Solidarity Economy and Praxis Imaginary in the Anti-Globa Movement

This paper presents a phenomenological reading of Pragmatist sociology, which allows to investigate the internal dynamics and tensions within the économie solidaire (ES) movement. While the movement's identity is defined by a common imagnary of action, conflicting views on how to realise the joint vision of a "ES" subvert the formation of a coherent and more powerful voice. The imaginary of practice contrasts with the imaginary of utopia and contestation that characterised the "old" social movements, like the Marxist-Leninist labour movements, which originated in the classical left ideology (Touraine, 2002). But even if the collective representations of these groups take their starting point in a common political imaginary of practice (Castoriadis, 1975), some internal criticisms appears. The reason is that this imaginary of practice is articulated by four distinctive states of mind organized around four values. To below to the SE, each association/cooperative must be able to travel between these states of mind and to represent its specific action as a realisation of the four values. When it doesn't, it takes the risk to receive criticisms from other SE actorsd. In a second move, I'll give a example of a very concentration around one specific state of mind that I call “extrapolation” and that leads to fights. I explore how the "Mouvement pour l'Economie Solidaire" (MES) position itself within the anti-globalisation movement by using arguments drawn from the common imaginary In the various World Social Forums (Porto Alegre, Bombay) or European Social Forums (Florence, Paris, London), the MES present themselves as the practical actors of concrete, material and realistic claims while they criticise the political grammar of the alter globalisation movements, such as the French radical left movement (composed by political parties and trade unions). But these forum are mainly the space of fights between the MES actors themselves and other “representative” association of the ES : Les Pénélopes. Each of them accuse the other to forget some of the four fundamental values to focus about one of them that they extrapolate. Rather than trying to reconcile the four states of mind and ideological representation of the ES, the different groups are resilient to compromise their position. Could some compromises allow them to reach a better political visibility in France?