Communal Performativity—A Seed for Change? The Solidarity of Thessaloniki's Social Movements in the Diverse Fights Against Neoliberalism

Abstract

The debate on the financial crisis is at an impasse. Neoliberal austerity discourse is often positioned as an almost insurmountable barrier, its disciplinary power affecting even the most change‐oriented citizen‐initiatives existing today. Countering this, this paper highlights the transformative capacity of social movements in Thessaloniki. Drawing from Butler, Laclau and Mouffe, and Gibson‐Graham we develop the notion of “communal performativity” both as an academic and as a practical concept to understand and build trajectories of socio‐economic change. “Communal” denotes the drive of the movements’ participants to interconnect and (re)negotiate with a multiplicity of Others, curbing identity politics to articulate internal differences and Otherness. We see some hopeful signs of bridges being built towards shared trajectories of change that can be understood as different but concrete variations on the abstract counter‐narrative of “breaking with neoliberalism”. Some of these variations challenge, others diversify neoliberal discourses and practices.

Dealing with Undeniable Differences in Thessaloniki’s Solidarity Economy of Food

“…Allen [25] (p.10) highlights how local food systems in the US continue to marginalise some social groups through pluralist democratic organising, because asymmetrical distributions of power are being upheld, "which amplify some voices or completely drown out others". Some research in Greece has also shown disagreement and division in solidarity initiatives (e.g., [6]). Rakopoulos' [26] raises sources of conflict in the Greek no middlemen initiatives, including tensions caused by institutionalization and its consequences for radical politics.…”

“…There is also a growing fear of co-optation (a form of homogenisation) of social movement politics in solidarity economies, particularly pertinent given the spotlight on Greece as a centre point of radical solutions to crisis, which Rakopoulos [27] contends can give rise to romanticised accounts of solidarity economy. Steinfort [6] argues from a post-structuralist perspective that movements in Thessaloniki could avoid fragmentary strategizing based on identity politics by undertaking "communal performative" narratives as transformation strategies that respect antagonisms and differences. This article contends alternatively that conflict, and the belief that it is inevitable, is exaggerated by overlooking the importance of structural difference in defining dynamics of self-organised initiatives.…”

“…Manos describes the inclusion of plural actors as "a recognition today of a wide range of citizens", an inevitability for food initiatives; but the question that remains is how do these initiatives include different actors as participants within them. Although conventions of individualistic competitiveness are being challenged through discussions of direct democracy and anti-capitalism in new economies [6], there still exists a confrontational politics within these new initiatives whose divisive characteristics rest on inequitable power relations.…”

“…Meanwhile, the cooperative does depend on voluntary labour offered in their free time. Since work is rarely remunerated in the Greek solidarity economy, and in cases where it is, the pay is usually low, many individuals dedicate voluntary hours for the functioning of the collective endeavour [6]. People are motivated to dedicate unremunerated hours often to put their politics into practice, or with the hope that this new endeavour may offer economic and social stability in the future-and as a result this is commonly considered a sign of virtue or a test of political credentials.…”

“…The solidarity economy has been welcomed by members of Greek society, their government [2], and intellectuals [3], as a solution to the capitalist crisis [4,5]. However, it is now ten years since the crisis began, and the process of building solidarity is not all hopeful [6]. During the years 2016-2018, which informed the research reported in this article, several initiatives experienced internal organisational dynamics or financial strains that have pushed the initiatives themselves into crisis.…”