Download workshop 13 - Alliance for a Responsible, Plural and United World

WORKSHOP 13
ECONOMIC POLITICS, IDEOLOGIES AND GEOCULTURAL DIMENSION
Document post-Findhorn
This proposal document is the synthesis of the work of the Economic Politics, Ideologies
and Geo-cultural Dimension Workshop, which is a result of the participation of 25 people,
brought together thanks to the Electric Forum ecopol.socioeco.org, and the meeting that
took place in Rio de Janeiro between the 11th and the 13th of May 2001; it incorporates the
debates that happened during the Assembly of the Socio-Economy of Solidarity Workshop,
which took place at Findhorn between the 9th and the 16th June 2001
This document was edited by Jaerson Lucas Bezerra1
CONTENTS ..................................................Page
1. Observations and Diagnosis.............................................1
2. Visions and New Model......................................6
3. Initiatives and Innovations...............................................8
4. Proposals.....................................................................11
5. Strategies and Agents.........................................................14
References/Bibliography...............................................
1. Observations and Diagnosis
Without doubt, we are in the process of reaching a new phase of questioning the principles that
have directed economic policy and systems of government these last few years. The neo-liberal
doctrine of the last couple of decades is in the process of becoming spent, even if the direction of
official economic policy remains unchanged. The neo-liberal box of tricks has nothing left to
offer.
The harmful results are very obvious and deserve some consideration anyway. The consequences
have been disastrous and the mistakes can no longer be justified as either transitory or inevitable.
Social and economic indicators, in different degrees for rich or poor countries, have shown an
The contents of this document brings together the contents of the following documents: Preliminary text for
Comments and Proposals; Initial Text; Summary of Communication and Debate from the meeting in Rio de Janeiro;
Synthesis Projects from the individual workshops within the Socio-Economy of Solidarity Workshop; a Socio-Economy
of Solidarity and the Nation State; Economy of Solidarity and Peace in Columbia; Ideology, Domination and Economic
Policy; Economic Growth and Social Politics; About the Single Thought; Evangelical Churches in the Battle against
Poverty; Latin American Dynamism in the Economy of Solidarity; Local Public Policies as Forms of Promotion for the
Development of Popular Organisations, a Concrete Alternative to Exclusive Globalisation, Social Economy of
Solidarity; Post Modern Economic Policy and the Void in Economy
1
2
increase in unemployment, exclusion, impoverishment, a reduction in productivity and an ever
increasing distance between the economies of the peripheral nations and those in the centre.
Years of neo-liberalism have bequeathed problems that simply can not be solved in the short
term, even by appealing to classical formulas such as inflation and reduced growth. These have
already been put into practice as recessive measures, which could persist, forming what is known
as depression and economic crisis.
In fact, we do not know if we are living through a new period in history, but it is clear that
humanity is going through a period of great uncertainty. The admirable post-modern new world
has been put off, with some uncertainty, to the future. One thing is sure: new solutions have to be
found enabling us to get out of the crisis; they should include Human Rights as well as values and
experiences that up to now have been considered as alternative.
The basic question, as far as economic policy being an integral part of economic science is
concerned, and the way in which they are presently developing, consists of knowing just at which
point we are sure that we are on the threshold of a new model. These policies, responsible for
recessions, are maintained in a disastrous fashion. Models incorporate new ideas. But there is
little evidence that, in the present moment of disintegration, governments and economic systems
are in the process of re-orientating their policies, despite appearances, or in reformulating the
whole of their commitments, up to now answerable for their practices. The tangible evidence of
the crisis exists, but no practical changes are being made to counteract the present situation. In all
events not at government level.
Economic policies applied in the neo-liberal mould by national governments and maintained
despite their results, have abandoned the objectives that aim at stimulating productivity and full
employment; they are content to reduce internal demand under the banner of fighting inflation
and reducing balance of trade deficits.
These policies, described as inevitable in official dispatches, and applied in reply to external
demands, have been deliberately repressive, especially when looking for a reduction in salaries,
the money in circulation and fiscal and budgetary balance. Subsequently abandoning the
teachings of the Ford doctrine, according to which the increase in benefits comes above all from
the increase in the volume of production, large companies are looking for financial profits by
taking over competitive companies and markets.
In the present situation of crisis, it is the State’s role at the heart of the economy, or, in other
words the profile of economic policy, that returns to the centre of the debate. Since, after all, it is
these that can synthesize in the best possible way the main expressions of the neo-liberal system.
It is through these that the salvaging and updating of liberal principles was put into practice,
3
which seems to have been superseded, again, by a new cycle of accumulation and capitalist
economy.
