Re: <nettime> Riots Inc.!

[david turgeon <david.t@steam.ca>]

dear KENDRA OKONSKI, the Wall Street Journal,

>Sweeping up the broken glass in Genoa, Italy, merchants must
>have asked themselves: Who paid for this riot? After all, an
>army of activists doesn't just descend on a city without
>some leadership--and some money to pay organizers, rent
>meeting places, print posters and so on. So let's follow the
>money.

sorry ma'am, i've followed the money as you said but we didn't get to the 
promised riots.  did i do anything wrong?!?!?!

>Indeed, the antiglobalization movement seems like corporate
>dystopia, a mirror image of the business world complete with
>trade associations, venture capitalists, management
>recruiting and marketing campaigns. Instead of selling
>T-shirts or toothpaste, the agitators are selling limits on
>cross-border trade.

oh yeah?  now that's interesting ma'am, maybe we should just buy some of 
those limits on cross-border trade you're talking about so we can fix 
globalization, guess we would have done that a while ago!!  too bad we're 
so stupid.  :( :( :( :( :( :( :(

>Start with holding companies. The Genoa Social Forum, a
>constellation of nonprofits that organized a "countersummit"
>to give the protesters a patina of intellectual
>respectability, served as a central coordinating hub. The
>Italian government provided $1.3 million to pay for
>conference facilities and translation services, Genoa Social
>Forum organizer Carlo Schenone told the press.

my GOD ma'am, an outrageous $1.3 MILLION!!!!!!!  that is, that is...  very 
little, come to think of it.

>While Attac largely focuses on lobbying
>for a tax on international capital transactions, it spends
>much of its time building coalitions with nonprofits focused
>on other issues--such as AIDS, the environment, human rights
>and organic farming--to combat globalization on all fronts.
>These opportunistic organizations help the movement look
>like a genuine grass-roots uprising and swell its numbers.
>This strategy is not unlike the alliances that firms
>sometimes form to crack new markets.

yes, but fortunately for us all ma'am, cracking new markets is a 
legitimate, ethical activity, much unlike combatting AIDS, helping the 
environment, being concerned about human rights or questioning agricultural 
policies...

>If reporters probed more deeply they might learn that a shared
>interest holds the protest industry together--a fear of a
>borderless, dynamic world. In that world, a shopper in Malmo
>or Manchester would be as free to buy sugar from Martinique
>as from the European Union.

now that's interesting you mention this ma'am, because it touches up on 
something i posted just yesterday!  i was saying (probably ineptly, of 
course!!!) that free trade propagandists liked to lure us into the idea of 
a "borderless, dynamic world" whereas we are really looking into 
"borderless, dynamic commerce & exploitation" with no opening of borders 
for people...  you know, people, what makes a world a world?  fortunately 
for us all, ma'am, we're all shoppers at heart, so i'll just personally 
import my sugar from martinique instead of getting it from the local 
shopping center now!  what a PRICELESS OPPORTUNITY, ma'am!!!!

>Businessmen are quick to object when their overseas rivals
>have a competitive advantage and can either relocate to
>enjoy lower costs or lobby government officials to reduce
>the cost of these supposedly "costless" edicts.

& to think that we thought the solution to that WAS more regulation around 
commercial borders!  i guess we're obviously all simpletons with no view of 
the Greater Picture, ma'am.  but thanks for enlightening us all!

>Perhaps the EU's truth-in-advertising laws
>should require the antiglobalization movement to change its
>name to the "protectionist caucus."

but ma'am, this would require that the antiglobalization movement have 
access to the airwaves at all, wouldn't it?  or maybe at least make the 
word into a trademark?  or find something to sell?  (oh yes, slap me, i 
forget these pesky limits to cross-border trade!!!!)

& since you mention susan george, ma'am, you may be interested in this 
quote from her:

"... have become targets for those which the media call "antiglobalization" 
activists, a label which is unanimously rejected by the concerned parties 
..."  (le monde diplomatique, august 2001, translation by me)

>If you are a European taxpayer or union member, chances are
>you are also a passive investor in the ventures that wrecked
>Goteborg, Genoa, Seattle, and the rest.

but that's okay ma'am, taxes pay for free trade propaganda like yours, 
too!!  & so does purchasing multinational products.  you shouldn't take it 
too hard on yourself.  :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

>Ms. Okonski is a research fellow at the International Policy
>Network in London. Tunku Varadarajan returns next week.

oh, too bad.  :( :( :( :( :( :(  did you run out of money to follow?!?!

~ david

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net