Democracy. Sustainability. Soildarity.
December 2, 2018 8:28 AM   Subscribe

 
I'm honestly I don't even know what to think? I legit can't tell if this is something from the 90s, satire, RT propaganda or... something else entirely? Because, like...

Is this thing operating in good faith?

EDIT: NOT THE POST! Just the movement / idea itself. The video itself. I'm glad it was shared.
posted by symbioid at 8:47 AM on December 2, 2018


Ya I was confused too. DiEM has been around a couple of years but the fact that the only two major organizations linked to this video are DiEM and Bernie Saunders makes me wonder how “global” and grassroots it truly is. The video was hilariously 90s. Really missed the message if you ask me (fighting authoritarism by appealing to authority like Saunders is ... weird).
posted by saucysault at 8:55 AM on December 2, 2018 [1 favorite]


That video could have been made by Steve Bannon.
posted by PhineasGage at 10:16 AM on December 2, 2018 [1 favorite]


That video could have been made by Steve Bannon.

What? I mean... sure... I guess anybody could make any video that espouses any viewpoint - but I take your comment to mean that there's overlap between Bannon's ideologies and this video's. But I'm not sure that Bannon would create a video that communicates suspicion of the very movements he is or was a part of. He is among the extreme right authoritarians that the video warns about.

Sure, there is some overlap between far right 'populism' (or whatever it really is) and left-wing critiques of the state and the economy. ContraPoints points out that Richard Spencer's recruitment video says "A nation based on freedom is just another place to go shopping," and Wynn says, "A leftist could have said the exact same thing."

But what it's all about isn't what one is against, it's what one is for. Some of the stuff that the USA's far right claims it opposes ("drain the swamp!") is really just stuff that it wants for itself and nobody else.

This video refers to a fight for peace and prosperity, for democracy, sustainability, and solidarity. Are those points of unity that Bannon or any of his international nationalist nazi-loving fascist ilk are trying to spread?
posted by entropone at 10:36 AM on December 2, 2018 [3 favorites]


It's almost the exact opposite of reality. Fascism only won once, where it won, when capitalists decided it was the only alternative to socialism. Fascism failed where capitalists could rely upon non-fascists to protect their property and income.

(Which is not to say that "left fascism" is not something against which to be struggled; it was quite important in the rise of Mussolini and Hitler both, for all that they both quickly extinguished it when they got power.)
posted by MattD at 10:57 AM on December 2, 2018 [2 favorites]


Wow, this is some thoughtless agitprop glossolalia.

I suspect the authors of this video know that global poverty has been steadily falling and continues to fall, and that the average human's chance of dying a violent death is at a historic low. They also probably know, or should know, that markets have been doing pretty damn well globally, and unemployment, especially in the most capitalist countries, is very low. Gross world product continues to grow at over 3% per year, with poor countries growing at more than twice the rate of rich countries. Starvation continues to plummet, global life expectancy continues to surge, literacy continues to increase, along with access to electricity and clean water. And as the world has become broadly more capitalist, these trends have accelerated. Capitalism failing looks like an abrupt reversal of that.

Inequality and environmental destruction continue to be massive problems, but if Sanders and Varoufakis were honest, they would be drawing attention to those problems, not claiming that problems which are getting steadily better somehow represent capitalism failing. Sure, humanity can do better, but I don't trust anyone to do better who insists on catastrophizing when steady progress is being made.
posted by andrewpcone at 12:36 PM on December 2, 2018 [7 favorites]


This video refers to a fight for peace and prosperity, for democracy, sustainability, and solidarity. Are those points of unity that Bannon or any of his international nationalist nazi-loving fascist ilk are trying to spread?

To create a plausible fascist policy plank simply take any broad left objective and append the condition "for white people".
posted by Freelance Demiurge at 1:00 PM on December 2, 2018 [5 favorites]


global poverty has been steadily falling and continues to fall, and that the average human's chance of dying a violent death is at a historic low.

Global poverty falling and unsustainable resource use go hand in hand. The global developments made in the last 100 years were bought with a credit card. There's a cost that we haven't paid yet.

Climate change threatens to displace 150 million people by 2050 and up to 2 billion by 2100. I think that the "abrupt reversal" you're looking for is pretty predictable.