The relationships between The State and the economy, or more precisely between public and
private, is achieved through the economic policies of the State which has, at its disposal, different
instruments, economic, social or political, for achieving these objectives. In every case, all these
instruments depend directly or indirectly on economic policy, as much on budgetary, monetary
and fiscal policies of foreign trade, exchange, economic sectors, revenue as salaries and
regulation.
Debates about the handling of economic policy, from the view point of reductionism, sets on one
side the liberals, who favour minimum State intervention; and on the other side the Keynesians,
who favour a more direct and permanent State intervention.
According to the latter, economic policy should take the form of a number of government
measures aimed at acting on and influencing the mechanisms of production, distribution and
consumption. Although addressed at the economy, the measures conform to political and social
criteria, in the extent that they determine, for example, which sectors of society will benefit from
the different economic measures taken by the State. Economic policy also depends on the level of
pressure group activity – political parties, social movements, unions, class associations and
movements of public opinion. The relationships established between the State and Society have a
direct bearing on the destiny of economic policy.
According to the liberals, or neo-liberals, in the current sense of the term, economic policies are
only instruments for the rebuilding the economic basis of financial capital, which considers the
strength of salaried workers and their unions, the level of Welfare State expenditure and taxation
on revenue and capital circulation as intolerable. The model known as Anglo-Saxon, terminology
of neo-liberal times, coincided with the arrival in power of Margaret Thatcher and Ronal Reagan,
in England and The USA respectively. Here, the order of the day has been to make sure that the
State draws back from the economic sphere and leaves the market to operate freely.
The model has been exported throughout the world, breaking cultural, institutional and economic
barriers and scorning the limits of national sovereignty. Globalisation, above all financial, has
been driven by an availability of money in a world that grows little and distributes even less,
creates unemployment for many and flirts with more and more sophisticated forms of social
exclusion and technological inequality.
4
However it is good to remember that the effects of neo-liberal policies, set into practice through
economic policies, are not the same for all parties. The “end of the State” and national
economies, that many support, are assertions that lack a basis in reality. The control of the world
economy is strongly linked to dominant national economies, or the existing and functioning
states. And it is them that determine the destiny of the capitalist economy and dictate the rules
that effect the economies of the peripheral nations.
In practical terms, especially if we analyse the results of only two decades, neo-liberal policy has
established a sort of neo-colonial economy, by strengthening a system of relationships and an
increase in dependence between peripheries and metropolis. The way that the economy and
society have been affected, especially in the case of the peripheral nations, has no equivalent in
the central nations.
The basis of the close relations between the rich countries, trans-national companies and
international financial institutions is association and the representation of common interests, but
the phenomenon is not the same when it’s a matter of the same relationships with poor countries.
In the first case the results are benefits and in the second case, almost inevitably, damage and
loss. Any way, this observation does not rule out discussion about mechanisms responsible for
the submission of, and absence of negotiating power in, emerging nations during decisions and
accords signed with these institutions
Economic policies have played a fundamental role during the establishment of the neo-liberal
model. For poor nations – suffering from debt, with high levels of inflation and lacking new
external investment – the neo-liberal recipe book makes sure to orient, the right word is demand,
measures such as the increasing of interest levels, the reduction of public spending, and, as a
result, economic recession. The results couldn’t be worse: transfer to the market of strategic
sectors put together by the sacrifice of the whole of society at considerable debt, as well as the
breaking up of public policies that still haven’t reached the status of what we know as the
Welfare State.
The shocks imposed on national economies had clear objectives: possibility of new investments
and guaranteed settlement of the foreign debt. This orthodoxy had results: if the foreign debt was
not paid, despite the enormous volume of resources transferred to the rich nations in guise of
interest payments and other debt services, public policies were dismantled, with, in addition, a
reduction of productivity.
Ideological domination will result from the persuasive force and efficiency with which the neoliberal orientation is revealed by multilateral development agencies. Integrated into the economic
policies of rich and poor nations, neo-liberal proposals, more conservative than liberal, strive for
market supremacy over the State, and the individual over the collective. The modern, flexible and
5
efficient side, which characterises the whole of liberal thinking, claims to surpass the political
mechanisms of the democratic system, seen in a negative light along with nationalists,
corporatists and technocrats. The theses of the Minimum State, the dismantling of the Welfare
State and the defence of unrestricted privatisation stems from here.
Having observed the disastrous results of neo-liberal policy, as well as governments resistance to
change and the constant dependency on foreign capital and investment, new proposals aimed at
redirecting economic policy must once again deal with a further challenge: transforming
economic policy into public policy.
This is because the lack of public participation in economic policy, either direct or through
political representation, dates further back than the recent period of neo-liberal policy. Keynesian
policy itself, the results of which are translated into social profits, was never thought of as being
in accord with the aspirations of society.
