La Alameda: "Guerrilla" struggles to make the Argentine economy social

5 La Alameda “Guerrilla” struggles to make the Argentine economy social Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 Doris Lee Introduction Within the concept of “social economy” lies the implicit criticism that the existing neoliberal capitalist economy is insuficiently “social” – it fails to cater to the needs of all members of society; it excludes and leaves certain sectors of society deprived. The rise and development of the “social economy” is one response to and remedy of those gaps in human need created by the existing economic model. The social economy is an “economy” – yet with values and scopes that are contrary to those of the mainstream capitalist economy: values of people above proit, cooperation above competition, and of worker participation and workplace democracy. The creation and sustenance of the “social economy” requires carving out a path in a hostile legal and discourse setting where precedence is given to that which extracts private corporate proits from labor and from the privatization of collective goods, including land. It may be debated (but will not be treated at length here) whether the aim and goal of the social economy is ultimately to replace and take over the whole existing economy (revolution?), or to simply create a parallel sphere that coexists with and complements the existing capitalistic market economy (Wright 2010).1 In either case it requires struggle. Whether one is demanding a state role in the guarantee of employment, or the state’s non- intervention in but legal recognition of workers’ self-creation of employment and use of public spaces, struggle by workers and communities is constantly needed. In such a task, civil society organizations are often the agents that push such struggle. I will rely here on the deinition of civil society as “the sphere of ideas, values, institutions, organizations, networks and individuals located between the family, the state and the market and operating beyond the conines of national societies, polities and economies” (Anheier et al. 2001, 17, quoted in Kaldor et al. 2012). Making the economy social Here I examine how a civil society organization can be effective in making the economy social – or creating social economy. The historical path of one Argentine  78 D. Lee organization, La Alameda, is traced and examined in terms of what factors and variables have contributed to its achievements in making the economy social. The example of La Alameda is important because the ield of social struggle and the “population” of civil society are illed with organizations that speak the same language about ighting poverty and the social exclusion of marginalized groups, Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 yet appear to contribute to the status quo more than to radical change. In Argentina: seeds sown and shoots grown Argentina is a country that has been noted for the upsurge of social economy initiatives and structures of various types since its economic crisis of 2001 to 2002, and which has signiicantly retained many of the gains for its workers which had been achieved at that time (Ruggeri 2010). Among these were three signiicant phenomena relevant here: the asambleas (neighborhood assemblies), the recovered factories (or occupied factories) movement, and worker cooperatives. To some extent these were not entirely new, and did have roots in labor and community struggles carried out even prior to the economic crisis.2 However, we want to examine what has enabled some organizations to continue their successes even after the crisis and once some of these phenomena have died down and lost their ability or even intention to change the external, fundamentally exploitative economic system (why the “seeds” indeed took root and became shoots that continued to grow). In this section, I examine the methods and sources of power of the community organization La Alameda, in Argentina, which account for its many achievements in the past 10 years to limit the power of capitalists to exploit workers, particularly migrant workers, and which is currently most well known for its anti-traficking achievements. “Making the Argentine Economy Social” means ensuring that the growth in the economy does not come at the expense of workers’ lives and dignity. The element of democratic consultation and participation of “stakeholders” (i.e., communities, migrant worker victims) is one of the factors contributing to the organization’s strength and effectiveness in its mission of making the economy social by limiting the control of capital over workers and of the government also over citizens and workers. Aspects of the organization’s source and use of resources is another key element. Through its methods and their success, La Alameda has demonstrated the potential power of an organization which insists on maintaining inancial independence from external donors for its core activities, and which also functions as a substantially horizontally organized network. La Alameda: introduction La Alameda is the name of a community center, but also of an anti-traficking NGO. It may be more accurate to label La Alameda as a worker and community service/advocacy conglomerate. In the building called La Alameda, activities are  La Alameda: “guerrilla” struggles 79 conducted, including weekly asambleas, union meetings, a community canteen providing free meals, worker education courses, and a garment production cooperative. In just 10 years, the organization La Alameda has succeeded in making “slave labor” a term routinely used in mainstream media – in this way helping to make Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 sex traficking and abuse of migrant and child labor major social issues; achiev- ing the support of the Cardinal of the Catholic Church (presently Pope Francis) as well as a wide group of media igures, and expanding its activist network even to other parts of Argentina where labor and sex traficking are entrenched prob- lems – all the while succeeding in achieving the escape and re-employment of countless migrant workers, closures of illegal sweatshops, and more. La Alameda has also played a role in securing the inclusion of “excluded workers” and the “popular economy” as a sector under the main union federation in Argentina, the Confederación General de Trabajadores (CGT, or the General Confederation of Workers). Below, I irst examine the origins, development, and current patterns of operation of La Alameda. Then I discuss the relation of its inances and organ- izational structure and operations on its “success” in terms of activism, and how these it into other debates on “successful organizations” and on revitalization of a bureaucratizing and rigidiied union movement. La Alameda: origin The organization now well known as La Alameda originated as an asamblea of residents in the neighborhood of Parque Avellaneda, which was formed during the crisis and mobilizations of the public on December 19 and 20, 2001. This asamblea – a gathering of neighbors in order to solve the common problems of the community – was eventually called “20th of December.” Until June 2002, it operated outdoors in Avellaneda Park, and focused on dealing with the pressing problems of that moment: the hunger and unemployment that had become rampant since the economic crisis and currency devaluation that had gripped Argentina since 2001. During that period, unemployment reached as high as 25 percent, the government was paralyzed, and workers even occupied factories out of desperation to keep their jobs, even at the cost of violent confrontations with police who would come to evict them; the asamblea responded by forming a community canteen to feed the hungry and also various cultural activities to support those neighbors in need. From June 8, 2002, the asamblea began to function inside a bar which it took over – a bar called La Alameda that had been abandoned and remained unused for four years.3 It continued its service of providing food for local residents in need, reaching up to 160 people served at each meal, and obtained the support of the City of Buenos Aires for the food, and the legalization of the community kitchen as a project of the Ministry of Social Development. Yet the asamblea had to ight against attempted eviction, and had to continue its ight in the courts to win expropriation of the site for its use as a cultural and community center.  80 D. Lee Finally, in 2007, the site was expropriated by the city government and granted to La Alameda as a public utility. La Alameda (the asamblea now assumed the name of the bar) was one of the irst asambleas to recover (occupy) a space and has also been one of the longest-lasting popular asambleas (Hauser 2004). Since the takeover of the bar in 2002, the asamblea not only continued the Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 community kitchen but also promptly established job creation projects – garment worker cooperatives were one of the priorities – to provide work for the garment workers who escaped from hidden sweatshops in the streets nearby and come to La Alameda for meals. From 2005, La Alameda began a campaign to raise awareness among the Boliv- ian garment workers in the neighborhood about their labor and migrant rights. From then began the irst lawsuits against slave labor and labor traficking in hidden sweatshops that supplied the major clothing brands. To date, more than 100 brands have been charged with lawsuits for use of hidden sweatshops founded on slave labor and traficking. Through the ight against these forms of production, garment workers have been rescued and reinstated in the formal labor market. In 2007, Fundación Alameda (the Alameda Foundation), a legal aid organiza- tion, was established with lawyers in order to provide regular assistance to workers who had escaped from sweatshops, and to sue the sweatshop owners and brands that exploited them. It also aimed to give training to sympathetic lawyers and other concerned people who wished to join the struggle against garment worker exploitation, and to inform more sectors of the public about the truth behind so many fashionable brand names. By the end of 2007, La Alameda had already brought legal charges against 85 brands for exploitation of garment workers in sweatshops, forced servitude, and violation of the Law on Home- based Work. Since then, the number of brands that have been legally charged by La Alameda has reached 110. From 2008 onward, La Alameda has also exposed the use of migrant labor, including child labor, in poultry farms by using hidden camera footage, which was a technique also often used in exposing the hidden sweatshops. As more and more workers learned of La Alameda’s unrelenting and immediate support for workers in need, more workers would call upon La Alameda to assist them – and La Alameda would also continue to take the initiative – to expose workers being abused in their workplaces, under the inaction of police and labor inspectors. In 2009, after making contact with Asian labor organizations, La Alameda initiated a joint global garment brand called No Chains to expand its work against exploitation in the global garment industry as well as to widen support for worker cooperatives. Recently, a growing problem in the city of Buenos Aires – and a very grave problem also in other tourist parts of Argentina – has been the spread of organ- ized prostitution and of prostitution houses where many of the sex workers have been traficked. La Alameda has also been aggressive in exposing these places, and also, daringly, in exposing the links of these places to prominent politicians and government igures – one of the most scandalous cases being the connection of several brothels to a Supreme Court Judge named Raul Eugenio Zaffaroni.  La Alameda: “guerrilla” struggles 81 Until today, La Alameda has been carrying out those attacks against exploita- tive employers and corrupt oficials, while continuing to function as a local center serving local needs. On a given day, perhaps only about 40 people attend for the free lunches, rather than the 160 or so that would attend at the peak. In addition, importantly, the weekly asamblea at La Alameda still continues. Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 La Alameda: decision-making and agenda-setting The central issues which this “NGO” tackles in its advocacy and legal and protest actions are determined irst by the needs of the surrounding community. Thus, when the needs of the surrounding community were to feed large numbers of people and to create digniied employment for workers, this was the central focus of activity. However, as the economy began to recover and the problems shared by workers coming to the community canteen were more about exploitation in garment sweatshops, tackling that problem became the priority. This character is quite different from many NGOs which are formed with a particular “issue” as their focus, and which, as a consequence of their funding, are incentivized to specialize narrowly in a niche and to distinguish themselves as experts to stay “competitive” when applying for funds. As the organization gained a wider reputation for defending the rights of and assisting any migrant workers – or any workers – who wished to sue and expose their employer, inquiries would come from further away and from different ields, not only garment sweatshops. Furthermore, as La Alameda itself became more deeply involved in these struggles, as a natural consequence of its aim of solving problems in the community it would seek allies in different ields – the media, the Church, leftist organizations and political parties, student groups – to broaden their struggles and gain wider support for their desired legislative changes and for their attempts to effectively discipline offenders. Internal democracy and space for debate The weekly gathering to update the whole collective – the community, the activists of La Alameda, and all workers in the related cooperatives – on matters of ongoing struggles and to consult them on future activities ensures that the activities are never far from the stakeholders’ interests and concerns. The openness of the group to debate and sharing of tasks also strengthens trust in the leaders and core activists. The transparency to the outside also inspires great trust in the group, a trust which the public do not often share with politicians, unions, religious groups, and NGOs. Financing and resources The organization, during its 10-year history, has relied on several streams of inancing for resources that it needs.  82 D. Lee 1 “Occupation” of what it needs. For example, the place La Alameda, which was irst occupied by the asamblea and which went through a long process of legal battles to gain legal rights. 2 Recognition as a community service center, which was linked to other “beneits” for the community and for the center. Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 • A monthly subsidy provided by the City of Buenos Aires to provide free morning and lunchtime meals in the main activity space of La Alameda. • Students who undertake internships or community service come to stay for periods of time and offer their practical help. • People who have been charged with petty crimes and then sentenced to community service may complete their service at La Alameda. 3 Furthermore, sustained campaigns also to obtain services or materials from the government, such as aid for migrants who have been rescued from sweatshops. 4 Solidarity of sister/brother organizations. Left political parties are granted travel vouchers to travel by bus to other parts of Argentina. They give the leftovers to La Alameda for its activities in other parts. 5 Fundraising events such as parties and festivals. 6 One-off donations for particular needed items, such as machines, raw materials for production, or other urgent needs of workers. These donations may come from concerned individuals who sympathize with the work of La Alameda, or from entities such as the Swiss Embassy or a private foundation. 7 Income generated by the cooperatives that are based in La Alameda. Currently about 10 percent of the regular costs of La Alameda (electricity, the Internet, etc.) are paid by the cooperatives. 8 Pro bono services of activists who are workers with other sources of personal income, including professional lawyers. One of the aspects which members of La Alameda believe has been key to their ability to gain public attention and sympathy for their work is the fact that the activists of La Alameda have all been working voluntarily, i.e., with no compensation from La Alameda for their work; on the contrary, many of the activists have cut down their working hours and thus their own incomes in order to free themselves for the tasks of La Alameda. For example, one of the main spokespersons and chair of the Fundación Alameda (Alameda Foundation), Gustavo Vera, works as a schoolteacher for a half day rather than a full day. Thus he earns his own livelihood, which itself is a low one, as he works voluntarily only half a day in order to spend more time for activism within La Alameda. Others also have foregone greater income opportunities in order to advance the work of La Alameda in the community; Tamara Rosenberg, who is the head of the garment worker cooperative 20th of December, is qualiied as a psychologist and used to have her own consultation ofice; however, she worked with the other garment workers with very low incomes for several years in order  La Alameda: “guerrilla” struggles 83 to develop the factory and gain income through expanding the market for their goods and through work, rather than through charity. All other activists working in and with La Alameda also worked totally on a voluntary basis; however, as the volume of tasks has greatly expanded, especially over the past ive years, three of the activists, Lucas Schaerer, Lucas Manjon, and Facundo Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 Lago, have been given a small stipend in the past two years, subsidized by an external organization, since otherwise these activists may have to take up other full-time work which could prevent them from fulilling their key roles and from continuing the high volume of work in the organization. These three activists have been handling the time-consuming, skilled, and essential tasks of producing videos, coordinating interviews and reports in the media, writing legal charges and press releases, organizing protest actions and advocacy- related events, and updating the La Alameda websites and the online monthly journal Agenda Oculta – their one-year-old journal dedicated to offering information and views about topics meriting public debate, which are hidden in society and minimized or ignored in mainstream media: traficking, forced labor, corruption, etc. Media strategy/public credibility La Alameda relies very much on a branding strategy, much like a corporation.4 They have a clear name, clear slogan, and clear logos. The slogan they use is “For a World With No Slaves, With No Excluded” – it is one which many can sympathize and assist with, regardless of political or religious leaning. The name they use, La Alameda, is repeated in every media statement, banner, and publi- cation. With such a clear use of a name and slogan, and with their repeated appearances in media, backed up by video evidence taken with hidden cameras, workers or other sympathizers and allies in particular causes know where to turn to when they need assistance to escape from abuse, or to join in partnership in ighting against an abusive employer, or an unjust law or policy that would further subject workers to hardship. The consistent use of its name La Alameda and constant appearance in the media, often in many media each week, has added tremendously to its ability to inluence public discourse and gain allies for its efforts. As a relection of La Alameda’s public reach, the blog of La Alameda has about 400,000 visits per year, while the online journal, Agenda Oculta, managed by La Alameda, has received 50,000 visits within a few months of launching the publication.5 The intensive efforts to gain “media power” – to gain inluence over debates in favor of victims, to publicly shame violators, and gain support for legislative and policy changes – are mutually constructive to the aim and principle of La Alameda of staying politically and inancially independent. The organization, which is not spending up to a quarter of its time, energy, and resources reporting and justifying its actions to a small group of donors on donors’ terms, is com- pelled – and freed – to use far more of its time, energy, and resources in solving  84 D. Lee the needs of its “stakeholders” and mobilizing media and alliances in society to strike at the core problems. Legal foundation Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 With the Alameda Foundation acting as a legal “wing” of La Alameda, the organization can battle not only in the ield of campaigns and public education but with concrete data, concrete victims, and legal bases of action. Cases do not often end with conviction and punishment of the perpetrators; for example, many of the sweatshop owners who have been sued by La Alameda have been able to simply open again, even in the same location. Nonetheless, the cases accumulate and La Alameda keeps a constant media presence, and these add weight and legitimacy to La Alameda’s demands to the public and to the legislature and government for systematic changes that genuinely protect workers from slave- like exploitation for proit. The legal wing of La Alameda serves both as a service provision to exploited members of the community and as an important concrete technical support to enable making the economy social. Ecumenical partnership/alliance-building A natural extension of its work is conducting legal cases, giving training to the public, advocating in media and various platforms to address the roots of the concrete problems found in the community in which La Alameda is based – garment sweatshops, migrant exploitation, sex traficking, drug traficking, etc. In order to achieve concrete gains such as punishment and deterrence of viola- tors and changes to the law to protect victims and eliminate exploitation, La Alameda constantly reaches out to allies, which range from church clergy, to art designers, to politicians. Politics La Alameda has indeed often worked in collaboration with politicians from dif- ferent backgrounds – but generally those which are clearly pro-worker and against the exploitation and abuse of workers, especially migrants. For example, in the anti-traficking and anti-maia conference held in April 2013, organized primarily by La Alameda, politicians from various parties as well as representa- tives of union federations such as CGT attended and extended their commitment to work with La Alameda against traficking and domination by the maia. However, certain individuals who work for or with La Alameda may be afili- ated to or members of one party, union, or another; La Alameda has for a long time kept the principle of maintaining its independence as a whole from any par- ticular political party, while being willing to maintain links and alliances. This has been a contributing factor to the willingness of a wide range of social actors and members of the public to recognize La Alameda as a credible organization  La Alameda: “guerrilla” struggles 85 and advocate for exploited workers and neglected communities. Being inde- pendent of any particular political party, La Alameda did not face pressure to gain votes for “their party,” thus remaining free from the tendency to exaggerate the organization’s achievements and promises near election times, and to modify its position on a certain issue for the sake of more possible votes. Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 Following the initial writing of this chapter however, in June 2013, Gustavo Vera announced that, on behalf of La Alameda, he would join Pino Solanas and Elisa Carrió in their political party coalition called Coalición Sur to run as candid- ates in national and local elections. The coalition includes nine political parties and La Alameda, the NGO, and is the forerunning list within UNEN, a larger political space which includes three other lists/coalitions besides Coalición Sur. Although some supporters of La Alameda have expressed the wish to see La Alameda main- tain its distance from politics, the commitment of La Alameda activists, foremostly Gustavo Vera, remains high toward principles of democracy, worker participation, and transparency. The future will tell whether participation in the legislature brings any dent in La Alameda’s remarkably intense level of achievements. Formula for success? In the following sections, I will expand from observations about La Alameda to the typical problems that face organizations, including trade unions, that over time lose their capacity and legitimacy to carry out radical social change; touch on theories that offer explanations and predictions of whether an organization can stay radically powerful; and revisit the characteristics of La Alameda that are paralleled by other examples in the world – offering the hope that its “winning” characteristics are indeed replicable. The question of how to maintain relevance and impact, and the social power to change the economy and society to workers’ needs – this is the same question for NGOs and for unions, and has been a theme of deep relection and sometimes acrid debate. Since the unfolding of neoliberal policies around the world in waves since the 1990s, including privatization, outsourcing, subcontracting, and deregulation, and accompanied by concerted attacks on union power, social organizations and communities have been struggling for the means to counteract these attacks and restore decent livelihoods and some element of control over economic and social institutions. Trade unions and their problems In industrialized countries, trade unions have been a major social force to collectively protest and make demands, to protect workers from work accidents, insure against illness and old age, and advocate for fair working and social conditions. However, the unions have posed threats to government and capital’s agendas and have been undermined through diverse ways, including legislative, political, and other indirect means. Furthermore, capitalists have found numerous  86 D. Lee ways to exploit cheap, unprotected labor – legal and illegal migrants, part-time and temporary workers, independent contractors, students, etc.; unions have not responded quickly and many are still focused on organizing formal workers in the workplace, or have become focused, for example, in the US, on gaining large membership numbers and inluence in electoral politics. Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 The loss of the relevance and power of trade unions has forced many of them to search seriously for ways to recover, while some new or simply alternative forms of organization which also defend workers’ rights have arisen. La Alameda, the Argentine organization described above, may be considered one such new form of organization, defending workers’ rights together with communities and unions, yet not a union per se. Organizations’ tendency to oligarchy: can the “Iron Law” be broken? The German sociologist Robert Michels presented what he regarded as the “Iron Law” of social organizations – that inevitably an oligarchy will develop in any democratic organization (Michels 1915). An “oligarchy” of elites assume leadership, the goals of the organization are modiied, and the organization turns its focus on maintaining its existence. Indeed, the danger of the tendency exists; however, besides the above evidence across cultures and eras, of starish-like decentralized organizations which do exhibit democratic decision-making, more recently Hanspeter Kriesi has identiied four types of trajectories of movement organizations, based on the common core of the “new social movements” that emerged in Western Europe in the 1970s and 1980s (Kriesi 1996, quoted in Tarrow 2011, 212–213).6 The four processes that Kriesi found an organization may go through in its development are as follows: 1 Institutionalization: combination of the formalization of the internal structure of a social movement organization with moderation of its goals (the pattern also identiied by Michels in European social democracy). 2 Commercialization: transformation into a service organization or proit- making enterprise. 3 Involution: a path leading to exclusive emphasis on social “incentives” so that movement organizations end up as self-help groups or voluntary associations. 4 Radicalization – that is, becoming an ever more exclusive organization for the mobilization for collective action. While social movements struggle against government and capital to make the economy responsive to human need and subject to greater democratic control by workers and citizens, in rolling waves of moves and counter-moves, government and capital continually make available myriad ways to disarm, coopt, and defuse movement organizations. However, it is not an inevitability that organizations follow that road to “survival” and allow their aims to be subverted and their activities tamed.  La Alameda: “guerrilla” struggles 87 Organizations – and movements – exist that do recognize certain keys to maintaining organizations that do not lose their value to the movement (i.e., that keep their radical power to mobilize and strike at the core of their target, not at the mere surface). Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 The power of the starish, the power of the guerrilla In his 2006 book The Starish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Lead- erless Organizations, Ori Brafman argues that decentralized and network-based operations and a certain type of people – “catalysts,” rather than leaders who monopolize authority – are important for the success of an organization. The author shows, using examples of “winner” and “loser” organizations, including corporations but also organizations like Alcoholics Anonymous, how differences in the degree of the centralization of authority, centralization of resources, and the sharing or restriction of information, affected whether an organization would grow, or survive when attacked. The “starish” (a decentralized network type of organization) could regrow parts when attacked, while the spider (a hierarchical organization with centralized authority, decision-making and resources) would be disabled if the center were attacked. Besides the decentralization of authority and sharing of information, also key are shared values or ideology, which is also related to having members who are self-motivated rather than reliant on external reward. Brafman examined past as well as current examples for lessons to inform cor- porate management; for example, he also referred to the guerrilla tactics of the Apache warriors in battles against the colonial Spanish army. Referring to the methods of guerrilla warfare, as opposed to conventional warfare, also suggests elements of success in ighting against a large, centralized authority such as a government. This is summed up succinctly in Wikipedia: [T]he strategy and tactics of guerrilla warfare tend to involve the use of a small, mobile force against a large, unwieldy one. The guerrilla force is largely or entirely organised in small units that are dependent on the support of the local population. Tactically, the guerrilla army makes small, repetitive attacks far from the opponent’s centre of gravity with a view to keeping its own casualties to a minimum and imposing a constant debilitating strain on the enemy. This may provoke the enemy into a brutal, excessively destructive response which will both anger their own supporters and increase support for the guerrillas, ultimately compelling the enemy to withdraw.7 Indeed, not much explanation is needed to demonstrate how La Alameda does employ guerrilla-type methods of action. The organization is indeed small in the number of dedicated activists; nearly all participants have other paid jobs. Yet the members themselves are part of luid larger groups of activity – for example, those who run the cooperatives, those who mobilize media, those who mobilize networks and the public for protests, etc. The group does make repeated small  88 D. Lee attacks on its targets: exploitative brands and factory owners, corrupt judges and politicians, and even the garment union federation SOIVA8 – though it is a union federation and in principle La Alameda supports trade unions and the labor movement – is not above attack if it fails to protect workers that in principle are under its mandate. Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 Yet, possibly above all, the one characteristic of guerrilla warriors which gives them power over their enemies and which is shared by La Alameda is legitimacy that comes from support of the local community, through its success in presenting the evidence of abuses to the media, and its wide and steady alliance-building. A inal important factor in a social movement organization’s capacity to bring about radical social change should be pointed out which merits its own attention – i.e., the impact of funding sources on an organization’s goal deinition – though it is to some extent implied in the process of institutionalization, which Kriesi identiied as one of the trajectories of social movement organizations and which Michels viewed as an inevitability. This is all the more important in examining frankly the countries of Asia and Latin America (and other develop- ing countries), where many of the active and prominent NGOs and trade unions are heavily if not exclusively reliant on external funds from donors based in the USA or Europe. Social movement organizations active in their local movements may or may not be aware of the impact upon their movement overall of their funding sources, since that external “non-proit” funding tends to steer the organ- ization’s activity toward donors’ requirements and reporting to donors, instead of responding to ground-level needs to the maximum degree. Impact of funding sources In the book The Revolution Will Not Be Funded, US-based non-proit organiza- tions from various backgrounds debated exactly the nature of the impact of non- proit funding upon organizations relying on them for their organization’s basic work. One of the main concepts used in the book is that of the non-proit industrial complex (NPIC). The NPIC functions as a means of controlling dissent – by incorporating it into the state apparatus, functioning as a “shadow state” consti- tuted by a network of institutions operating what should otherwise be under the government remit, in areas of government and social services (Smith 2007, 9). Robert Arnove, for example, has argued in his book Philanthropy and Cultural Imperialism that foundations have a corrosive inluence on a democratic society; they represent a relative and unregulated and unaccountable concentration of power and wealth which buy talent, promote causes, and, in effect, establish an agenda of what merits society’s attention. They serve as “cooling-out” agencies, delaying and preventing more radical, structural change (Arnove 1980, 1 quoted in Smith 2007, 8). The framework in which foundations fund organizations negatively impact social movements, according to the experiences of several of the contributors to  La Alameda: “guerrilla” struggles 89 this volume, most of which have been involved in organizing against violence against women, whether individual or state based. The reliance of non-proit organizations on external foundations for funding contributes to a form of organ- ization which is ultimately unsustainable, not contributing to building up grass- roots leadership and a mass movement capable of actually transforming society. Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 Furthermore, the NPIC is seen to contribute to a social movement culture that is non-collaborative, narrowly focused, and competitive – as they must compete with each other for funding by promoting only their own work (Smith 2007, 9–11). It also encourages social movements to model themselves after capitalist structures rather than to challenge them (3). On the other hand, grassroots fundraising – income generated from individuals, fees for services, and non-foundation sources – can become an organizing strategy itself, as well as a means to build a wider and stronger community base to deter- mine the effectiveness of the organization itself (like a built-in monitoring and check-and-balance system). As stated by Project South, a social justice organiza- tion which learned the hard way how unreliable and politically controlling founda- tions can be and decided to re-focus on grassroots fundraising (Smith 2007, 1):9 Fundamentally, economies are about the give and take of resources. In a community-based economy, resources low from and return to the same community. Connecting organizing and fundraising allows those affected by the work of an organization to determine its course. (Guilloud and Cordery 2007, 109) Thus Project South made inancial independence – even partially if not com- pletely – a principle and aim which supports the organization’s intention to make real change in the community based on the needs, concerns, and perspective of the community. This meant that the organization also naturally collaborated with other organizations – jointly planning, coordinating, and paying costs of com- munity events. This manner of raising funds while engaging with the community means that a culture of economic give and take is developed, one which places value on community, collaboration, and sharing of resources (Guilloud and Cordery 2007, 109–110). The contrasting example of La Alameda conirms the power to change society that comes from independence from government or foundations, and from its tasks which themselves are directly generated from the problems of the community, and solved with the community’s resources. Thus – and also mentioned in The Revolu- tion Will Not Be Funded, refraining from entering a framework of salaried NGO work dependent on foundations has made the organization even more reliant on the community for enabling its work – in other words, the organizing and advo- cacy come before the fundraising, and even enable the fundraising. In this inal section, I briely explain how the example of La Alameda shares parallels with worker centers in the US, and other organizations that operate in ways other than workplace-based organizing.  90 D. Lee Relevant debates in the trade union movement Decline of mainstream unions and union organizing In the USA the trade union movement has been struggling also to tackle the Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 impacts on workers and worker organizing from corporate globalization. In the book US Labor in Trouble and Transition, Kim Moody analyzes the reasons for the decline in the power of US labor, and prescriptions for revitalization of the labor movement (Moody 2007). Some of the reasons are macro-economic, but Moody places great responsibility on union leadership for the decline. Some of the major mistakes he believes they have made are brokering compromises and partnerships with employers, accepting deals that raised the welfare of a union elite but not that of the rank-and-ile, and also investing excessive union resources and hopes in the election of favorable candidates for Congress or for president, which draws away from basic organizing work and serves to margin- alize workplace militancy. Rise of worker centers Yet there is no lack of effort to counteract the weakness, bureaucracy, and unre- sponsiveness of organized labor in the US. Among the various attempts to tackle labor and employment issues outside of the US trade unions, a major attempt worthy of note is the trend of worker centers being established. This trend in the USA suggests that in the vacuum left by traditional trade unions, not only in Argentina but in the US and potentially in Asian countries too, experiments in organizing workers who have been excluded from unions or whose workplaces are dispersed or hidden are accumulating into movement wisdom and stirring unions into overdue reform and adaptation. In the research by Janet Fine on US-based worker centers, which are deined in her project as community-based and community-led organizations that engage in a combination of service, advocacy, and organizing to support low-wage workers, she inds that they prioritize leadership development and popular education, and combine aspects of organization and movement, and regard membership as more a matter of active involvement and commitment to the center’s work than of paying dues and formal registration. They mainly serve immigrant communities (and a few which are mainly African American), and help immigrant and low-wage workers to have a collective voice in public policy-making, and offer important bases for educating and organizing excluded workers. Similar to La Alameda, they serve and organize workers outside the workplace, they cater to workers who tend to be excluded or neglected in mainstream trade unions, they provide space for a variety of cultural as well as educational or work-related activities, and tend to prioritize reproduction of the movement by the continuous education and cultivation of new leaders. They combine efforts to thwart the dehumanizing effects of the current economic model while promoting the “social economy” – economic activities with social  La Alameda: “guerrilla” struggles 91 goals, with aims of reinstating the excluded into the economy with dignity and rights. And in Latin America Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 To a signiicant extent, the example of La Alameda is one that is visible in many parts of Latin America. As Paula Rojas has written in her article “Are the Cops In Our Heads and Hearts?,” many new models of organizing and of movement- building have appeared and been built up in various countries in Latin America over the past 15 years (Rojas 2007, 189). The asambleas and recovered factories phenomena in Argentina are signiicant examples, but there are also the Zapatis- tas in Chiapas, Mexico, and other horizontally connected community and worker movements in Brazil, Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador. Some of the traits they share include the people’s struggle for autonomy rather than attempts to seize state power, and collective production and decision-making in common spaces, demonstrating political work not only at election time or at NGO ofices but in everyday life. And the work of building a mass base and mass movement may be slow but it would be true people power. Conclusion The level of worker organization and trade union ethic in the USA is far behind that of Argentina, and there are many factors accounting for the differences in the worker movements and for the development of the trade unions and other organizations that aim to protect workers’ rights. Yet what is common across the USA and the countries of Latin America is the insidious search of capital for ways to exclude different categories of workers from rights as citizens, and for ways to exploit those excluded workers for cheap and docile labor. The emergence of social and solidarity economy in Latin America, the USA, Canada, European countries, and many places around the world relects a counter-reaction to the divisions caused by neoliberal economic development. Without doubt, organizational development is determined by a mixture of internal and individual (person-level) factors, and external macro factors such as the political context. Yet what I have examined in this chapter are the aspects of organization which an organization may decide itself – its aims, its membership practices, its manner, and criteria of fundraising to support its costs. Using the example of La Alameda in Argentina, it was possible to see the close relation between “success” in terms of responding to the community-level but also nation-wide problems of worker and migrant abuse, and the “light” guerrilla-like practices of the organization: horizontal decision-making, sharing of information within the organization, reliance on support from the community rather than on the risky amassing of wealth from certain external donors for core functions. As the concept of social and solidarity economy is slowly being articulated and developed, it is already being encroached upon, in a sense, by government  92 D. Lee and business initiatives to couch business with social goals in terms of “social innovation” while continuing to minimize labor-related restrictions on entrepreneurs and to prevent unions from exercising rights to participation in management. It would be beneicial for those who see social and solidarity economy as the future necessary direction for worker and community struggle to Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 realize the importance of keeping organizational strength and agility to always respond irst to community needs, which may be done by ensuring that resources come from and go back to the community, and by staying cautious against the development of an organizational or movement “oligarchy.” Notes 1 Wright describes three methods of social change: ruptural, interstitial, and symbiotic change. The concept of social economy is not used in a narrow sense but could be achieved through all of those ways; what is certain is that it is oriented toward fulilling social goals, not the pursuit of private proit. 2 In the words of Eduardo Murua, This movement began before the crisis; the movement of worker-recuperated enterprises began four years prior to the formation of the National Movement of Recuperated Enterprises [MNER]. What happened in 2001, that is, what it per- petuated, beginning with the inancial crisis and the social crisis that this gener- ated, was that all of the experiences of struggle of the labor movement – the movement of unemployed workers, the piqueteros, the worker-recuperated enter- prises – inally became visible to society at large. It wasn’t that these movements began with the inancial crisis, but that all of this already started with what the neoliberal model generated, the model that was installed by the dictatorship of 1976 and that was continued by the subsequent formal democracies up to ’95–’96. And it was then that there was a decision by a good part of the collectivity of workers to begin a method of struggle that included occupying factories and getting them to produce again, but his time under the control and management of workers. This was many years before the inancial downfall. (www.workerscontrol.net/es/node/236 (last accessed April 15, 2013)) 3 The following chronology of the development of La Alameda (which earlier was also known by the name of the garment worker union that was set up in La Alameda – Unión de Trabajadores Costureros (UTC)) is drawn in large part from Barattini’s article (2010). 4 La Alameda has maintained a blog since February 2007. Available online at: http:// laalameda.wordpress.com. 5 The website of Agenda Oculta is www.agendaoculta.net. 6 Drawing on data from France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, Kriesi focused mainly on how the political context inluenced the development trajectories of different types of organizations. However, I leave aside this area to focus on internal organizational factors. 7 Available online at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_and_tactics_of_guerrilla_ warfare (last accessed April 15, 2013). 8 SOIVA: Sindicato Obrero de la Industria del Vestido y Aines, or Clothing Industry Workers’ Union. 9 The Ford Foundation had approved a large grant to cover the general operating expenses of Project South but at a late stage reversed its decision because during the board approval process, one of the board members saw a support statement for the Pal- estinian liberation struggle on the organization’s website.  La Alameda: “guerrilla” struggles 93 References Anheier, Helmut, Marlies Glasius, and Mary Kaldor, eds. 2001. Global Civil Society 2001. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Arnove, Robert, ed. 1980. Philanthropy and Cultural Imperialism. Boston, MA: G.K. Downloaded by [Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong] at 03:01 29 June 2016 Hall. Barattini, Mariana. 2010. “Trabajo esclavo y organización: el caso de la Unión de Traba- jadores Costureros en Argentina.” Estudios Demográicos y Urbanos 25(2): 461–481. Brafman, Ori. 2006. The Starish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations. New York: Penguin. Fine, Janice. 2005. “Worker Centers: Organizing Communities at the Edge of the Dream.” Economic Policy Institute Brieing Paper 159, December 14. Available online at: www. epi.org/page/-/old/brieingpapers/159/bp159.pdf (last accessed April 15, 2013). Guilloud, Stephanie, and William Cordery, Project South: Institute for the Elimination of Poverty and Genocide. 2007. “Fundraising is Not a Dirty Word: Community-based Economic Strategies for the Long Haul.” In The Revolution Will Not Be Funded: Beyond the Non-proit Industrial Complex, edited by Incite! Women of Color Against Violence (pp. 107–112). Cambridge, MA: South End Press. Hauser, Irina. 2004. “Los vecinos de Parque Avellaneda temen perder otra vez ‘La Alameda’.” Página 12, April 15. Available online at: www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/ elpais/1-34118-2004-04-15.html (last accessed 15 April, 2013). Kaldor, Mary, Henrietta L. Moore, and Sabine Selchow. 2012. Global Civil Society 2012: Ten Years of Critical Relection. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Kriesi, Hanspeter. 1996. “The Organizational Structure of New Social Movements in Political Context.” In Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings, edited by Doug McAdam, John D. McCarthy, and Mayer N. Zald (pp. 152–184). Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press. Manjon, Lucas. 2013. Personal Interview, April 22. Michels, Robert. 1915. Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tend- encies of Modern Democracy, translated by Eden Paul and Cedar Paul. New York: The Free Press. Moody, Kim. 2007. US Labor in Trouble and Transition: The Failure of Reform from Above, the Promise of Revival from Below. London: Verso. Rojas, Paula X. 2007. “Are the Cops in Our Heads and Hearts?” In The Revolution Will Not Be Funded: Beyond the Non-proit Industrial Complex, edited by Incite! Women of Color Against Violence (pp. 197–214). Cambridge, MA: South End Press. Ruggeri, Andrés. 2010. Las Empresas Recuperadas en la Argentina. 2010: Informe del Tercer Relevamiento de Empresas Recuperadas por Sus Trabajadores. Buenos Aires: Programa Facultad Abierta Facultad de Filosoia y Letras Universidad de Buenos Aires. Smith, Andrea. 2007. “Introduction: The Revolution Will Not Be Funded.” In The Revolution Will Not Be Funded: Beyond the Non-proit Industrial Complex, edited by Incite! Women of Color Against Violence (pp. 1–18). Cambridge, MA: South End Press. Tarrow, Sidney G. 2011. Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Pol- itics. New York: Cambridge University Press. Vera, Gustavo. 2013. Personal interview. April 22. Wright, Erik Olin. 2010. Envisioning Real Utopias. London: Verso.