The New Radicals

(4 of 4)

In some ways, the IMF protest was a reunion. It wasn't a replay, though. In Seattle, organized labor ran interference for the ragtag groups assembled behind it, marshaling several thousand union members who feared that free trade might send their jobs abroad. In Washington, labor focused on lobbying Congress over the China-trade issue, leaving the IMF and the World Bank to the ad hoc Netocracy. Munson, the anarchist, thinks it's just as well. "The union heads are into a protectionist, nationalist agenda," he says. "They want to prevent China from entering the WTO. Our position is that we don't want the WTO to exist."

Not wanting things to exist is not a platform; it's an attitude. But it will do, at least until something more positive comes along. Beck, who's already thinking beyond Washington, has her eye on this summer's political conventions. "We need a plurality of ideas. More parties," she says. "We need to break up the two-party system."

Into what, though? And into how many pieces? The antiglobalists seem, at times, like "anything but"-ers, like connoisseurs of chaos. With their affinity groups and spokescouncils and e-mail listservs, they have mastered the art of creating disorderly order and vice versa. It's a real achievement, despite the feeling of some that they've failed hugely in winning poor Americans and minorities to their sometimes remote, confusing cause. Globalization is a big word and an even bigger enemy. Maybe for people with everyday concerns like paying the rent and keeping the car gassed up, it's a little too big.

There's the paradox. Because if one sentiment links the antiglobalists, besides their concern for the world's have-nots, it's a distrust of the large, of the enormous (except for Big Labor--for now). Their spirit recalls a conflict from the '70s that also pitted young idealists against a fearsome acronym. When Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, moved by a belief that small is beautiful and big is hideous, set out to build a personal computer that would challenge IBM's great mainframes, their aim was not merely technical but also social. They wanted to bring power to the people. Now the people have it, and they're using it. To do precisely what is still a mystery.

--Reported by Mitch Frank/New York, Margot Hornblower/Los Angeles, David E. Thigpen/Chicago and Adam Zagorin/Washington