There's a joke about a parachutist whose chute fails to deploy, and who continues to fall. "Well... so far, so good, I guess!"
posted by entropone at 1:36 PM on December 2, 2018 [18 favorites]


What? I mean... sure... I guess anybody could make any video that espouses any viewpoint - but I take your comment to mean that there's overlap between Bannon's ideologies and this video's. But I'm not sure that Bannon would create a video that communicates suspicion of the very movements he is or was a part of. He is among the extreme right authoritarians that the video warns about.

Bannon's expressed goal is demolition of the current world order. The fact that many leftists would like the same thing, and Bannon's much more effective at it, should worry those leftists who assume that the only way to get what they want is to demolish capitalism worldwide. Revolution, it turns out, is bad praxis.
posted by Merus at 2:58 PM on December 2, 2018 [6 favorites]


Metafilter: this is some thoughtless agitprop glossolalia
posted by The Toad at 4:04 PM on December 2, 2018 [8 favorites]


This Guardian op-ed goes into more detail about what they are planning to achieve, I think.

Both are wrong. To achieve progressive goals on a global scale, from worker rights to climate justice, we must reclaim the international institutions and deploy them to deliver an International Green New Deal.

That is why DiEM25 and the Sanders Institute have launched the Progressive International movement: to mobilize people around the world to transform the global order and the institutions that shape it.

The IMF should oversee an international monetary clearing union that rebalances the current gross capital and trade imbalances.

The World Bank should oversee a Green New Deal in collaboration with Europe’s and China’s public investment banks, aided by coordinated interventions in the bond markets by our central banks.

The ILO should have the power not only to investigate countries like the United States and corporations like Amazon, but also to sanction them for suppressing unionization efforts and failing to comply with international labor standards.

A reinvigorated United Nations, with a security council elected from a UN assembly comprising not just government appointees but also citizens from around the world, should forge binding commitments to swift ecological transition.

posted by destrius at 4:05 PM on December 2, 2018 [5 favorites]


Re: global poverty, the aggregate worldwide numbers are certainly better, but in many parts of the 'developed' world there are significant pockets of increasing privation and of course growing inequality, as has been frequently discussed here (and everywhere).

Just this weekend the protests in France significantly escalated. The facts and comments in this article give a sense for the economic reality that is the proximate cause. (Please let's not restart the 'racism vs. economics' debate here.)

For a significant portion of the citizenry in many countries, a rejection of the "Davos consensus" and the efforts of global elites is reaching a new crescendo. Still TBD is whether the Left or the Right will offer a populism that appeals to the greater portion of these disaffected people. Hence my comment upthread about the similarity between the PI video and much of what Bannon espuoses.
posted by PhineasGage at 5:48 PM on December 2, 2018 [1 favorite]


I suspect the authors of this video know that global poverty has been steadily falling and continues to fall, and that the average human's chance of dying a violent death is at a historic low. They also probably know, or should know, that markets have been doing pretty damn well globally, and unemployment, especially in the most capitalist countries, is very low.

My take on this (based on my admittedly intermittent interactions with actual activists/activist organizations in the past year) is that intelligent people are increasingly mobilizing around "we can do better" rather than "the world is turning into a shitheap". It's the clear incompetence and narcissism of elites and the experience of stagnation, when we should be moving forward, and the sense that challenges lie ahead that we are ill prepared for, that makes even people who aren't seeing their own situations deteriorate start engaging and agitating.

The apocalyptic mindset isn't entirely absent, but I'm seeing it a lot more on the Right than on the Left. I'd agree that this video seems somewhat out of step with the times, even without the weird editing (I was reminded less of the 90s than of the old End Times videos that we had to watch periodically at church. Low budget + extremely earnest voiceovers was their trademark).
posted by AdamCSnider at 8:38 PM on December 2, 2018 [2 favorites]


D. Weigel (WaPo): Bernie Sanders turns focus to the White House and the world.

the fact that the only two major organizations linked to this video are DiEM and Bernie Saunders makes me wonder how “global” and grassroots it truly is.

Here is video of the international rountable at the Sanders Institute at which the initiative was launched.

DiEM25 and the Sanders Institute are making the open call (signable here, along with an option to join the PI individually or as an organisation), but the idea's been in the works for a while now.

