Border Camps : The New ‘Sexy’
Thing? By Wayne Foster
"This year Strasbourg will be the scene of the first Europe-wide noborder
camp…[it]..will consist of 10 days of actions, workshops and discussions around
the central demand of 'freedom of movement and settlement' for everyone."
- Extract from the call to the Strasbourg no-border camp
"'Freedom of movement and settlement' for everyone", like a
non-capitalist world or an end to oppression, is something it is pointless to
demand. We can "shout down fortress Europe" until our lungs bleed,
but no government can ever give us a world without borders and nations - that
is a future that people everywhere must create for ourselves.
The Strasbourg camp and the movement against borders generally, is another
poorly thought out distraction from the irrelevance of ‘activism’. Our
inability to practically confront oppression must at least partly be a
consequence of our adherence to forms of activity which overlap with existing
political structures, inherited from authoritarian leftists and liberal
reformists. We lobby, militantly. When we convene at governmental summits
attention is inevitably focused on those governments. We hold demonstrations.
We call them actions and include a samba band and some balaclavas. Liberal
reformists hold demonstrations in the hope of influencing the government (no
liberal would be silly enough to call a demonstration demanding a world without
borders). Leftists hold demonstrations to build a mass of activists. This
thinking undeniably permeates our activity. The belief that “If our
activist-ghetto was only much bigger this would somehow create revolution,”
remains widespread and belongs to the activist mentality discussed extensively
in 'Give up Activism' (originally published in 'Reflections on J18' and
subsequently reproduced, often with additions, everywhere but the Washington
Post).
'Anti-Capitalism', characterised by activist politics and militant lobbying,
has been the ultimate manifestation of single issue style politics. Now that it
has been confronted with its own impossibility, it looks as though no borders
might
step in as the next big single issue style campaign and save a few professional
activists from redundancy. We should be cautious - a world without borders is
incompatible with capitalism and the nation-state system, it can only be
created by global revolution which is unlikely to be brought much closer by
no-border days of action accompanied by militant lobbying.
"These border camps, which are characterised by diverse interventions and
discussion groups have been documented on the first European noborder web site
and an expansion to include groups from the UK and Spain is being planned for
the upcoming year. Furthermore, many calls for actions in the individual countries
circulate on the noborder mailing list and attempts are being made to
co-ordinate common activities, particularly in resistance to official European
summits. This practical approach to co-ordinate actions as an expression of a
fundamental critique of EU migration politics, is central to the noborder
project. This involves continuous networking and information exchange. Because
our aim remains not only to criticise but to create European-wide structures
for practical and effective resistance." -
Extract from 'The European Noborder Network: An Attempt for Practical
Resistance'
No borders has all the ingredients for a single issue style campaign - an
issue, a network of well resourced, influential activist groups, some slightly
tokenistic
links to especially oppressed people, a well designed electronic interface and
plenty of publicity in the 'anti-capitalist' media. Global days of action and
spectacular actions are now following. The ability to network and co-ordinate
large international mobilisations of people becomes the end in itself. Like too
many activist campaigns, its success is measured by the total number of people
who waste their time on it, and the total inches of press coverage it inspires.
It is enough simply that we can look back, display the photographs, replay the
web cam and say, “look, that happened”.
This is a safety valve for an oppressive social order - those who want to turn
their frustration and anger into action get drawn into political campaigns
where
we can let off steam, feel we are resisting, say we are resisting, create the
spectacle of resistance, but actually fail to confront oppression in any
practical
way.
Meanwhile, we develop community, not practical everyday solidarity where we
live and work, but a political community that exists distinct from most
people's everyday lives and, worryingly, implies that it has a transformative
capability. Most alarmingly is the political class of professional activists
that dominate 'anti-capitalism' in Europe - a fluid indefinable network of
skilled, committed,
hardworking people with the time, resources and abilities to become involved in
the preparations, and consequently the decision making process for major
'anti-capitalist' events. This class was very much in evidence in Strasbourg
when it was proposed that we should pack up the camp a day early, march into
Strasbourg carrying all our stuff, get into cars and go and stay at a farm 40
KM away. No criticism is intended of people for being scared, mistaken, etc.,
the incident is of interest because of the power structures that meant this,
frankly bizarre, proposal was given such serious consideration (it took several
hours for a large majority, that had been clear from the outset, to put the
proposal down). It is not a question of criticising individuals involved in
this
class, its existence is a consequence of our replication of the political
sphere, our desire for the spectacle of resistance.
'Practical resistance' to borders implies constructive solidarity with and
amongst those whose movements are restricted, it implies confronting
specific present term problems; it also implies a way of organising and acting
consistent with revolutionary objectives. That certainly does not necessarily
mean raising grand political slogans- building solidarity and living, working
communities is revolutionary in itself.
There are a number of groups that do excellent work along these lines and some
of them were present in Strasbourg as part of the noborder network. These
include self-organisations of those without papers and local solidarity groups
that work practically to confront racism. It is imperative such organisation
takes place today and, of course, important that these groups exchange ideas
and tactics. What was positive about Strasbourg was where these groups were
brought together. What was problematic was that Strasbourg attracted a
community of activists, attached to politics and sloganeering, who demanded a
world without borders as though the nation-state system was no more essential to
the world of the powerful than some minor proposed road extension. There is an
irreconcilable chasm between demands that are revolutionary and a form of
struggle that never will be.
I'll try and conclude more positively by mentioning North Edinburgh Welcomes
Refugees (NEWR), a local group I've never been involved with, which wasn't
represented in Strasbourg, but which does practically confront racism while
encouraging the everyday solidarity essential to the revolutionary project of
creating a world without borders.
NEWR is run by some of the residents in a few North Edinburgh housing schemes
which have been proposed as mass dumping grounds for asylum seekers. In
Glasgow, thousands of asylum seekers were dumped in an already pissed off,
under-funded, and impoverished working class area, without any consultation
with local residents and very minimal provision of additional services. In a
context of far-right agitation, racist media and a lack of constructive
responses to the local's legitimate grievances, there were a series of clashes
between asylum seekers and locals which culminated in the murder of a young
Turkish man. In order to avoid a repeat of such circumstances in Edinburgh,
NEWR has sought to act in the interests of both refugees and local residents.
So, while they have been active spreading information about refugees'
situation, challenging right wing interpretations and trying to ensure the
local area is welcoming to refugees and other migrants, they have also given
equal attention to local people's concerns. They have spread and debated
radical interpretations of local people's problems in countenance to right-wing
vilification of immigrants while avoiding the typical leftist response that
leaps to stigmatise the concerns of existing residents as racist. They have
tried to ensure that any mass dispersal of refugees to the area takes place
following full consultation with local people.
NEWR breaks down barriers, spreads radical ideas and contributes to the
establishment of community in areas where most things have been done to
alienate people from each other.
The struggle against borders is either revolutionary or paradoxical and when it
is located in a political sphere it will never be revolutionary. We need to
give up single issue campaigning and the forms of struggle we have inherited
from them. We need to inspire everyday solidarity, not political community. We
need to give up activism, give up politics, give up the spectacular sideshow.
None of this is original which must raise the question why we keep doing the
same things. Perhaps we simply have too much invested in our political roles to
abandon them.
