LATE JANUARY 2002: Noam Chomsky, one of the intellectual leaders of the broadly named Anti-Globalization movement, is addressing a cheering crowd of 3000 at the World Social Forum in Puero Allegre, Brazil. ‘[The Forum] offers,” announced the ecstatic Professor, “the real possibility of building a new international.” The title of the Forum, ‘Another World is Possible,’ underscored the real purpose of the event: to build the burgeoning Left-wing movement from a protest to a party. While the forum is getting underway, another facet of the Leftist critique was at work at the University of Minnesota: a group called the Earth Liberation Front claimed responsibility for a fire that caused well over $250,000 worth of damage. The message: protest against Genetically Engineered crop research.

The contrast between the well-heeled World Economic Forum at New York and the Puerto Allegre Forum drew the headlines, but the contrast between Puerto Allegre and the University of Minnesota may be the more lasting one. It highlights the divergence inside a movement that isn’t sure where it wants to go, but can’t stay where it is.

ELF and its sister group, the Animal Liberation Front, are one of the earliest expressions of the anti-Corporation, far-Left division known collectively as the Anti-Globalization movement. Their websites’ ‘Diary of Actions’ chronicles almost all ELF activities back to its founding in 1992. A typical entry is from late 1996, ‘Hwy. 99 and Garfield McDonald’s locks glued and spray painted.’ They describe themselves as an ‘international underground organization that uses direct action in the form of economic sabotage to stop the exploitation and destruction of the natural environment.’ No humans have been harmed in a Direct Action, but as Representative Betty McCollum remarked at a recent hearing, “It’s only a matter of time before somebody gets hurt,” ELF and ALF took anti-corporate feeling and made it into an ideology, and did all of it well before the Anti-Globalization movement burst forth in 1999. ‘lets dance as we make ruins of the corporate money system,’ wrote an ELF member in 1997.

More recently, a collective known as the Anti-Globalization movement has garnered headlines. Along with mainstream environmentalists, the Sweatshop and Fair Trade activists, and a renewed interest in Anarchy as a political ideal on college campuses, the Anti-Globalization movement gradually coalesced . It’s been spotted wherever the World Bank or IMF holds meetings, protesting the ‘domination of World Capitalism,’ among a laundry list of generally Left-wing demands. Their message in all points is very similar to ELFs and ALFs. A typical Anti-Globalization flyer proclaims ‘we are people who protest the power multinational corporations, faceless international financial institutions and inaccessible governments have over their lives’ Their members number in the tens of thousands, and have held highly publicized, and sometimes violent, protests at Quebec, New York City, and overseas.

Before September 11th, there was good reason to expect the two movements to blend into each other, as the Anti-Globalization movement became split between violent demonstrators and the more moderate faction. The protests in Genoa showed this potential, as rioters overshadowed the more numerous peaceful demonstrators. It seemed reasonable to expect a smaller but much more intense group of anti-Capitalist activists to emerge. They would use the same tactics as ALF/ELF but towards a larger range of targets.

Yet there have always been crucial differences between the wider Anti-Globalization movement and the ALF/ELF movement. A crucial one is structure: the necessary secrecy of the movement prevents it from changing in any meaningful sense. The Anti-Globalization movement is capable of discussing new ideologies and creating leaders to promote changes. None in ALF or ELF have the authority to change the basic precepts already laid down. The two have separate methods; the infamous McDonalds and Starbucks smashings aside, the Anti-Globalization movement has always been a primarily non-violent one. The Nation reported one thoughtful Anti-Globo remarking ‘we need to speak up and say clearly that violence, as a political tactic, just doesn’t work either in the United States or in Europe.” ALF/ELF couldn’t change their tactics; doing so would reveal who the members are. Finally, the two have very different Big Brothers to look up to. Across the pond the Americans have an example to follow: the well-developed and mature European Social Democracy model. Indeed, the attendance at the Puerto Allegre was heavily skewed towards Europeans and their fellow Social Democrats in Latin America. ALF/ELF don’t have the same model of evolution to follow. James Jarboe, of the FBI’s counterterrorism division said, “Over the years splinter groups have continued to emerge which have been dissatisfied with more conventional protest methods and have escalated the intensity of their protests.”