State intervention within the economy, based on Keynesian theory, did not occur in a democratic
way. For the central nations it was a matter of proving, against a background of devastation
caused by global conflict, particularly the last two World Wars and the Great depression of 1929,
that capitalism could be saved, on condition that governments knew how to best use their
resources; for maintaining full employment, through loans, and financing public works.
Fluctuations of economic activity, through the cycles inherent to the functioning of the capitalist
system, was further protected with the possibility that the level of economic activity was
influenced or determined by central governments through monetary and fiscal policy. Politics of
full employment and public work financing should be understood only as a type of « social
facade » for intervention by the state.
Distribution of the profits of productivity among wage earners, as well as the support for the
expenditure relating to the Welfare State dates from this period, at least as far as the central
nations are concerned. As for the peripheral economies this welfare was never consolidated. And
this despite the fact that public policies – especially ones with a relationship with the capitallabour partnership – had been pursued by populist governments and by nationalist ideologies.
The doctrine of national economy implies the nationalisation of decisions relating to economic
policy. Therefore, economic nationalism integrates the idea and the decision to create a national
capitalism. Public policies aim to reinforce national capital and only to benefit the more
developed social classes in large urban centres. Social rights, without being universal, are linked
to the political conveniences of governments. Social exclusion and the absence of citizenship are
not recent phenomena: neo-liberal policy is responsible for its accentuation and more and more
for holding up its resolution.
6
Since their beginning economic and public policy has been linked to the interests of capital
development and state intervention. Social policy has been earmarked for the excluded.
The latter have not even been developed within this logic of interests. Conceived, at the
beginning as essentially reformist and pragmatic, without attempting to broaden the
understanding of the relationships between economy and social, social policy has always been
based on focussed and inconsistent interventions.
Even if the definition of government is normally associated with the idea of the state, that doesn’t
mean that the interests of the former are unable to align themselves alongside other logics that
impede the principle of representation. The delegation of power from the people to government,
through the voting system, in order that they exercise mandates satisfying the needs of society,
becomes a critical point in the functioning of western democracies.
And if the economic crisis isn’t enough, we can add that of political representation. The neoliberal system doesn’t only affect the economy. With the worsening of the social situation and the
discrediting of the ruling classes, we ask ourselves at what point democratic regimes can
consolidate, when a large part of the population doesn’t have the status of citizen. The main
question is: up to what point can genuine democracy progress and consolidate within a neoliberal economy ?
A political crisis threatens attempts to strengthen democracy – the widespread lack of credibility
and corruption among representatives of executive, legislative and judicial power -, characterised
by an absence of collective initiatives capable of motivating and mobilising the people. The
number of abstentions and spoiled ballots in the countries where voting is obligatory is
systematic of the political crisis.
The mistrust shown towards representative democracy and to the legal order guaranteed by the
constitutional state is not only limited to the peripheral nations. New social strata, arising from
the inequality of access to consumer goods and services, based on criteria of class, race and
gender, are the outward expressions of a new classification system which has established
different categories of people, each occupying their respective place in society. The traditional
political institutions have also failed to develop projects capable of integrating and expressing the
needs and demands of society.
Finally, it is the limits and discrepancies inherent to the functioning of representative democracy
themselves, which are at stake. The only solution consists of guaranteeing for the public a culture
of direct and permanent democratic participation, and for the ruling classes a non-centralised and
non-authoritarian democratic culture, which could then strengthen the way representation works.
7
The scope and nature of economic policies – representing the interests of State, and Society, and
through the realisation of all the actions that attempt to change the economic situation – make
them the ideal forum for the construction of a new reality. These policies must determine the
debate that continues to limit economic systems only – neo- liberal or state interventionist,
according to the trends ; its duty is to establish them now as responsible and competent for
society. This is the only method capable of changing economic policies into truly public policies.
2. Visions and New Models.
Even taking into account that it is difficult to say precisely in which time we are living, the
passage from modernity to post modernity has been extremely favourable to the research and
examination of possible models that seem necessary during crisis situations.
Modernity as a European phenomenon has been responsible for modern man’s destruction of
autonomy, and of his will to dominate the world technologically. Modernity has culminated in
the ideals of western illuminist humanism, based on progress stemming from optimism related to
domination and technological progress..
But then again, the concept of western modernity includes other interpretations. “ the fact that
modernisation in the west was the first and predominated for three centuries in Europe, and then
the United States, has lead commentators in these countries to consider their modernisation as
modernity in general, as if the break with the past and the establishment of the capitalist elite
were essential and necessary conditions for the formation of a modern society” (Touraine, 1994:
35).
