We’re currently putting together the first in a series of publications called Turbulence: Ideas for movement. In the first issue, we want to take the slogan “We Are Winning” – famously sprayed on a wall in Seattle during the 1999 WTO protests – and ask, “What, actually, would it mean to win?”. We plan to publish Turbulence to coincide with the counter-mobilisation against the G8 summit in Heiligendamm, Germany in June 2007
People have always pushed for better lives, for themselves and for everyone. Every now and then the struggle to remake the world erupts. This most recent eruption has been given numerous names, like the ‘anti-capitalist’ or ‘global justice’ movement or, our favourite, the ‘movement of movements’.
But it's been several years since Seattle and those early summit mobilisations brought a movement into public view. Today, things appear more confused. Collectively, we’re uncertain how to proceed, though that uncertainty isn’t preventing us from experimenting.
There’s been no shortage of movement recently. Over the last twelve months, first on France’s supposed ‘periphery’, and later in its ‘core’, powerful movements exploded and shook the country. Between these two events, in December 2005, Evo Morales, whose roots are firmly within the ‘movements of movements’, was elected President of Bolivia. A few months later, in March 2006, over a million migrant workers took to the streets of the United States, protesting against the “Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act”. They demanded legalisation.
For some, these events have represented victories: winning, if only in a limited sense. Others have been more sceptical. With reference to concrete events and processes, such as those mentioned above, we want to ask the broader question: how could we win? Indeed, what does it actually mean to win? These are hard questions – ones to which the answers apparently keep changing.
There have been many different ideas on how to keep moving, and where to move to. The simplest has been the celebration of ‘unity in diversity’. Some say nothing more is needed that that. Some have looked to manifestos produced by figureheads. Others have put faith in collective processes such as Peoples’ Global Action and the World Social Forums. Others still have turned towards the parliamentary sphere. All of these now seem less and less informative.
We hope that Turbulence will be a place where diverse parts of the movement can visualise, and explore with others, what it might mean to effectively achieve social change, to win. We think this question of winning is productive because it opens up so many others. How do movements relate to institutional politics? How do theories relying on growth deal with a finite planet, and its manifestations such as climate change? How do we break with capitalism? Politically why do we do what we do? Why do we keep doing it?
We are publishing Turbulence to coincide with the counter-mobilisation against the G8 summit in Heiligendamm, Germany in June 2007. There are three reasons for this. First, we see Turbulence as a political intervention. Summit mobilisations have played a significant part in this recent eruption of struggle, but many of us are asking how we can move beyond them. Second, we have found counter-summit mobilisations to be moments of extraordinary openness, where differing theories on social change make more sense. Third, while Turbulence will be available around the world, in multiple formats (print, audio download, on-line Spanish translation), Heiligendamm will solve the headache of immediate distribution: we hope to get rid of thousands!
There are 10 people in the editorial collective with backgrounds in different parts of the movement. We have previously been part of other publishing projects including We Are Everywhere: The irresistible rise of global anti-capitalism, International Social Science Journal, Shut Them Down! The G8, Gleneagles 2005 and the movement of movements, Ephemera: Theory and politics in organisation, and various anonymous projects such as Peoples’ Global Action bulletins and spoof-newspapers.
If you want to write for Turbulence, or help with distribution, please contact us at
editors@turbulence.org.uk
But it's been several years since Seattle and those early summit mobilisations brought a movement into public view. Today, things appear more confused. Collectively, we’re uncertain how to proceed, though that uncertainty isn’t preventing us from experimenting.
There’s been no shortage of movement recently. Over the last twelve months, first on France’s supposed ‘periphery’, and later in its ‘core’, powerful movements exploded and shook the country. Between these two events, in December 2005, Evo Morales, whose roots are firmly within the ‘movements of movements’, was elected President of Bolivia. A few months later, in March 2006, over a million migrant workers took to the streets of the United States, protesting against the “Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act”. They demanded legalisation.
For some, these events have represented victories: winning, if only in a limited sense. Others have been more sceptical. With reference to concrete events and processes, such as those mentioned above, we want to ask the broader question: how could we win? Indeed, what does it actually mean to win? These are hard questions – ones to which the answers apparently keep changing.
There have been many different ideas on how to keep moving, and where to move to. The simplest has been the celebration of ‘unity in diversity’. Some say nothing more is needed that that. Some have looked to manifestos produced by figureheads. Others have put faith in collective processes such as Peoples’ Global Action and the World Social Forums. Others still have turned towards the parliamentary sphere. All of these now seem less and less informative.
We hope that Turbulence will be a place where diverse parts of the movement can visualise, and explore with others, what it might mean to effectively achieve social change, to win. We think this question of winning is productive because it opens up so many others. How do movements relate to institutional politics? How do theories relying on growth deal with a finite planet, and its manifestations such as climate change? How do we break with capitalism? Politically why do we do what we do? Why do we keep doing it?
We are publishing Turbulence to coincide with the counter-mobilisation against the G8 summit in Heiligendamm, Germany in June 2007. There are three reasons for this. First, we see Turbulence as a political intervention. Summit mobilisations have played a significant part in this recent eruption of struggle, but many of us are asking how we can move beyond them. Second, we have found counter-summit mobilisations to be moments of extraordinary openness, where differing theories on social change make more sense. Third, while Turbulence will be available around the world, in multiple formats (print, audio download, on-line Spanish translation), Heiligendamm will solve the headache of immediate distribution: we hope to get rid of thousands!
There are 10 people in the editorial collective with backgrounds in different parts of the movement. We have previously been part of other publishing projects including We Are Everywhere: The irresistible rise of global anti-capitalism, International Social Science Journal, Shut Them Down! The G8, Gleneagles 2005 and the movement of movements, Ephemera: Theory and politics in organisation, and various anonymous projects such as Peoples’ Global Action bulletins and spoof-newspapers.
If you want to write for Turbulence, or help with distribution, please contact us at
editors@turbulence.org.uk
e-mail:
Homepage:
