Las protestas no cambian el sistema por si solas

He comenzado a colaborar en Apuntes Globales, aquí va mi primera entrada:

Han pasado casi ocho meses desde ese 15 de mayo en que miles de personas comenzaron a salir a las calle a mostrar su indignación; a expresar su descontento con el sistema político, económico y social y a crear un nuevo movimiento de resistencia noviolenta.

Politólogos, periodistas y expertos se refieren al 15M como un movimiento social. En el ámbito del activismo y de la investigación para la paz, estos movimientos también son conocidos como movimientos de resistencia noviolenta.

Como todo movimiento, el 15M ha vivido diferentes fases: una primavera de acampadas, un verano de marchas, un otoño global y un invierno de manifestaciones, ocupaciones y campañas a favor de la reforma electoral. ¡He ahí la clave! Campañas que busquen un objetivo concreto.

En una entrevista reciente de Gene Sharp a Aljazeera, el experto en resistencia noviolenta comentaba que el movimiento Occupy WallStreet debía comenzar a buscar otras estrategias para propiciar el cambio: “Las protestas no cambian el sistema por si solo”.

Este politólogo estadounidense de 83 años lleva toda su vida estudiando las posibles estrategias que los movimientos de resistencia noviolencia pueden seguir para lograr cambios sociales, políticos y económicos. En su libro “ De la dictadura a la democracia” explica más de 192 estrategias para hacerlo. Este manual para hacer revoluciones no violentas ha sido traducido a 24 idiomas y se dice que ha sido utilizado en Siria, Egipto y Bahrain.

Colores, mensajes en ingles, desobediencia civil y compromiso por la acción noviolenta son algunas de las estrategias que Sharp destaca para lograr sus objetivos. Sin embargo, estas estrategias, aunque necesarias, por sí solas no satisfacen las condiciones suficientes para derrocar a un dictador o a un sistema.  El movimiento de l@s indignad@s, por ejemplo, ha utilizado algunas de ellas. Sin embargo, hay tantos frentes abiertos que definir una estrategia única y concreta en donde centrar las fuerzas parece complicado.

Desde el inicio del movimiento 15M, se nos ha exigido que nos definamos, que expliquemos qué queremos y hacia donde vamos. Como participante de éste, me apoyo en la frase “ Somos lent@s, porque vamos lejos”. Creo que lo que está haciendo el 15M actualmente es necesario: trabajo de base, creando redes, trabajando en concienciación, afianzando estrategias y grupos de trabajo y manteniendo convocatorias de protesta periódicas con gran número de asistentes.

Sin embargo, quizás por mi impaciencia, o mi miedo a que la indignación se convierta en frustración por la falta de cambios, o en conformismo si llegan reformas que acallen las protestas, considero necesario empezar a definir una estrategia a largo plazo, mantener el trabajo de base, pero escoger enemigos y objetivos concretos.

Bajo el lema de democracia real, se esconde en mi opinión el deseo de luchar contra el poder del sistema económico representado por las grandes estructuras económicas y financieras, es decir, empresas y bancos.  Las protestan surgen en un contexto de crisis creado por estos entes, que me atrevo a llamar instituciones políticas. Es por ello que mi apuesta es definirles a ellos como enemigos y atacar su poder apoyado con nuestros hábitos de consumo entre otros. Éste debe por tanto ser el objetivo clave del movimiento.

Puede que no diga nada nuevo; sin embargo, ante tantas injusticias sociales, políticas y económicas, veo que las fuerzas están otra vez dispersándose en pequeñas luchas que, aunque no dejan de ser importantes, desunen y nos hacen perder de vista a los que realmente ostentan el poder.

Se corre el riesgo de volver a la situación de hace un año en donde había muchos movimientos sociales que, aunque estaban en red, no unificaban objetivos o luchas. Un ejemplo de ello, son las dos convocatorias simultáneas para el próximo 18 de diciembre contra los Centro de Internamiento de extranjeros (CIES) y por la reforma electoral.

Creo, por tanto, que es necesario reunificar las fuerzas, elegir enemigos concretos dentro de este gran grupo que hemos definido como bancos y empresas y organizar campañas a nivel nacional. Una vez escogido al enemigo, hay que elegir el camino a seguir de forma conjunta.

Las teorías de Sharp abogan por definir objetivos concretos y únicos para crear las estrategias. Stephen Zunes, otro experto de estos movimientos, explica en un artículo reciente que mantener el apoyo de la mayoría de la población no es suficiente. “Se necesitan estrategias a largo plazo, una secuencia lógica de tácticas, y la habilidad para aprovechar las fortalezas y debilidades del oponente”.

Se debe diseñar una estrategia a largo plazo cuyo objetivo sea derrocar estos poderes fácticos como si de un dictador se tratase, elegir el camino a seguir y centrar y reunificar las fuerzas en ello. Hablarem

The Death of Osama bin Laden: It’s a pity…

By: Professor Richard Jackson
Secretary, British International Studies Association (BISA)

Editor, 
Critical Studies on Terrorism
Department of International Politics

Aberystwyth University, Penglais, Aberystwyth,

Ceredigion, Wales SY23 3FE, UK

The fact that Osama bin Laden, a man who fought his enemies with violence that frequently killed the innocent, is now dead could be a positive development…

But it’s a pity that the US chose to pursue a massive ‘war on terrorism’ as a response to bin Laden’s terrorist campaign, a war that has killed and injured far more innocent people than bin Laden’s initial attacks…

And it’s a pity that the Bush administration and the coalition of the willing linked Iraq to al Qaeda and bin Laden, and then invaded with the result of more than 600,000 dead…

And it’s a pity that so many people, including many innocents, were kidnapped, rendered and tortured for information on bin Laden’s whereabouts, and in the end, normal methods of intelligence-gathering found him anyway…

And it’s a pity that the US did not respond to the Taliban’s offer to hand over bin Laden to trial in Pakistan in 2001, and that they did not take the opportunity to strengthen international law and the ICC, so that bin Laden (and any other terrorist or war criminal) could be captured, tried and imprisoned at the Hague. A strong international legal system guaranteed by the US would have been far better than the disastrous decade of war on terrorism than we have had instead…

And it’s a pity that so many are celebrating using violent means to fight a violent group, and that it will most likely lead to a continuing, maybe even intensifying, cycle of violence. It’s a pity that so few recognize that violence rarely leads to any long-term solutions, but instead, most often creates ever more violence and suffering in the long run…

And it’s a pity that some think we should just celebrate his death without thinking about the context in which it occurred, the history of suffering he and his enemies engendered, the inherent moral and strategic problems with the way it was done, and the likely future consequences for so many…

And it’s a pity that the US and other Western states view ‘justice’ as killing a man extra-judicially and then disappearing his body in the sea. This seems like a surrender of our own values and principles, and it helps to create a world in which law and justice is ever weaker…

And it’s a pity that targeted killing is now a core tactic of counter-terrorism, especially when the Israeli experience clearly demonstrates that it does not work to reduce terrorism, kills many innocent bystanders, and leads to more recruits for the terrorist groups…

And it’s a pity that bin Laden came to be seen as the personalization of evil, the mastermind who could be blamed for causing most of the world’s terrorism, and who therefore needed to be eradicated at all costs. Solely focusing on one man meant that the history and context of real political grievances which lead to bin Laden’s rise was silenced and erased; terrorism was about one evil guy, not decades of US foreign policy, entrenched grievances, structures of oppression and daily physical, structural and cultural violence. Now he’s gone, I wonder who will take his place as the next personification of evil…

And it’s a pity that it happened so late that it will have no positive effect at all on terrorism or counter-terrorism, or on bin Laden’s mythical status as the man who stood up to the Western world for more than a decade…

And it’s a pity that they dumped his body in the sea, which will most likely add to his mythical status. It won’t surprise me if a lot of his supporters refuse to believe he is really dead. They may also be further angered that his corpse was desecrated by not being given a proper burial…

And it’s a pity that killing him in this way now makes him even more of a martyr to his followers, and a potent symbol of resistance. It would have been better to de-mythologise him and exorcise his power by putting him on trial and showing him in prison – an ordinary man growing old, rather than some kind of super-terrorist who eluded the world’s greatest superpower for years…

