economic crises. This way of thinking perfectly resembles traditional extreme right thought. To Hylkema only one real economic duality existed, the one between the "national, creative and productive capital" and "reprehensible international big capital". The extreme right never principally opposed capitalism and even denies any difference in interest between the "national capital" and the workers. "The owner, the staff and the workers together share only one central goal - a flourishing company", Hylkema explained. For him the main thing was to reduce "class hatred" and to strengthen the unity of "the people" as a whole. For that reason it is very convenient for the extreme right to have a common enemy, one that can be held responsible for the economic problems, crises and insecurities that will always accompany capitalism. "International capital" can fulfil that role perfectly. Modern nazi ideologists also understand this principle very well. "Solidarity within the nation gets replaced by some sort of universal solidarity between the rich, the managers, the industrials: on many an international congress they secretly decide on their strategies", according to new-right Voorpost. CAPITAL WITHOUT A FATHERLAND Once ideologically separated from the rest of capitalism, the "reprehensible international capital" can easily be associated with "the enemy" - some other state or a certain well-defined group of people. Following this line of thought, a critique of the system as such can gradually turn into the crazy idea that a small group of hostile people completely controls our lives. Such thinking is historically very closely linked to anti-Semitism. In the deeply rooted and mostly European anti-Semitic tradition there's always this connection made between "the international capital", America and "the Jews". This tradition holds that the "international speculative capital" is in the hands of Jews who conspire to rule the world. This "Jewish capital" supposedly operates from New York. For centuries right-extremist and nationalist movements have repeatedly revived this anti-Semitic way of thinking. Usually by saying that "the fatherland" or "Europe" is being threatened by - and this depends on the audience - "international capital", American multinationals or "the Jews". It's all the same to the ideology behind it. Of course, criticising free trade doesn't have to lead to anti-Semitism, but the two combine surprisingly easily. Hylkema's fascist party NSB, for instance, was not anti-Semitic in the beginning of the thirties. But, by its constant propaganda against "international capital" it did lay a strong foundation for its later turn to anti-Semitism. In the beginning of the forties it was just a small step for the party to start inserting the word "Jewish" in front of the phrase "international capital" in their propaganda pamphlets. Anti-MAI activists putting "international capital" apart ideologically, are not by definition anti-Semites, but the analysis behind their reasoning surely is potentially anti-Semitic. History shows how easily the one can lead to the other. The New Right also loves this type of anti-Semitism. In a recent article on globalisation, Ruter for instance wrote that "whoever arranges and controls the loans, also controls the economic cycle and economic development." It is most certainly no coincidence that he throws in a quote of Amschel Meyer van Rothschild, a Jew who, according to Ruter, once said: "Give me control over the currencies, and I don't care anymore who makes the laws." At the start of the international campaigns, autumn 1997, the anti-MAI activists strongly emphasised that the talks on the agreement were secret, and their attention swiftly turned to the individual decision-makers. "MAI niet gezien?!" wrote about a "multinational coup" and a "silent taking over of power". Actually, the talks were partly secret, but not as totally as the activists suggested. Forced by an assistant leaking official documents, the talks quickly became more open. Many contemporary "conspiracy fans" were drawn towards the anti-MAI campaign. The campaign office received frequent calls from these nuts, probably alerted by the long article on the MAI published in their favourite magazine Nexus. This article was written by a left-wing organisation that is central to the international anti-MAI campaigns. Until the beginning of the nineties the Australian-based Nexus was openly anti-Semitic, but after that it backed down a bit. However, the stories remained essentially the same. In recent issues, articles on the political power of "Jewish capital" popped up again. Conspiracy fans also visited anti-MAI meetings. On such a meeting in Geneva in August 1998, titled "Globalisation and Resistance", one participant wanted to publicly read excerpts from the books written by Jan van Helsing, a hideous German anti-Semite. Around about the