 Hello, hello, hello and welcome to another coordinating call of the M25 the movement for Europe featuring progressive ideas you won't hear anywhere else. Today we're going to be discussing communication, specifically, how do we communicate our policies now let me give you a bit of background in April 2019 we launched a campaign called the Green New Deal for Europe. Its purpose was to unite political forces, community activists unions around a set of proposals to combat the twin crises of austerity and climate breakdown but a lot has changed since then. Obviously the political landscape has changed, but also at least in the progressive world, as they say in English, everyone and their mother has a Green New Deal. So we've decided to re brand our Green New Deal for Europe campaign to repackage it to pitch it differently. And we're in the middle of that process. This is one of those working discussions. So this will be a brainstorm to decide what direction do we actually take in terms of rebranding, because ultimately, this will be the campaign and the proposals that will be taking to the ballot box in forthcoming elections that we whatever we decide to compete in you out if you are thinking I've got some idea for your brainstorm or you just disagree or wildly agree with something that we're saying please put it in the chat on YouTube and we'll read your comments out between the interventions. Now I will hand it over to Dushan who is our Green New Deal for Europe coordinator Dushan. Thank you Mehran and hello to everyone who's watching us. Basically before we get the backlash right away, let me explain that we are very well aware of certain disadvantages of rebranding, but we just think that advantages outweigh. Basically, yes, there is a possibility of losing good rebranding, we know that we have nice colors and nice website and stuff like that. And that Green New Deal is well known name that's usually attractive to public. On the other side, it's not really representative of DM, not just its colors, but it's also its name. And we need something that is going to be resonating better with our target population, which is 99%. And Green New Deal, yes, attracts people, but it attracts only, let's call it intellectual elite or environmentalists and so on and so on. And we are trying to fight with and for the people that are much, much, how to say it, broader category. Also, unfortunately, even though our Green New Deal, as Mehran already explained, was one of the first, especially for Europe. It can now be easily confused by the other deals that outsource it does because of money and other resources, like Green New Deal by Greens, UK Green New Deal. There is also now that so called Green Deal by European Union. And the thing is that we really don't have time to explain what is Roosevelt's deal and how is ours Green New Deal, different from all the others, let alone that the people that we are fighting with and for have time to do that, they don't. And let's not make it a technical matter because it's so much more Green New Deal, or whatever the future main is going to be, needs something that's self explanatory and something that's being integrated inside of the M structures, because in the end of the day that's our blueprint for Europe just transition. We have other things on the agenda, other than just rebranding, like opposing the ratification of SETA, because if it gets ratified by national parliament, it's going to be a disaster. And only because, because there's a possibility to do so because of certain, let's call it loophole by European Union. We actually have the chance to stop the elite in most direct way to do so. So we have other actions that we need to organize around in the most direct way and to make European Union and Europe in general democratized so let's go on with this and let's have something that's really DM like workers friendly and something that's both radical and realistic in its name and in its nature. Thank you. Thanks. Thanks to Sharon Ivana. Thanks. I very much agree with everything Doshan said, and especially this. I think we're losing you there Ivana. Unfortunately, would anyone else like to speak while Ivana sorts out her internet connection. Very quickly. I'm super happy with this rebranding and it comes in time. The G20 is meeting in Naples very soon on climate issues. So it might be like, you know, like a good target to test the new brand in even just to do some test groups on which like testing styles and so on. And connected with that and guess that you're aware of that. If not, I can send you send you the details. Thank you. Renata. Any other thoughts on that I know one is this disconnected for a bit and she'll be coming back in a sec. I can try without the video. Okay. Try without video. Go for it. Sorry for the internet. So basically the rebranding. I mean, if we decide that we are gearing up for 2024 EU elections, then we should also look at our overall policy proposals and how Green New Deal then fits into all of this. And it's not then just about the name and the branding, but much more and how to emphasize the social policies that we have hidden inside. And people are often misguided that it's just quote unquote about green transition and not also about the basic goods for example. Thanks. So I'm a barrel. Yeah. Sometimes I'm being very pessimistic, but should we not be a little more realistic because green new deal. Let's look to these three words. These concepts. I mean, green. Yes, it gives a hope for a beautiful world. But new the concept new is really not a convincing concept at the moment. Because of instead of