The expression, “single thought”, which so precisely defines neo-liberal ideology, already has a
precedent in illuminist thinking. “Modernity has for a long time been defined by what it
destroyed, like a constant questioning of ideas and forms of social organisation, like the role of
the avant-garde in art. Always, the longer the movement of modernity stretches the more it works
away at cultures and societies that are incapable of adapting, putting up with them instead of
using them.” (Touraine, 1994: 334). The assumptions necessary at the birth of a new form of
organisation, the Modern State, are contemporaries of European Modernity and have the same
foundations. The single authority, its own territoriality, its exercise through a qualified body of
technical help are the demands of security and efficiency for its formation. The Economic State
dates from the beginning of the 19th century with the constitution of financial capital. Politics has
never since been separated from market mechanisms.
8
The new model will be constituted in such a way that the State intervenes directly, not only by means
of protectionists measures in relation to monopolistic capital. But also through monetary action from
Central Banks, and the creation of an infra-structure favourable to the analysis and criticism of the
State’s economic policy. In other words, this change implies the foundation of organised capitalist
expression.
Since its beginning, the goal of economic policy has been to clarify the directions that governments
should follow, and the eventual interventions that they should undertake in order to increase the
wealth of their respective nations. Policies of structural adjustment, dictated by international credit
organisations, set up several years ago, have tried for a long time to re-orientate the objectives of
economic policy, by shifting national interests and by forcing nations in debt to take recessive
measures. During the neo-liberal reign, the wrong questions have dominated the official political
scene, among them the need for State Reform, under the pretext of excessive functions, centralised
bureaucratic authority and the irrationalities of expenditure.
Interpreted as synonymous with modernisation and rationality, whilst always remaining part of the
neo-liberal prescription imposed on the nations in debt, decentralisation has been proposed as the
impetus for reducing bureaucracy, increasing flexibility and « strengthening » public participation.
Without any discussion, this point of view has been absorbed by the peripheral nations, which
currently corresponds with the breakdown and reversal of labour victories and the cut back of
resources within public policy making.
The intentions are flattering : community organisations and localities are granted power and ability as
dignified service providers with costs and efficiency well below the accepted level of central
government provision. Decentralisation conceived in this manner is imbued with an instrumentalist
vision, where the organisations of civil society and localities, or the municipalities, are seen as
something « outside of the State » or « beneath the State », thus being able to include activities
previously under the responsibility of central government, which has now completely abandoned
them. Manipulating community participation and the potentials of localities in a utilitarian way is
part and parcel of neo-liberal ideology.
Community participation in public policy making and their municipalization are phenomena that
create the possibility of democratic relationships between the State and society, on the condition that
they lie within the scope of other conditions, like the equitable distribution of budgetary resources
between government spheres, the ability of local sectors to absorb these functions, and, above all, the
active participation of the community in decision making and administration.
An other type of decentralisation, with the same principles, relates to the transfer of State businesses
to the market economy, or privatisation in the limited sense. This form of decentralisation is always
advocated on the basis of gross simplifications or comparative advantages, by attributing rationality
to the private sector, and inefficiency to the public sector. Policies have been the target of critics that
denounce the precariousness of the method of functioning, excessive expenditure, and an imbalance
between the use of resources and the benefits that flow from them.
9
Programmes of State de-nationalisation, both of businesses and other sectors formerly under state
control, dictated by the demands of structural adjustments, have striven to lean on these
simplifications in order to promote privatisation programmes.
Arguments about rationality and efficiency are always coupled to the concept of decentralisation; it is
a matter of trying to avoid the purges and conflicts inherent in the process of privatisation. Thus,
they are seen as a form of conservative modernisation, where the technocratic and administrative
aspects are always trying to empty the political arena. On the other hand, the processes of
privatisation finish by transforming essential goods and services into merchandise, and their value is
assigned a price, preventing access for those who can’t afford to pay. The privatisation of essential
goods and services also brings about a reduction of the public sector, reducing the possibilities of
participation in the relationships between the State and society.
Reforming the State is one of the most important tasks, but the reform that we are suggesting here is
different: that of democratisation. Faced with a context shaped by scepticism towards the methods
of direct democracy, republican powers distanced from the aspirations of society and the
preponderant reductionism of a single dominant thinking, civil society has taken a different route. By
assuming forms of representation different to traditional political representation, the public sector
has grown, enriched society and created other ways to managing conflicts.
If these conflicts haven’t found room to show themselves at the heart of the State, it is because the
latter has never been so distant from society as it is today, by insisting on the invalidation of
differences, ignoring situations of conflict, and, finally, in the invalidation of the nation. Salvaging the
role of the democratic state in order to redress the crisis, starting from the dynamic of new relations
between the State and Society is the big challenge faced today. The democratisation of the State that
we are recommending must not be confused with the neo-liberal proposal for State reform, which is
loaded with ambiguities and vested interests.