International politicians on board so far are K. Jakobsdóttir (PM of Iceland), N. Ashton (Canadian MP), F. Haddad (Brazil's opposition leader), A. Colau (mayor of Barcelona), and AMLO (just-installed president of Mexico), and J. Corbyn concurred on the idea in Edinburgh.
posted by progosk at 3:35 AM on December 3, 2018


(As regards the promo video, feels to me they were aiming for Adam Curtis, stylistically...)
posted by progosk at 3:41 AM on December 3, 2018


I think calling a movement which plans to rely on the IMF, the World Bank, the UN and the ILO "revolution" is a bit much, even if I hope they can do good work regardless.

Still, good to know that the slightest hint of a threat to capitalist property relations will still get people all het up about how if it comes to socialism vs barbarism, they're supporters of barbarism. At least it's honesty.

It's almost the exact opposite of reality. Fascism only won once, where it won, when capitalists decided it was the only alternative to socialism. Fascism failed where capitalists could rely upon non-fascists to protect their property and income.

Fascism definitely took off more than once. Still, I kind of don't disagree, I just don't see how the take-home from that could be that we shouldn't threaten capitalism at all because it could lead to fascism. I mean, talk about preferring a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice. By that token, are civil rights activists responsible for voter suppression today? Are feminists to blame for threats to Roe V. Wade? Instead, maybe reactionaries are the ones to blame for their reactions.

To create a plausible fascist policy plank simply take any broad left objective and append the condition "for white people".
I wouldn't necessarily disagree with this either, but surely that is merely more evidence as to how fascism co-opts the response to the horrors of liberal capitalism and redirects those tensions towards racial tension rather than class struggle? Which is furthermore why white supremacy and capitalism are intrinsically connected, and neither can be challenged alone?
posted by AnhydrousLove at 4:57 AM on December 3, 2018 [7 favorites]


Which is furthermore why white supremacy and capitalism are intrinsically connected, and neither can be challenged alone?

I'd be fascinated to hear how capitalism and white supremacy are intrinsically connected in, say, today's Japan, South Korea, India, and China, just to make a start. I mean, it would be nice if all the evils in the world are just facets of the same dark gem, it would make life a lot simpler, but that doesn't necessarily make it true.

It's worth remembering that the last time fascism was a serious force in the world, it was put down by an alliance that included American capitalism, Stalinism, and British pro-imperialist conservatism. Maybe "the Left" of today is of such impregnable and overwhelming strength that it can dispense with all such morally inferior allies this time around. Or maybe it'll have to make compromises to get things done. If so, there are worse forces in the world to have a chat with than the UN and it's associated, if problematic, brethren institutions.
posted by AdamCSnider at 6:34 PM on December 3, 2018 [1 favorite]


My apologies, how thoughtless of me not to provide a comprehensive and holistic analysis of the specifics of how these things operate in every different political theatre. I would also point out that I left out disability, gender and sexuality as relevant aspects of struggle.

Look, I'm no expert in any of those states. My understanding is that white supremacy in particular had significant and lasting effects in most of those places, related to colonialism and imperialism.

There's also the matter of other racial politics where yts aren't the focus, again, I'm not qualified to comment on the specifics, but my understanding is that neither China or Japan is exactly free of racism.
I've also heard that some of that may have come from imposed Western understandings of race. It's not my field though, and I'll admit, I did have settler-colonial states like Australia, the US and Canada more in mind.

If you really think there is zero relationship between race and class, well, I don't think we're going to come to any agreement on that.

As for the UN and all that, yeah I imply criticism. I don't have to pretend they're perfect. I don't quite see where I said that they could never be worked with at all. I had kind of thought I'd said "I hope they can do good work regardless".
posted by AnhydrousLove at 7:19 PM on December 3, 2018 [1 favorite]


It's worth remembering that the last time fascism was a serious force in the world, it was put down by an alliance that included American capitalism, Stalinism, and British pro-imperialist conservatism.

I also think it's worth noting that capital - or American capital, at least - played both sides of the war because war is good for business.
posted by entropone at 6:43 AM on December 4, 2018 [3 favorites]




« Older When Soviet Industrial Designers Imagined a Better...   |   What if Doggerland had survived? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments