G20 and the art of the possible

I’m currently reading The Art of the Possible, which is a handbook for Canadian political activists written by one Amanda Sussman and published in 2007. With the G20 still lingering in many of our minds, I thought the following passage from the book’s introduction was worth posting.

“Protests, boycotts, and alternative summits send out the important message that there is a problem, and that it needs to be solved. Leaders have to take notice and consider the need for change. But if you’re interested in a change of a specific policy, this book argues that the greatest of changes occur from within [the system]. Reform does not mean compromising your basic values. Rather than rejecting government, it demonstrates how working through government is the most direct route to social progress. It means understanding where your bottom lines are and where you have room to manoeuvre.

“To illustrate this point, let’s take a look at the G8 summits, the most prominent targets for social activists today. At Gleneagles and Heiligendamm, the anti-globalization movement sent a message that no globalization was good globalization. Images of alternative kids, dressed in alternative clothes, generated public attention with demands to shut the G8 meetings down.

“One can understand where they are coming from. According to many activists, governments have little power in the face of rising corporate influence. In many parts of the world, it is multinational corporations that are providing for basic human needs like clean water, sanitation, and access to health care. In the developed world, major social change is taking place outside the political world, with government playing a peripheral or even obstructive role. Progress on gay rights is being won through the courts. Fair trade is being promoted by progressive companies rather than by parliaments or government departments. As a result, rather than spend time working through government institutions, many radicals focus their energies on consumer boycotts, corporate awareness campaigns, and shareholder politics.

“After the G8 summits, many were frustrated that no matter how big the protests got or how widespread the message, there seemed to be few results. From the perspective of those inside these meetings, the radical approach to advocacy backfired. Leaders and officials were left with the impression that these were fringe elements of society wanting the impossible: rolling back globalization, ceasing all international trade, dismantling the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization, and starting from scratch.

“That is not to say that the protests didn’t achieve anything. Widespread public awareness and involvement in an issue build a powerful constituency of support to which democratic politicians ultimately have to respond.

“But to have an impact on the actual decisions and policies announced by governments at the G8, you have to start much earlier than the main event. It requires working from the bottom up and the top down of government to convince internal and external advocates of the merits of your position, address the concerns of those who disagree, and offer plausible options that take into account real government constraints.

“More often than not, a ‘win’ will not go far enough, fast enough. Every step taken will open up a whole array of new miles that need to be trod. But with many government decisions, even an incremental step can affect hundreds of lives. What seems like a small decision can actually have a huge impact.”

Posted in Democracy