Truly participatory actions of a democratic nature are those that, whatever their form, both represent
and include the demands of society, in the attempt to change governmental agendas. In this sense,
the goal of participation includes the democratisation of administration and the division of power in
political decision making.
When all is said and done, although it is recognised as formal democracy, participation is the exercise
of citizenship as an important element in the break with State authority, and the traditional ways of
conducting politics and administrating public resources. The goal of democratic participation is to
build alternative forms of power, which, by acting outside of constitutional boundaries, has the
tendency to change them.
The inclusion of proposals from civil society during the definition of economic policy, and the
management of public policy through the creation of councils and other forms of participation, legal
or not, represents an important step towards the democratisation of the State in the attempt to go
beyond the traditional ways and interests with which States have introduced their policies. The truly
public nature of these policies would be re-established through this sort of participation.
10
The experimental democratic management taking place today in the localities of several nations,
reflects the effort of progressive administrations and organised civil society ; they have benefited
from the broader conditions of governing that they posses, by taking over the void left by the
ineffective performance of central governments.
Therefore, points of view and models could be included as searching for the new, the transforming
will of being involved and giving dignity to the meaning of life. With these objectives, it isn’t only
neo-liberal policy that we wish to replace, or Keynesian principles that we want to salvage from state
intervention and direction : we wish to re-invent, through public economic policy, the State and
citizenship in the full meaning of the word, where it is the rights of citizens that dictate the duties of
the State, remembering that the struggle for citizenship, for winning rights, is an indispensable
condition for the construction of democratic society.
3. Initiatives and Innovations
The initiatives and innovations at the heart of economic policy relate to new mechanisms of control
and openness, in the area of the established relationships between the State and society. Some
actions can already be glimpsed and it is possible to quote some of them. The first concerns
participatory budgets, already in operation particularly at local and regional level. This practice
demands progressive governments, community structures at the heart of the population and, finally,
the presence of a legislature aware of its functions, charged with approving budgetary proposals in
debate and authorised by the executive power and society.
The municipality, the closest sphere to the citizen, is the most apt for answering social demands with
the most appropriate solutions, which allows the mobilisation and involvement of communities to
introduce policies that directly effect their everyday life. Localities have shown that they are areas of
potential, not only for the formation of sectorial councils of public policy, but also a whole range of
alternative production systems and experiments, motivated by the idea of an economy of solidarity.
One of the present challenges is the diffusion of these practices into other local areas and other
political spheres.
In order that these initiatives, both exemplary and worthy of mention, attain a wider diffusion they
demand an overhaul of the political cadres of executive and legislative power. This overhaul is
already a reality at local level. Mayors, and other municipal authorities, recognising the satisfactions
and demands of society, are prepared to share power with it, and win ground in local government
elections.
11
The most successful local initiatives have taken place in the areas where communities are organised
in municipal regions, in order to discuss the demands that, for them, are community priorities and
which will be carried out through the municipal budget. This political instrument of direct
participation doesn’t only entail community organisation as the consolidation of citizenship. The
success of these experiments coincides, in general, with the arrival in power of progressive
administrations and political parties that identify with democratic ideals. The economy of solidarity,
strengthens worker’s organisation by encouraging the tightening of the links of solidarity and social
life in the circuits of production and consumption.
The practices of participatory budgeting, which mainly consists of participation in the decisions
taken that affect resource allocation, must stretch out to other situations and other goals. Society’s
participation must not stop at coherent selection and allocation of the percentage of resources in
sectional public areas and policy. Other administrative and fiscal mechanisms must be set in practice
so that the budgetary proposals already voted are definitely applied following decisions taken during
debate. We are referring here to the period of budgetary execution.
It still often happens that resources, even those approved in the budget and with a pre-fixed destiny,
get diverted to other ends. Several times during the approval of the budget, resources that are already
committed are redirected by centralised and authoritarian practices, on the part of representatives of
executive power. To avoid such an abuse of power, we highlight the need for participation
throughout the fiscal procedure.
Budgetary resources come, on the whole, from the transfer and collection of taxation; they are
practically all managed in the form of charges and taxes. In this sense, the participation of civil
society must stretch out to influence the fiscal policy that creates the resources. The fundamental
question is the participation in decisions relating to the origin, total, form of collection and source of
the resources. Therefore, the democratisation of fiscal policy must be carried out both on the side of
receipts and of expenses. This is the fundamental step necessary for other economic policies to
assume their truly public nature, since fiscal policy is practically always linked to all the other policies.
The reformulation of tributary policy at all levels of government, and not only in local authorities, is
an urgent task, since fiscal policy has a direct influence on economic and public policy, linked directly
to the population’s welfare. We add to this work the Observations of the Synthesis Project from the
Fiscal Policy Workshop, which points out the need for a wide-ranging and varied tributary base,
which essentially notes capital return, wealth and speculative financial transactions. The proposed
new system must be progressive and differentiate capital and wealth from goods and services
destined for consumption by the poorest classes.