new, probably we should say urgent and the same with deal. Is it deal or is it rescue. So I asked myself these questions and yes, Green New Deal is positive optimist and very attractive. But is it true. Think about it because let I'm living in Turkey and the three C's Black Sea again, and the Mediterranean is under political and ideological assault. So let's I think I also agree that we shouldn't think about the the title but the content and the truth behind this content. And secondly, I think we should concentrate on these three C's because these three C's are not only ecological issues, but also very cultural issues. It is connected to culture to historical culture to memory. I mean, let's accept that this region we are living in is the most memory full of region of the world. So this is my opinion. Thank you for our Yanis. I have an attachment to the Green New Deal, which is personal. And that's because I gave it. First time I spoke of a Green New Deal was in 2002 in Brussels in the European Parliament that gave us a talk to the progressive caucus it existed back then comprising the left and the greens. And the social democrats and I gave a speech in which I was advocating a Green New Deal in 2002. So you can imagine, given that the Green New Deal was also the main policy of am I frozen? Can you hear me? We hear you. We hear you. So everybody was frozen. So I'm saying this because I'm the person that has the greatest reason not to ditch the branding of Green New Deal. But having listened to do some we need to do to digit. There's no doubt we need to digit because it has been replicated. It has divided and multiplied. Everybody has a bloody Green New Deal. And it means nothing. Even the European Commission has a green deal. Okay, they took the new out. But they now the term means nothing. It's been emptied of content. The, you know, when ExxonMobil came up with a research paper entitled the importance of the Green New Deal. I thought, okay, all right, that's it. Now it means it is it is census. Okay, that's point number one. Point number two. We are in the process, not just of rebranding the Green New Deal, but also of rethinking DM 2.0. A more radical DM, a DM that goes beyond the lofty ideas of democratizing the, you know, Europe. A more radical DM that looks at capitalism and its latest incarnation and makes plans for post capitalism. Given that the Green New Deal is our main agenda for doing all that. That has to be reflected. The word green has become conservative. The word green, green is a new brown. You can you can see that from the way in which greenwashing has become an art or a science or a combination of art and science. The greens in Germany are what what they are. So I don't need to see more of this. So I think we need to drop not just the whole title but even the word green from our title. Time ago I've been putting out the the ideological and analytical position that the 25 is relies for many of our policies on green Keynesianism, but we're going beyond green Keynesianism. I had an article remember beyond green Keynesianism. I think that the new manifesto that we will come up by next February is going to signal our move beyond green Keynesianism anyway. Okay, so what should the new branding be? I haven't had much time to think about it. I mean that in that the word ecological is one that we must be playing teaching the word green. The words new and deal, but I was right, have to go. So off the top of my head if you put a gun on my head now without having had an opportunity to think about that this is simply put for thought. And then I shut up. I'm keeping notes here on my phone. Something like ecological post capital share prosperity. Somehow to combine the notions of shared prosperity post capitalist and ecological. I'm not suggesting that term right. I'm not suggesting that sounds terrible sounds like, you know, a brand for some kind of equipment. But I think ecological post capitalist and a prosperity a version of prosperity, not growth, not development, not industrial, but prosperity that the shared. That's my two and a half cents for the time being. I was wondering how we would fit that on a T shirt. A couple of quick comments from the chat here. Suggesting from Emilio you are DM, it should be named DM new deal on it. Another which I think little tongue in cheek perhaps. He says green nuclear deal is a better name. And another suggest is emphasizing sustainability over green from Sean saying Rosemary over to you. Thank you. I think we're beginning to demonstrate forcibly the enormous terrors of attempting to come up with a name off the top of our heads. However, I don't think that we can hide behind the excuse that we want to be talking in depth about content forever because actually this art form, which is called finding excellent names things is one that in the commercial world they pay millions of pounds for to people incredibly talented because it is such a very specific craft. So having set myself up for a huge fall. I'm now going to put my faith in the suggestion which is DM green transformation. I like this idea because I actually do think we have to hang on to the green. I just don't think DM's ecological transformation does anything to make us more accessible. And for me green says something about the relationship between man and nature. I think that's absolutely vital part of the dialectic here. I want to go on to talk about why I think the relationship between man and nature is mirrored at this moment in time for the future of the species actually in the importance of the relationship between man and man or woman and woman at fellow human beings the relationship between fellow human beings on the one hand side and the relationships between man and nature on the other. So, yes, I'd like to throw DM's green transformation into the mix and transformation is important because it doesn't monkey around with pretensions of revolutionary glory, but it does suggest change which is truly transformative. And whatever else we're doing, that's what we're engaged in here. Thank you. Really interesting discussion to follow. I hope also the viewers enjoy it and please write more suggestions into the chat so we get more ideas going. We'll also reach out to the membership and ask for more ideas and a wider brainstorm to bring it back into this group. I just wanted to say, bring a little more of a strategic point, because we have also a progressive agenda for Europe, which is the name for our overall policy program, where the Green New Deal for Europe has been a part of and other policy papers like peace and social policy or technological sovereignty, migration and so on fall under. And I asked myself the question, shouldn't we take the name for overall policy program and turn this into a campaign, also campaigning for these important topics that I just mentioned about this, of course, that I now have mentioned to also think ahead towards the European elections in 2024 and possibly already have a name that we are putting out there in campaign activism that we then also can use and show as an electoral program to really make full use of our double strategy of movement and party. So that is my contribution. I haven't come up with the really good name proposal like others you have. I hope some more speakers can bring some interesting proposals. Thanks. Thank you, Johannes, a comment from Zoe Lujic on the chat agreeing with you Rosemary transformation is a very good word to use especially as we're working on transformation of energy within our Green New Deal for Europe policy revision work. Any other, any other comments from any of you guys still thinking digesting. Who wants to go next. Let's go. Your yellow hand up. Yeah, it's too sophisticated for me, you know. And Lewis, I know that you had some comments that you're putting in the chat, you can speak after stretch go and put them out there go for it stretch go. Yes, this is a working meeting which happens to be life transmitted. I must honestly say that I think it's impossible to find a name now today of course and that we will have to brainstorm more and also crowdsource different proposals but what I think is the most important thing is, of course that we all agree on the content that we all agree that the end 25 has to be both as Dushan said realistic and radical at the same time. You know I'm saying this at the moment when today, two interesting events happened on the one hand Ursula from the land of the European Commission is in a visiting Croatia. Shearing the recovery plan so called recovery plan at the same time Victor Orban is meeting Alexander Wucic in Serbia. Why is this interesting because at the very beginning when, when the European Commission announced European new European Green Deal without the new Ursula from the land said that her leadership of the European Commission would be a geopolitical one. And what we can see what is playing out these days is precisely geopolitics on the one hand the greenwashing of the European Commission with a green deal which is nearly not sufficient to get us out of the other climate crisis and the very slow transition towards sustainable energy. At the same time the problem of the European Commission of course is the externalization of costs and extractivism which will continue. So on the one hand you have this Europe this European Commission on the other hand you can see that the new block is being formed. Serbia is particularly interesting. I know many members from Serbia could say more about it because of the extraction and the mining which is going on now. Both on the one side, on the one hand, the real thing top mining company, which is extracted lithium, or trying to because there were big protests in Serbia and the petition on the other hand is China and copper mining. So what I think besides thinking about the name we should think about geopolitics as well in which way a Green New Deal is not just a European Green New Deal or a Green New Deal for Europe without taking into consideration other countries the externalization of costs and the extraction of lithium for instance now in Serbia which is part of Europe but not part of the European Union. I think we have to broaden our policies or when it comes to ecology and sustainable development. I don't have a name now. Of course we will have to continue talking about it but I think we have to go much more radical against extractivism and externalization, which again means also to go much more radical against greenwashing, especially given the fact that now everyone speaks about a Green New Deal. And even as Jani said, big business is now also talking about Green New Deals. So, you know, when you have the ocean burning in front of your eyes, I think it's insufficient and important to talk just about a new deal. We have to be much more radical than that. Thanks, Srećko. And as you implied, just there for viewers that are just joining, we're not just talking about picking a name. We're actually using the name of this campaign or the renaming and rebranding of this campaign as a prison through which to look at what we would like to focus on in terms of the content. Luis. Thanks, everyone. Yeah, I wholeheartedly agree with what Rose Berry and Srećko said