And it’s a pity that all the resources and efforts put into killing bin Laden over ten years was not instead put into strengthening international law, dealing with political grievances, supporting peace constituencies, resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, genuinely promoting political participation and democracy, and reconsidering oppressive and unjust foreign policies which provoke violent resistance…

And it’s a pity that so many Americans are on the streets celebrating and so many political leaders are crowing about it as a major victory. It will be a further humiliation for some in the Middle East, and they may rightly feel that the celebrations contain no acknowledgement of the suffering they have experienced from US invasion, counter-terrorism operations, drone attacks, rendition, etc. I wonder how we would react to celebrations in Iraq at the news of Bush’s death…

And it’s a pity that no one is talking about the other three people killed in the operation, one of whom was bin Laden’s son and another an unknown woman. They may turn out to be innocent people, more ‘collateral damage’ in our war on terror. It illustrates something about our real values that their lives are so unimportant that they won’t be discussed or mourned in all the euphoria over killing bin Laden, the evil mastermind. And it’s a pity that Obama said ‘no Americans were harmed’ in the operation, as if American lives are more valuable than others. This way of ordering the world into worthy and unworthy victims, people to be mourned and people to be erased, is what keeps the cycle of violence ever turning…

And it’s a pity that it will not lead to the end of the war on terror, the culture of fear, and all the intrusions into daily life of militarized forms of counter-terrorism. It’s a pity that in response to bin Laden’s initial attacks, we irrevocably changed our way of life and undermined our own values, and that political leaders are already saying that his death changes none of these things but that we will have to (endlessly) continue to be vigilant in the fight against terrorism…

It’s a pity that this event will do nothing to end the sheer stupidity and shameful waste of ten years of war and violence.

Professor Richard Jackson

Penglais, Aberystwyth,

Editor, Critical Studies on Terrorism Department of International Politics

http://richardjacksonterrorismblog.wordpress.com/

CARTEL

Juventud SIN futuro

Manifiesto: Juventud SIN futuro

Nosotras y nosotros, la juventud sin futuro, nos dirigimos a la opinión pública para mostrar nuestro desacuerdo con la política de recortes sociales del Gobierno, y la consecuencia más grave y con mayor impacto en el futuro que estas medidas representan: la juventud más preparada de nuestra historia vivirá peor que sus padres. La agresión contra el colectivo juvenil en un escenario de crisis capitalista, con una tasa de paro juvenil del 40%, la más alta de la UE, se materializa principalmente en tres medidas: o La Reforma laboral, que aumenta la temporalidad de nuestros contratos, la flexibilidad laboral y supone la desaparición de la negociación colectiva, convirtiéndonos en trabajadores precarios/as de por vida o La Reforma del sistema de pensiones, que retrasa la edad de jubilación y reduce la cuantía de nuestras futuras pensiones y nos dificulta aún más encontrar un trabajo digno. Todo ello nos plantea un horizonte sin futuro o La mercantilización de la Educación pública, que apuesta por la rentabilidad privada, y no por la formación y el conocimiento. Una universidad de élite para una minoría y fábrica de precarios para una mayoría, con medidas que se concretan en una nueva selectividad que pone trabas al acceso a la universidad y en la degradación de la formación profesional. Somos las y los jóvenes a quienes las élites económicas y las políticas de nuestros gobiernos nos quieren convertir en la generación sin formación ni trabajo ni pensión digna. Aquellos que, además, no tendremos casa en nuestra vida, desde que los especuladores hicieron del derecho a la vivienda un negocio con el que enriquecerse; un modelo de crecimiento económico que ha fracasado y ha generado esta crisis. Hemos tomado conciencia de que las medidas de salida a la crisis económica se han realizado a través de una constante socialización de las pérdidas. Frente a la salida de la crisis por la derecha, nosotras y nosotros, la generación precaria, señalamos a los culpables y reivindicamos ser escuchados. Queremos recuperar nuestra capacidad para ser actores de un motor de cambio, combatiendo un país de precariedad, desempleo y privatización de nuestra educación. Somos además conscientes de que la movilización y la lucha tienen sentido, pero sobre todo de que son necesarias. Italia, Francia, Grecia o Islandia nos enseñan que la movilización es indispensable. El mundo árabe nos demuestra que la victoria es posible. Por eso llamamos a un ciclo de movilizaciones que recuperen la voz de la juventud en la calle, y lo hacemos extensivo a la sociedad civil. Nosotras no nos fiamos, sabemos que esto sólo lo solucionamos sin los que causaron esta crisis. Instamos a emprender la movilización colectiva, a reivindicar nuestro derecho a disentir, a reconstruir nuestro futuro. Los abajo firmantes, estudiantes y miembros de la comunidad educativa, jóvenes trabajadoras y jóvenes trabajadores, movimientos sociales, profesionales de la ciencia, la técnica; mundo de la cultura y de las artes dan respaldo con su firma a este llamamiento a la movilización. «Nos habéis quitado demasiado, ahora lo queremos todo»


http://www.juventudsinfuturo.net/

191635_10150119981499487_46660034486_6093115_3954594_o

NO A LA GUERRA

DECÁLOGO CONTRA LA GUERRA

—————————————-

1.º Todas las guerras son iguales: la prueba palpable del fracaso de la clase política.

2.º Jamás se debe confiar en una noticia relacionada con la guerra.

3.º Toda apología de la guerra es un crimen.

4.º Fabricar, vender o almacenar armas es un crimen y una peligrosa insensatez.

5.º Todo grupo de personas armadas inspira terror, nunca respeto, honor o valentía.

6.º Toda utilización de la violencia con fines políticos es terrorismo.

7.º Iniciar o mantener una guerra para satisfacer objetivos económicos es delincuencia común a gran escala.

8.º Los asuntos de la Cosa Pública deben permanecer alejados de todo credo religioso.

9.º Toda parte en conflicto está obligada a dialogar hasta conseguir la Paz.

10.º Siempre hay alternativas mejores a iniciar o mantener una guerra.

NUESTRA POSICIÓN SOBRE LA SITUACIÓN EN LIBIA
—————————————————————-

1.º Estamos de acuerdo en que la Comunidad Internacional debe intervenir.

2.º Manifestamos que esta intervención no debe consistir en una guerra.

3.º Creemos que existen otras formas de arrestar o neutralizar a un dictador.

4.º Cualquier opción, incluso las ‘no perfectas’, será mejor que una guerra.

5.º Las guerras apenas afectan a los tiranos, pero sí a la población civil.

6.º Nos preguntamos por qué no se detuvo y juzgó a Gadafi cuando se pudo.

7.º Nos preguntamos quiénes vendieron armas al régimen de Muammar al-Gaddafi durante todos estos años, y por qué ignoraron el crimen que implica armar a dictadores terroristas.

8.º Nos preguntamos por qué los motivos para actuar contra Muammar al-Gaddafi (Libia), siendo idénticos, no justifican actuar de igual modo contra Teodoro Obiang Gnema (Guinea Ecuatorial), Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahayan (Emiratos Árabes Unidos), Kim Jong-il (Korea del Norte), Abdalá bin Abdelaziz (Arabia Saudí), Ali Abdullah Saleh (Yemen), Hamad ibn Isa Al Khalifah (Baréin) o Sidi Mohammed ben Hassan ben Mohammed ben Youssef Alaoui (Marruecos).

9.º Muammar al-Gaddafi debe ser puesto a disposición del Tribunal Penal Internacional, pero la detención de un presunto criminal, por sí sola, no puede valer de pretexto para emprender, incorporarse o alentar una guerra.

10.º No a la guerra.

___
Firmado: el equipo de administración de la página de la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos. En la ciudad de Bilbao, el día 20 de marzo de 2011.

“Living Dolls. The return of sexism”

After more than two hundred years of feminist struggles, Natasha Walter sets out a dilemma between the hypersexual society encouraged within western societies and the influence scientific studies have in using genetic arguments to create sex and gender stereotypes. She divides the book into two sections: “The new sexism”, in which she describes how women are unconsciously forced to value themselves only from a sexy physical appearance; and “the new determinism” in which she analyzes many “scientific” studies about the genes difference between the sexes, how media has covered these supposed differences and their influences on creating stereotypes.