same time, "conspiracy expert" Kuhles came into contact with the Dutch campaign. For several weeks he was able to spread his anti-Semitic poison in anarchist circles before being unmasked. LIBERALISM REPLACES CAPITALISM The central concept of globalisation has recently filled the analytical gap that was left when some 10 years ago the critique of capitalism went out of fashion. In the middle of the nineties left-wing circles first turned to the concept of "neoliberalism". Especially the popular Zapatista uprising in Mexico stimulated its use. But neoliberalism is not the same as capitalism. It is rather the ideology that gets delivered together with the changes of capitalism that have been imposed from above since the mid-seventies. Among these changes are the flexibilisation of the workforce, the privatisation of government services and the development of new computer and biotechnology industries. Also part of these developments is the trend towards an increased international division of labour. By the end of the nineties this latest trend became central to left-wing analysis, especially when activists started campaigning against the MAI and WTO. This change in analysis and focus of attention undoubtedly is a result of the overall political swing to the right that we have all witnessed this last decade. This raises the question of what might still constitute a left-wing analysis, and what makes a political line right-wing. Political discussions are getting scarce, especially in the Netherlands, which poses great problems to campaigns like those against the MAI. Knowledge of the history of left-wing politics is also scarce. Earlier campaigns and discussions on international solidarity seem to have been almost completely and collectively forgotten. Most left-wing groups joined the anti-MAI campaigns without giving it much thought, upset as they were by apocalyptic stories about a new secret "world constitution". And they kept on going without a thorough discussion that could have lead them to a radical change in their political direction. This last decade has seen non-governmental organisations (NGOs) taking on a more central role in campaigns, unhindered by the rapidly shrinking left-wing movement. Especially in the realm of international campaigns this can be clearly seen. For the left it is problematic that the NGOs' criticism usually does not see beyond neo-liberalism and free trade. They do not consider capitalism as such as a problem. That is of course not in their interest. They are too much a part of the system themselves, and have a lot of jobs to lose as well. Too much leftist talk doesn't pay. NGOs therefore don't like political discussions. The professional NGO campaigners rather spend most of their time flooding their fellow activists with details on free trade from every corner of the world. The activist who does not have access to Internet or e-mail will easily get the impression that he or she is not able to seriously participate in the campaigns. An extra problem with this NGO-provided information is that it usually has a top-down focus. Information from a grassroots point of view is getting very rare. And because of the information overload, even the most experienced activist in the end starts to overlook the difference between the two. Nowadays left-wing groups are most often not powerful enough to get an international campaign off the ground without the help of NGOs. The choice of limiting criticism to free trade so as not to endanger the help of the NGOs is apparently easily made. With the result that left-wing groups are spreading an ideology that offers the New Right, rather than the left, bright opportunities for future growth. * * * ANTIFA INFO-BULLETIN (AFIB) 750 La Playa # 730 San Francisco, California 94121 E-Mail: tburghardt@igc.org * On PeaceNet visit ANTIFA INFO-BULLETIN on pol.right.antifa Via the Web --> http://burn.ucsd.edu/~aff/afib.html Archive --> http://burn.ucsd.edu/~aff/afib-bulletins.html * ANTI-FASCIST FORUM (AFF) Antifa Info-Bulletin is a member of the Anti-Fascist Forum network. AFF is an info-group which collects and disseminates information, research and analysis on fascist activity and anti-fascist resistance. More info: E-mail: aff@burn.ucsd.edu Web: http://burn.ucsd.edu/~aff Order our journal, ANTIFA FORUM, cutting-edge anti-fascist research and analysis! 4 issues, $20. Write AFF, P.O. Box 6326, Station A, Toronto, Ontario, M5W 1P7 Canada +:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+ +: * A N T I F A I N F O - B U L L E T I N * +: :+ :+ +: * RESISTING FASCISM * BY ALL MEANS NECESSARY! * +: +:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+ ++++ stop the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal ++++ ++++ if you agree copy these 3 sentences in your own sig ++++ ++++ see: http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/spg-l/sigaction.htm ++++