about us not being able to, you know, come up with such an important piece of marketing, let's say, what it is on the fly. I would, however, like to make a note about dropping the word green as well. I think that, you know, doesn't really work with us and great about confusion. So I very much like, you know, sustainability to be an element in the name. Now, there's an aspect that I'd like to discuss and I'd like to hear Duzan's thoughts about it, which I think it's connected actually with what Srećko just said, as to, you know, to make a very valuable and really the best content. I'm sorry for the lack of modesty, but I think that a great new deal, as it's got right now, continues to be innovative and, you know, avant-garde. How to make that popular and spread out. And by these, what I mean is how do we become part of the conversation, even in the institutions and all these things that, you know, are taking place right now. I think that's really important. I think that we need to, you know, get in and jump into the official discussions because we are limited on the fridge. And in order for us to, you know, make our voice heard, we also need to be part of those conversations and say, no, this is, you know, the right way to go. I'm speaking about all these forums, you know, Renata mentioned one, you know, we need to have into those conversations as well. Because those are the ones, as Duzan rightly said, that gather all the attention and, you know, cover all the front pages and whatnot. And we need to be there like it or not. And the second point connected with Srećko, I call holiday free. Ours is a blueprint that needs to be taken globally, you know, from here to Latin America and everywhere else. So it's no longer a pan-European thing because because of our DNA or international DNA and for things to work. And because we are present issues that actually global interconnected, we need to, you know, go one step further and go global with it. And of course, we have the Progressive International to help us do that as well, you know, and other tools. So, but I really want to hear what Duzan has to say about taking part of that, those conversations as well. Thanks, Louis. Duzan, would you like to respond? Of course, yeah. Thank you for the question, Louis. And first of all, let me just stress something before I answer to that. That really green new deal is much more than just environmentalism issues. So it's heavily, heavily connected with everything that the N does. It's our project campaign and most probably political programs. So it has housing, jobs and all the others. And we identified some gaps inside of the blueprint. As Rechko was speaking, influence on so-called global south is one of them. Even though we mentioned some structures and shutting down tax havens and don't letting the companies to go to other countries. We also have some more job to do. And we also have to incorporate aspects from Yanis is another now inside of green deal to help our blueprint for post capitalism to be even more even deeper. So, getting back to what Luis said. I think that through NC's are national co-actives and our provisional national co-actives and through all of our DSCs, we have to work with unions. We have to mobilize the people mobilize are already a registered members who are more than 150,000. And as you know, the majority of them are not really active. So let's mobilize them first and let them identify with the end and green deal and our ideas and incorporate that inside of their identities. Then they can work to mobilize trade unions, workers unions, and we can really be present on occasions where it's important to be like we applied for COP26. As you all know, unfortunately, or not unfortunately, we'll see we got rejected. We assume that's because they found us too radical or whatever, but we didn't have an individual answer. And that's why we are going to have alternative cop called cop off, because we need to have our voices heard, and we need to provide the platform to the people, and all the others that don't have the space in mainstream media and mainstream spaces because they voice their voices are not heard. Unfortunately, variety of coalitions taught us that we are much more being used for policies than than we actually get from from those coalitions. So, right now, I'd say that we have focus focus to be political movement and to be to have structured electoral beings that can push this political agenda and this political program without compromises we don't need seats. We just need this program to to be in life to be in Europe. For that, we need much bigger acknowledgement by the broader public, not just environmentalists, as I said before, and we need to be out on streets. Unfortunately, COVID made it hard, but we are thinking through how to how to make it easier for our comrades to be on the streets. So that's one one aspect, and there's also multiple others like trying to reach the media which which will provide the platform we are also working with Green New Deal hubs that share our resources around and so on and so on. But most importantly, if you ask me, current issues need to be debated from the stance of Green New Deal for Euro policy. So when we have DMTV, when we have interviews, let's debate those issues from the stance on how they can be sold because we already have the blueprint on how they can be sold. And now let's present it to the public. Sorry for taking so long, but it's a complex issue. Thanks, Tushin. Interesting thoughts. Yanis. No, Juliana. Juliana first then Yanis. Thank you. I also don't have any concrete proposal today, but I like