The disinterest in voting is the consequence of a lack of credibility among political parties and a lack
of proposals coherent with reality. The rebuilding of the cadres of political representation, with
parties and candidates identifying with Human Rights and citizenship, is the necessary condition for
12
new relationships emerging between state and society. For that, one must be aware of the urgency
for reforms of electoral legislation, campaign financing, candidate profiles and their political
platforms.
Let us not forget that the democratic practices of government, where they exist, are the result of the
strength of social movements and the participation of society through movements, health councils,
education, environment, town planning, childhood, as well as other forms of association that have
already tried to replace the traditional relationships of dependency, by looking for openness and the
provision of basic goods and services for the population. The participation of society in political and
electoral processes finishes by becoming a condition that enables the possibilities of change in the
makeup of executive and legislative power, and as a consequence public policy, to come about.
The participation of NGOs in this process can not be overlooked: during recent decades, they have
done their best to support social movements by increasing their visibility and range of action. These
authorities are confused today with other forms of organisation that have emerged with the claim of
complementing or replacing the function of the State, with strong campaigns like those of voluntary
participation and the encouragement of business philanthropy, which creates a homogenisation that
simplifies both the meaning of different movements and the elimination of conflicts.
These new trends finish by stressing localised and fragmented solutions, reproducing the same
pragmatic logic with which the government manipulates social policy. There was a certain attempt to
try to align the so called Third sector, mainly on behalf of official policy, agents and actions that
carried out very different work. Here we must point out the need to strengthen the identity of the
NGOs and other institutions guided by democratic principles, by differentiating them from other
trends that insist on marking social policy by voluntary and isolated acts, as if these weren’t part of
State responsibility and didn’t belong to the whole of public policy.
Policies designed to combat poverty and social exclusion, and even the development of programmes
to tackle unemployment, can not be separated from public policies. The focus of social policies
currently aimed at the poorest groups, justified as urgent, and separated from public policies, end up
producing assistance and philanthropy, by calling on society to take part.
These policies, both harmless through the lack of any relationship with the causes of the problem
and unaware of it because of their cyclical nature, always lead to a waste of resources and the
shedding of responsibility by the state in relation to social problems caused by economic policies. On
the other hand, they end up by strengthening dependent practices and the handling of old structures
of power. Finally, they become divorced from the reality that one of the clearest demonstrations of
13
social crisis results from economic decisions which have tried to divert large amounts of money away
from the production sector towards the financial.
The participation of society’s institutions in new relationships with the State must depend on the
organisation of groups that already have an experience of struggle, even sectotial. This proposal
includes ideas proposed in discussions about new trade union functions during the Labour,
Employment and Activity Workshop, which, whilst being aware of the traditional function of the
union movement in society, centred on social protection for people in formal employment, points
out the need for a Citizens’ Union, or new unionism, which goes above and beyond business and
labour relations by including the struggle for citizenship.
We recognise that foreign policy has a direct relationship with economy, and that decisions are taken
without consulting either society or the legislature; we point out the urgency of setting up democratic
mechanisms for the realisation of these policies. These mechanisms include both legislative power,
presently limited to ratifying international treaties, and the participation of society. Taking account of
the fact that although economic liberalisation has fragmented interests and increased competition,
the national interest consequently includes a greater diversity of demands
The positions taken and the accords signed by the representatives of foreign policy must include the
expression and possible satisfaction of different interests. The idea, then, is to include transparency
and political control mechanisms in the decisions that effect society as a whole.
We would add to this the suggestions of the Foreign Debt workshop, more precisely those on the
setting up of forums for negotiation where decision making power does not belong to creditors and
the decisions take into account the basic needs of the nations in debt; on civic consultation practices
throughout the world, like those already taking place in Spain and Brazil, thanks to which
mechanisms for raising awareness were created that finished by confirming the need to cancel
foreign debt.
Several workshops have pointed out the need to create information which publicises the disastrous
results of neo-liberal policy. This is because, paradoxical though it may seem, official statistics of
economic growth like GNP – Gross National Product- and GDP – Gross Domestic Product,
demonstrate economic growth in the countries where the degree of social exclusion is increasing.
This necessity heightens especially at the moment when the official statistics broadcast through the
media are separated from the decisions of foreign policy and from the direction taken by economic
policy at national level
Society’s participation in the orientation of economic policy must not only be limited to the budget,
fiscal questions and foreign trade; they must also include monetary, exchange, sectional, revenue and
investment policy as well as regulation.