Walter also includes the debate regarding sex work focusing on prostitution, striptease, top-less modeling and lap dancing in the context of freedom of women’s “choice”. Walter’s main conclusion after interviewing prostitutes, strippers and young women aiming to be models, is that most of them see these careers as ways of empowerment as well as feeling self-confident, important and valued in society. However, when these women started sharing their feelings, Walter describes that some of them felt undervalued, bad treated and humiliated. Moreover she interviews young women who talk about the way they enjoy their sexual life and she talk about the lack of sensibility for love and tenderness this women have in their sexual life. Walter then focuses on childhood, and she connects self-confidence, empowerment and obtaining a respected social position with previous phases of a women life. Walter remarks, for example, on the important influence new dolls have on girls. She points out how Disney’s princesses have become sexier from Snow-white to Jasmine, and also how the Bratz dolls model for girls how important it is to be fashionable and sexy. Girls are taught, Walter says, that in order to succeed as a free girl and woman in society and not be drop out they need to work on their bodies and become fake dolls. She points out the different education society is giving to girls than it does for boys, and she includes how not only schools have an impact, but also families, television, magazines and the toy industry which perpetuates different roles for women and men in society. Walter criticizes how this new hypersexual culture takes the feminist discourse of empowerment and sexual freedom and puts it within a culture not defined by them. She puts forth the idea that instead empowerment and sexual freedom for women is created through a male “gaze” and through male desire.

After analyzing many scientific studies Walter argues that most of the studies that defend these genetic differences between women and men can not be considered valid as in many cases they base their arguments on issues that can be easily considered a matter of socialization. She also criticizes the articles published by many media sources as defending those arguments because they rarely include multiple arguments or other studies that also exist, which deny the genetic argument. She also stresses that many times mainstream media includes studies with slight scientific and empirical support. She calls this “The new determinism” where the public opinion pressed the women to obey and fulfilled these stereotypes and then uses the result to “prove” genetic differences. Walter claims the silencing of the other studies that support no genetic influence in differences of behavior between women and men has led to a popularity of the “determinism” ideology.  What is more surprising about her discourse in this book is that she regrets her arguments in her 1998 book “ The New Feminism” where she states that feminist should focus on political goals rather than personal empowerment. “Living dolls” is an excellent book to shed light on debates about current images of women. However, it lacks analysis on the consequences this “image” culture has on the political and intellectual position of women as well as the indirect and structural violence this culture encourages.  She includes an important quote from Simone de Beauvoir  “One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman”. However, she forgets another important feminist quote that cannot be forgotten “ The personal is political”. This is basic in another way to understand how the hypersexual culture invades and manipulates women’s everyday lives aspirations and even the world history that continues evaluating women for their physical appearance and not for their intellectual, political and scientific contribution to society. The hypersexual society Walter describes is motivating women to stay away from important affairs. As stated in the title of her book (but does not get developed completely inside) this is a new way of enforcing sexism that not always women appreciate. In this point, looking at this conflict as a global affair and not only western, I found it important to think about how western women keep on criticizing the oppression Muslim women have without realizing our own oppression and how they tend to compare freedom between cultures. However, we cannot obviated that this hypersexual culture is not only affecting western countries, but also others that in order to fulfill western expectations see it as the path to follow in order to become a “developed” country.

Walter’s book can be seen as an interesting way to become aware of the patriarchal system we live on. However, Walter hardly points out the contemporary feminist arguments and debates about issues concerning fashion and sexuality, nor the perspectives of sex worker’s rights group who would argue against her generalizations about them, or about women who enjoy the “hypersexual” way of life. Although she gets the reader to question the scientific support on the gene differences, she does not touch on issues of gender as a way classifying the society in two categories, excluding others such as transsexuals or transgendered people who challenge the inadequacy of dualistic gender systems. These new ideas should be a matter of discussion in her book as they involve a struggle against the sexual conditioning she talks about.

“Living dolls” is an interesting book about the new society we are living and takes out interesting points that must be debate and studied in other to find the path for peace, justice and equality.