Page 234 - Contemporary Political Sociology Globalization Politics and Power

220 Globalization and Democracy

intended simply to parallel mainstream ways of life, but to challenge them.
As such, alternative globalization resists not just the hegemony of neo -
liberal globalization, but also any political program and state or interna-
tional regulation as such. It is important to distinguish here between
different kinds of consensus - building and organization. Activists of the
anti - globalization movement have developed a range of ways of reaching
consensus in order to strategize and organize protest events and discus-
sions (Graeber, 2002 ; Notes from Nowhere, 2003 ). Consensus oriented
towards developing and realizing a political program or to bring about
state or international regulation is, however, antithetical to alternative
globalization: it is only valid in relation to a particular course of action
(Graeber, 2002 : 6). Alternative globalization continually challenges
authority and calls settled structures into question; anarchists organize
precisely on the basis that they are resistant to any authority beyond that
which they are personally free to create, revise, or leave.
In this respect, alternative globalization involves a form of democracy
called “ agonistic, ” in which a central place is given to the view that con-

flict between opposing viewpoints is inherent to social life and that there
are no universal grounds that could be used to establish the defi nitive
validity of one perspective over another. As there are no certainties to
which those opposed may appeal, neither scientific nor moral, confl ict is

only ever ended through the exercise of power. Furthermore, in the
absence of any legitimate authority or justifi cation for preferring one
perspective over another, power can only ever be exercised illegitimately;
it is effectively the same as force. Any justifi cations for deciding between
opposing viewpoints that might enable binding regulation for large
numbers of people must always be treated with suspicion as effects of
illegitimate, hierarchical authority (Benhabib, 1996 : 8). There should be
no agreements on general rules, and attempt to build lasting or large - scale
consensus must be challenged. Democracy must be participatory and
direct, engaging us in continually challenging established assumptions and
ways of doing things.
The legitimation of alternative globalization as radical participatory
democracy can be seen in the ongoing dispute over whether the World
Social Forum should coordinate a political program. For many, the search
for consensus that such coordination would require is inherently prob-
lematic because, in settling on a course of action, the equality of diversity
of existing alternatives would be lost: some would be marginalized and
even repressed. In contrast, a number of the founders of the WSF have
argued that the major points of agreement amongst the movements par-
ticipating in the WSF should be made publicly visible in order to provide