text from radikal global, 2003

REFERENCE:
Editor: BUKO (Hrsg.)
Title: Radikal Global: Bausteine fuer eine internationalistische Linke.
Publisher etc. : Berlin, Germany: Assoziation A, Mai 2003.
ISBN 3-935936-18-4. 272 pages. Euro 16.00
Language: German

From the Introduction by Theo Bruns, pp. 7-17

[my translation]
p8-9
Internationalists share one basic conviction: freedom is only possible among
equals; it is valid for all or for none. . . ., it must be without borders;
does not flourish in (nation-)state prisons and feeds on the old dream of an
egalitarian and solidarity-conscious world society. Internationalism must,
thus, not be confused with Thirdworldism or a kind of revolutionary foreign
policy at the grass roots level. Notably, in recent times it is more related
to intra-societal conditions. Debates about (anti-) racism and the effects
of global neoliberalism . . . are wide-spread.

            Many old certainties have been lost, however. There is no more
historical subject of liberation and no more "law" of the struggles backed
by historical philosophy, no more "main contradictions" and only highly
unclear views about alternative forms of society after the bankruptcy of
"real" socialism. There is a broad consensus today that oppression and
exploitation form a complex network of diverse  relations of domination
[Herrschaftsverhaeltnisse] along cleavage lines of class, gender, and
descent, but also of pairs of opposites like old and young, "fit" or
"disabled". Any of these relations are hierarchical within themselves, but
interpenetrate each other in a contradictory manner and run straight through
individuals. Some systematic consequences follow from that.

            Change is dependent on movement. But he who wishes to imagine
and develop change "from below" - and that is a nonnegotiable "heuristic"
and practical perspective, is not situated on firm ground. Social antagonism
exists only in the plural, does not have a homogeneous subject and cannot
base itself on a "below" that would be "innocent" per se or
social-revolutionary from within. Being oppressed is not a place of
privilege with an immanent tendency toward liberation. As the history of
national socialism and  contemporary processes of self-ethnicization and
aggressive homogenization show, there are reactionary, counter-emancipatory
revolts "from below". Even movements of the basis are not free from
hierarchies and keep re-constituting domination. This book, thus, represents
a movement-related perspective - e.g., regarding the globalization-critical
or peace movements, without affirming them uncritically in their concrete
process-forms.

            Furthermore, there is no Archimedean point [axis?] of (counter-)
power, and social change is not primarily constituted via state action.
Emancipation has no historically guaranteed foundation but, rather, must be
conceived anew, debated through controversies, fought for, and re-examined
in a continuous process. Social movements are thus movements with a limited
radius. That implies relinquishing phantasies of power of any kind, a
farewell to the "new man" as well as to heroic (self-)designs. The epoch for
which the figure of "Che" was emblematic in various respects, has
irrevocably come to an end.

            Moreover, one must be sceptical regarding any type of "grand
theory" that claims to have the general key for the explanation of the state
of the world in its pocket. . . ."

COMMENT: I do not necessarily agree with each of the above statements, but
find the text interesting.

GK