4. Proposals
1. To promote, especially in the cultural sphere, education in community and co-operative
values and solidarity as the essential basis for consolidation of the profoundly human project
of a new economy, to be translated into coherent economic policies with the desired aims.
14
2. To redefine economic policy, by accentuating activities that aim at social inclusion and which
are based on participation and Human Rights. To create areas for debate which establish
treaties for the reduction of productivity in sectors that create unemployment and cause
environmental destruction.
To define economic policies as means for providing the material basis for the welfare and
fulfilment of people, races and nations, whilst respecting biological, human and cultural
diversity in dynamic and sustainable collaboration with nature.
To enlarge the functions of economic policies in the production, monetary, trade and
financial domains, whilst above all attempting to satisfy human needs, socially sustainable
development and citizen rights.
3. To reject the existing links between present economic policies and neo-liberal ideology, by
showing, the connection that exists between current economic policies and neo-Liberal
ideology, showing on one hand the responsibilities of the nation States and, on the other, the
location and the interests of its beneficiaries, indicating the real objectives of those policies
and the social exclusion that arises from them. To reject the mainstays of neo-liberal ideology
that attempt to hide and mask the harder, antagonistic aspects of the forms of domination,
which tends to facilitate the acceptance of the power structure and the irreversible nature of
the present cycle of accumulation of capital.
To reaffirm that the neo-liberal State continues to exert internal authoritarian power when it
is a question of monetary, fiscal, social security, labour and other public policies that have a
direct influence on the life of society.
To promote discussions that demonstrate the role of neo-liberal ideology and its pretension
to form the dominant vision. This should demonstrate the inability of such an ideology to be
in harmony with the ethical principles necessary for carrying out policy.
4.
To introduce mechanisms of democratic participation – debate, consultation, plebiscites,
before making decisions and signing accords with international finance institutions of trade
and commerce or bilateral and multilateral accords, processes of integration or external debt
These mechanisms of participation must also include internal decisions such as privatisation
and labour legislation. To show that these decisions affect the functioning of economic and
social sectors, by increasing exclusion and social apartheid or, with a different orientation, by
contributing to emancipation and social justice.
To rebuild the democratic State, by giving it a public face starting from ethical principles and
social and human rights. To establish the State as the democratic forum for resolving conflict,
by allowing the diversity of actors and themes, such as the economy of solidarity,
environment, peace, human rights, gender, race, etc. to be expressed politically, by
participating at the decision making levels of State institutions.
To reaffirm the importance of political participation in the electoral process, taking into
account the balance of democratic relations resting on shared representation systems with the
15
direct participation of organisations from civil society. The goal of this new way of
conducting policy is to decentralise power and the social control of public resources. The
transformation of official policies into public, represents a new legitimacy for participation
and citizens’ control of State apparatus.
To set up as effective practice, discussion and the identification of priorities in government
programmes for the candidates of Executive power, by allowing society to include its
demands at the heart of the government. This practice will avoid the excessive
personalisation of candidates and will offer the possibility of voting for the government
project whilst taking account of society’s aspirations.
To demand from candidates of the executive power a debate on their governmental ideas, by
leaving the possibility of introducing the demands of civil society. To evaluate the political
profile of candidates charged with legislative power, by examining up to which point they are
able to represent society’s interests
To participate in the electoral process and elections aimed at changing the political cadres in
order to guarantee the representation of society’s interests and its participation.
To re-enforce the role of representative councils, in all government authorities. With the
presence of social movements, unions and organisations from civil society, by giving them
specific remits and by defining the resources earmarked for this within the budget. Thus, this
new configuration sets up a decision space where representatives of the social sectors will be
able to express their demands and conflicts.
5. To reorganise politics starting from a radical transformation of the forms, actions and agents.
Society needs to be constituted as a political subject, through its organisations, and
economically, through self-managing businesses of solidarity.
6. To include in municipal legislation, and in other equivalent legislation in other spheres of
government, the obligation to publicly debate the spatial and sectorial allocation of public
resources. The process of participatory budget, whilst still needing improvements, is defined
as an area of citizenship, instigator of democratic relations between State and society.
To promote popular participation in the debates and decisions pertaining to the budget in
national and sub-national domains of government. The enlargement of methods of
participation in participatory budgets, over and above decisions about allocation of resources,
going as far as control and taxation
To develop the practices of participatory budgeting to other moments of budgetary
execution, by guaranteeing that the share and allocation of resources is effectively carried out
in accordance with the consensus arrived at through debate.
7. To strengthen the organisation and initiatives of the Global parliamentary forum, created
during the first Global Social Forum held at Porto Allegre in 2001, and composed of
legislative representatives from several countries with the aim of supporting more effectively
the action of social movements and citizens, and thus concreting alternative solutions to neoliberalism. The basic idea behind the meeting of the forum was the struggle against the
commercialisation and privatisation of goods and services necessary to meet people’s needs.