Now the two groups are separating. The Anti-Globalization movement towards, not a mainstream position, but to a respectable and potentially electable alternative. ALF/ELF, on the other hand, remain much the same. Not only have the two movements changed, but the way the world reacts to them has changed as well. The Anti-Globalization movement has sought to harness what exists of the opposition to Bush’s war policies. ALF/ELF has seen its own notoriety grown, and not to their benefit. More and more newspapers and Congressmen are condemning them as terrorists.

The Anti-Globalization movement’s ability to follow the Social Democratic model in Europe is the key to their efforts. It has many attractive elements, and the similarities in ideology are striking. The manifesto for Germany’s Green Party calls for rectifying ‘growing global injustice,’ ending environmental exploitation, and other themes of the Anti-Globalization movement. And unlike in the US, Social Democratic positions are electorally powerful. The more respectful parties have significant representation in European parliaments, while their radical fringes can produce hundreds of thousands of protestors at selected venues. They’ve also shown the way to maintain a successful ‘Green-Blue’ partnership between Environmentalists and Unions, something the Anti-Globalization movement is struggling to establish.

Which makes the closest American equivalent to the Social Democratic movement– Nader’s Green Party– a major player in the struggle to establish a political force. The Green Party is “tapping something among a younger progressive environmental crowd worried about globalization,” said UC Professor Bruce Cain to the SF Chronicle. Green Party registration rose 57% nationwide between 2000 and 2001. Nader has made no bones about his intention to build the Green Party as a long-term player and alternative to the Democratic party. So far, 200 candidates have run for office from the Green Party, with eight victories.

While the Anti-Globalization movement tries to move to respectability, the extreme environmentalists are finding themselves consigned more and more to the fringes. This is mostly because of greatly heightened scrutiny and pressure from the FBI and Congress, which have focused on the environmentalist movement as the sole identifiable domestic terrorist movement. The FBI prominently highlights its efforts against ELF and ALF, boasting that ‘Currently, more than 26 FBI field offices have pending investigations associated with ALF or ELF activities.’ The FBI is also establishing 56 new ‘Joint Terrorism Task Forces’ across the Nation, with a special focus on Ecoterrorism.

Several members of Congress have taken up the pursuit of Ecoterrorism as a cause. Most are Republicans from the developing West and Southwest, areas that see heavy ELF/ALF action. Representative Scott McInnis, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health, has held several inquiries into the nature of ELF and ALF. In a widely publicized appearance before McInnis’ subcommittee, ELF leader Craig Rosebraugh repeatedly took the fifth amendment. Legislation to attack Ecoterrorism is also in the works. The ‘Agroterrorism Prevention Act’ is currently before a Senate Committee, although the wider USA PATRIOT act has much to do with the FBI’s pursuit of ALF/ELF as well.

The divergence of the two groups is hardly set in stone. The Anti-Globalization movement’s ideology of a corporate controlled media and government is conducive to a wholescale rejection of ‘The System,’ which many of its members still do. In a movement populated by large and unwieldy alliances between mainstream environmentalists, Anarchists, Socialists, and many others, building an electoral machine is difficult. Also, the Green Party’s future depends on seducing established Liberals away from the Democratic party, something its finding difficult to do. And all that is beside the problem of legitimizing a movement where a significant minority of its members believe Bush planned the September 11th attacks.

Yet the Leaders of the Anti-Globalization movement– and the members of ELF/ALF– seem to see no other path ahead of them. To score political successes and bring in new members, the Anti-Globalization movement needs to organize effectively and present a clear alternative to the National parties. ALF/ELF see their ‘Direct Actions’ as more vital than ever. There is little sign just yet of a rift in the far Left, but the cracks are growing.