Manifesting over the manifesto: own positions
So far I have tried to grapple with some of the arguments in the table of planeetgroenlinks. Now is due time to throw in the table my own ones. Probably too late, since with so many commentary many of the inhabitants are tired of the discussion. But vooruit!
I want to make three points here. Not surprisingly about the course, imago and culture of the current groenlinks. Each point is easy to resume in one sentence each, so here it is:
1)The course of groenlinks should be more liberal in some aspects, and less in others. To call the current course too liberal (or right wing or any other synonym) is just fool.
2)The image of groenlinks do need to include other groups, without excluding the group already represented.
3)The culture of groenlinks must be more open, if we want to grow as a party, but more openness call as well for more responsibility.
Nothing shocking, so maybe you would stop reading right now. But perhaps the argumentation is shocking? read on!
1) A big deal of the ideological discussion inside groenlinks revolves around the question “are we becoming too liberal?” In my eyes, almost a non-question. To start with, there is no such a thing as a liberal manifesto, which can be used as a measuring device. What does exist is lots of different issues to decide to be more liberal, or not. Same for groenlinks: inside our current pool of ideas we find some that need liberalization, and some that need some dose of “estatification”. Two examples: the mantra that more flexible labour market improve the circumstances of excluded is a classical idea that has received lots of counter-evidence along time. To name only one, in the report of the arbeidsinspectie on labour mobility and discrimination (2004) comes the clear result that allochtonen are far more flexible in their jobs than autochtonen. And still, they remain with higher rates of unemployment. This is not to be solved giving more flexibility.
A different standpoint in which we could use more liberalism is in our migration standpoints. We still talk about controlled migration, or labour migration only if it is in the advantage of the netherlands. But I still remember a debate organized by the wetenschapelijk bureau from the VVD, in which it was argued for a world without borders, as the ultimate liberal goal. I certainly concur, I'll be happy to have the liberalization of our migration standpoints.
So... shall we stop using big and heavily charged words and get down to the real issues?
2) In the same wibe, lots is being discussed about our “elitarianism”. A lot of warm air, in my humble opinion. What matters here is that we must become more diverse. I have nothing against having some very elitarian party members... if we have some very egalitarian members as well. So at the side of a deep analyst of political nuances we must also have some black and white activist, a la greenpeace (or at least a la greenpeace in the seventies). In my eyes the challenge of groenlinks is not to abandon the elite and welcome the people, but keeping the elite and the people in discussion. Actually, if my memory still works, that was pretty much the gramscian version of democratic centralism. Think in something like “democratic multicultural centralism” and consider culture not only as a ethnic thing, but also a socio-economically determined phenomenon.
3) Many people that ask for mayor involvement in the decision process today is simply not capable to keep up, if they would be given the chance. As vz from one workgroup, starter of another and member of yet another, I would love to see the role of workgroups increased inside the structure of the party. I was strongly against the last reform of statuten, in which workgroups were deprived from the possibility of offering not-asked advice. But hey, beware of what you ask for... because you can get it! This is an issue in which we criticasters should be less populists. To give an example, the Kleurrijk Platform sees a change of members that rounds 75% every year. The people that stays around is very scarce. So imagine that such a club would be -all of a sudden- in charge of the multicultural positions of groenlinks. In a word: a nightmare. And not only workgroups, also the regios. It sounds very nice (in the partijraad, for example) to talk in favor of the regios and against the randstad. But should a local activist coordinate international policy (you guess what my answer is here)
So yes, I do think that the kader should take more responsibility in the decision making of our party. Sure thing. But is the kader aware that this would imply far more commitment than the existing one? Less time to hang around and more time reading policy pieces? Far more efficient workgroups meetings? How many members of workgroups would remain as members if the answer “sorry, I did not have time for ...” would not be acceptable?
Rejoinder, then. Why did I not sign the kritiek manifest, and still... why I consider it a very important piece
So yes, I have been bothered by very un-critical meetings -or congresses- of groenlinks. I had had the feeling of being part of an applause machine, now and then. But who's responsibility that is? Isn't it mine as well? It is. I missed, perhaps first of all, a strong auto-criticism in the spirit of the kritiek manifest. In second place I miss a broader call for diversity. My answer to elitarianism is not less of it, is more populism as well. Both are needed. And last of all, but perhaps more important than all, I do not consider useful a full attack of the liberalization of groenlinks. I rather argue for more liberalization in some issues, and less in others. These three reasons, when balanced and measured, make me not sign. But hey! If this manifest would not have been written, with a sustained effort from Leo and Paulus and others... we would not be discussing these issues. I might not agree with their tone, or their emphasizes... but I greatly thanks their input. Without this group of indians we would not be about to sit in powpow... and that is very needed in groenlinks now!
1 Comments:
You write very well.
9:38 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home