16
8. On the international scene, towns represented by associations are looking for inspiration in
the successful experiments for dealing with urban problems and working in teams to find
solution to common problems. It is impossible to deny that these forms of solidarity were
possible because of the faster diffusion possible because of modern communication.
The new fact to point out is the independence that these new networks of communication
have in respect of national governments. If these associations were born, to begin with, from
parallel forums which took place at the time of the large global forums, the present trend is a
form of autonomous organisation and the establishment of proposals independent from
official accords, because these are only declarations signed by governments that fail to go
beyond the level of diplomatic intention. technologies that are characteristic of recent
globalisation.
9. To set up methods of democratic participation in the decisions and reforms of fiscal policy,
once the relationship between fiscal policy and economic and public policy is known.
10. To decentralise public and economic policies, according to their nature, towards local and
regional spheres of government; by taking account of the typology of municipalities, and
respecting cultural diversity and the just allocation of resources according to defined abilities.
11. To discuss the measures aimed at strengthening the identity of the NGOs and elaborating on
the proposals for collective action, taking into account their thematic plurality. To analyse the
struggles and perspectives of NGOs in national realities and in international thematic, like,
among others, legality and the relation between the State and access to public funds.
12. To create strategies so that the Economy of Solidarity is included in public and economic
policies, starting from local experiments of consumption, production, technology, trade and
finance. To struggle for the recognition of economy of solidarity initiatives which deserve
government subsidies and integration with public policy. To publicise these experiments so
as to make them known and to strengthen them, by proposing methods by which they can be
enlarged and copied.
To explain that the renouncement of neo-liberal globalisation will result in forms and logics
of this phenomena. Other forms of integration between countries are possible, in so much as
they take place in areas that allow democratic relationships, by interacting with other
operators who are also looking for respect of diversity, co-operation, solidarity and human
welfare.
5. Strategies and Actors
The strategies necessary for moving forward on these proposals demand first of all a preoccupation
liked to a new definition of the objectives of economic policy. A new economy for a new world,
based on something beyond market logic, by establishing a State for society and an economy for life.
The harmony between the new economy and social values is obtained through methods of
participation. The intended participation enlarges the traditional activities of voting and militancy in a
political party, by outlining now the democratic ideal that supposes citizens to be aware of the
evolution of the nation and strongly interested in direct or indirect forms of participation during
decision making. Here we point out education as a means to obtain a more consistent participation.
17
It is interesting to observe that the inspiration for democratic principles and the exercise of rights,
which are the basis of new strategies, question the organisation of States where only representative
democracy is predominant. The strategy of transformation is realised through electoral processes and
the choice of candidates committed to social causes, but always with a watchful eye and civic control
over their political actions..
The local area as the preferred area for democratic experiments is strengthened thanks to the
disclosure and enlarging of budgetary participation practices., which democratise the decision making
process and strengthen the community methods for the reproduction of life and the satisfaction of
needs..
The guarantee of the diversity of interests starts from a pluralist administration. This guarantee is
established when national institutions are created – at all levels of government – and global
institutions democratically constituted and administered, composed not only from inside the State
but also from organisations representing the respective civil society.
Openness is brought about by statistical methods obtained through public institutions administered
under the control of civil society. New indicators, to fully inform about the social costs of neo-liberal
economic policy, will give the results and benefits of new experiments in progress.
The actors engaged in making these strategies concrete are social movements, NGOs, unions,
councils and other associations. Representatives of the State, of executive and legislative power, are
those that exercise progressive administrations, with mandates and management that are both open
and visible, and prepared to share power with the community.
Bibliographic references
DONAHUE, J. D. Privatização: Fins Públicos, Meios Privados. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar, 1992.
CHESNAIS, F. A Mundialização do Capital. São Paulo: Xamã, 1996.
CHESNAIS, F. La Mondialization Financière: Genèse, Coûts e Enjeux. Paris: Syros, 1998
GOMEZ, J. M. Política e Democracia em Tempos de Globalização. Petrô polis: Vozes, 2000
GONÇALVES, R. Ô Abre-Alas - A Nova Inserção do Brasil na Economia Mundial.
Rio de Janeiro, 1994.
HELD, D. Democracy and the Global Order. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995.
OHMAE, K. O Fim do Estado-Nação. Rio de Janeiro: Campus, 1996.
18
Projects and synthesis from the Workshops of the PSES – SOCIO-ECONOMY OF
SOLIDARITY WORKSHOP: Findhorn, June 2001.
TOURAINE, A. La Critique de la Modernité. Petropolis: Vozes, 1994.