the direction of this post-capitalistic transformation plan sort of thing because people, you know, I think most importantly it is if people hear the name of it, it's what they associate with it. And with the Green New Deal, in the past years, I felt like the key question for people was, is it only for the environment? Like people were like thinking that it is primarily about saving the earth, so to say, and that the people that are living in the present are like secondary in this sort of program. So they have questions like, what's with my job? Or how will the future look for the people? And I think that the name has to be of this sort that people associate with their lives. So they think, okay, this could be something for me because we had this word also holistic, you know, it's speaking to everything and everyone. So I think this is important direction. Why also, this is also the reason why I think that the green is problematic in itself, not just because of the greenwashing, but because of this misunderstanding of people that they think that the green has nothing to do with real life issues, but more specifically with just having an energy transition and so on and so forth. So it's a very complex word nowadays, the green, because there are too many associations with it. So yeah, hopefully it would be great to have a name that is not only not too intellectual, but that can be have a holistic meaning and be explained easily to people with, you know, to talk about the core points of the program rather than to have to explain its existence, because this is kind of what we have been doing with the Green New Deal is to explain its existence much more than its content. And yeah, so it would be great to have a name that points to the content already much stronger. This is only what I wanted to add. Thanks again. Yes, you're absolutely right. Now, yes, we're ditching Green New Deal. I think that there's a consensus there but let's not forget what a good name it was, because unlike, you know, green transformation rosemary, which is a standard Green Party argument since the 1970s. It's not bad, except that, you know, there's no differentiation between what the green movement has been saying since the 1970s and what we're saying. You see, the reason why I retrieved the New Deal in 2002, and added green to it, was because the New Deal was in 1933, a very clear program for taking the money of the rich and pressing it into the service of the many. And that's what Roosevelt did. That was like the New Deal. What was it that did it refer to. It referred to that which the Greens today in Germany, for instance, do not understand that you don't need to tax people in order to spend on creating jobs, green energy, whatever. The point of Roosevelt was in the New Deal, we are not going to tax in the middle of a depression, right. But there is all this cash here, sitting idly by, we're going to put the bankers in a box. Yeah, in a kind of prison. We're going to stop the bankers from doing banking things. And we're going to find public financial tools like US Treasury bills, by which to soak up the liquidity from the banking system and create jobs with them. That was the New Deal. My idea in 2002 is you add the green to make sure that the investments are not brown. They are not in creating more motorways for gas gasoline cars to speed across America, right, that you're using it in order to create a green energy union, for instance. That was the original idea of 2002. So the Green New Deal embeds the social, the anti-finance and the green transition or green transformation. So let's not be, let's be clear about that. Even if you all agree that we're going to ditch the Green New Deal. These are three very powerful words that capture a great deal of what is important. And we're going to have a huge problem replacing them. I'm not against replacing them. I already said simply because everybody has jumped on the bandwagon and now they have created an inflationary process diluting the meaning of the three words Green New Deal. We don't have the name yet, but you know, it's good. We're brainstorming. At some point the name will come to us. But I think it is important to have this conversation. I don't like the idea of sustainability at all, Luis, because it's conservative. I don't want to sustain anything. I want to change everything. Now I know you what you mean sustainability in terms of the environment, right? I don't think that we even want to say that we want to sustain the ecological equilibrium that we have because the ecological equilibrium we have is really bad. I mean if you look at most ecosystems, right? Even if we do nothing, they're in trouble. So we want to change the ecological systems. We want to improve them. We don't want to keep them where they are. So anyway, I think that the word sustain, the verb to sustain is a conservative verb. It's not part of DM 2.0 of the new radicalized DM. I don't like the word green. Only because it has been completely taken over by everyone else. Transformation is great, but it's not enough because the greens have used it because we are already experiencing a transformation. You know, article in the techno feudalism, it's a transformation of capitalism to techno feudalism, not this transformation, not necessarily a good thing. So, you know, we're going to have a huge task of finding two or three words that will replace the meaning and the signifier of the Green New Deal. I do believe, and thank you to someone I think Juliana said it, or Ivana said it, one of the two, that it is important to signal that, effectively, we are adopting a modern version of socialism, that we are radicalizing ourselves and we are moving towards an eco socialist agenda. Those terms are horrible because everybody has taken them. You know, every man and his dog, I won't mention his mother, has taken eco and socialism and put it together. But anyway, you know them. Thanks, Janice. A couple of comments from fellow brainstormers on the chat here. John suggests that regeneration could be a good term. Janet finds transformation a wonk word. Sorry, Rosemary. And Henry Wallace suggests that we go a little bit more radical with anti capitalist or a similar sentiment needs to be in the name so that it's hard for the project to be co opted and that we can set our sights and so we can set our sights on the transformation to post capitalism Rosemary. Yes, I just wanted to observe that what I'm sort of learning from this conversation is that we do have the danger and inherent contradiction in what we're looking for which makes our task even more difficult which is that on the one hand we're seeking something that distinguishes us from everyone else and is particular to our particularity, but on the other hand we want to stay accessible and staying accessible is partly being involved in the language that everyone uses. So I think that is a genuine target in the whole full process. We need to, you know, look at straight. Thanks Rosemary any, any responses any comments. Okay. Janice, go for it. Yeah, it's right. As Henry said we need to be connected to the language everybody uses, but at the same time we need to add the twist that distinguishes us so that that's the twin difficulty that we have the reason why I took the floor again is because I want to suggest that we should also do something completely off its rocker or off our rocker. That is, you know, let's not try to replace the green new deal with an ecological green transformation with post capitalist elements going beyond socialism, you know, how about, I mean I was thinking now of David Graber's great expression, everything could be different. How about, you know, deems, everything must be different policy. Now I'm not suggesting it, but I'm trying to think of an alternative way of approaching the name that it should be, you know, something that gets you there and pulls your, your heart strings. Okay, and then people can actually find out what it is. Just putting it out there. Thanks, Janice. Another thing to put out there perhaps is that I've noticed several political parties, not necessarily political parties whose views we agree with. Rather than talking about programs or manifestos they're talking about contracts contracts with with the people contracts with the voters. This could be another thought that might just add to the mix. Anyone else. Well, since nobody's speaking, let me, let, let, let me say something that I need to say. It's got nothing to do with the topic. But since people are watching, some of our members are watching and maybe some enemies as well. Who knows. Let me say for the public that is watching us that the letter that we signed yesterday here in Greece. 95 members of parliament, sending it to President Biden on behalf of Julian Assange was a difficult letter to organize. And it was very difficult for me personally and I'm saying this in public I don't care. I see that we co-signed it with Syriza. I consider Syriza to be a toxic party, a party that has done enormous damage to progressive movements across the world. A party that refused to come to the aid of Julian during the worst and darkest hours when I was calling upon the Syriza leadership to do that. As I keep telling friends and comrades, what matters today is Julian. What matters is to respond to Stellar's and his team's request that we get as many parliamentarians to sign similar letters to Joe Biden. Because it is crucial that we get him out of there. And if this means that we put our signatures next to those of people that have in the past demonstrated an incapacity to do the right thing by Julian or by progressive causes, we will do that. Because what comes above all else is to create maximum pressure to have him released. Thank you, Janis. I'm going to hand it over now to Dushan just to close the topic of the discussion. Dushan, wrap it up. Let me just first invite our viewers and members inside of our three newly established thematic DSCs that are going to be actually focused on the third revision of our Green New Deal for Europe policy, which is a big step for us. And we definitely need your help. So if you are interested, first in agriculture and animal rights, then in establishing new green jobs and what does that mean? And thirdly, in energy just transition and nature preservation, please contact us. We will create, we will, you all actually, sorry, there's already a thread on forum regarding that, and you can join our matter most where all the communication regarding the campaign is happening. Also, we are going to democratize the process of rebranding and name change. So there's also going to be a forum thread on that, where we are going to call you to submit your proposals. So, yeah, that's, that's all in that regard. It's rebranding is just one of the things that we are focusing right now in the campaign. So join us. email us at GND at dm.dm25.org. Thank you, Dushan. And thank you to you out there who've been listening to this. If you'd like to continue the brainstorm and the discussion and you're not yet a dm25 member, please just go to dm25.org slash join. And we will see you again here in two weeks, same time, same place for another meeting of our coordinating collective. Cheers.