Has anybody at the Commission watched the Matrix or read the Gospel?

The Commission is under attack by all NGOs and charities. Europe 2020, the new economic strategy which follows the Lisbon Strategy, has forgotten the central piece of the puzzle: people. I guess nobody in the Commission has ever heard about the Matrix or the Gospel.

In the Matrix, computers have taken control of society and harvest people’s brain power as fuel.

In the Gospel the main character dies on the cross to liberate the power of love. He wasn’t an hippy ante litteram. Love is a metaphor for the people’s power beyond material means.

While the first one is a cult movie, one sixth of humanity still buy into the messages of the second one.

Do you share my view that the guys (and girls) in Brussels might have missed something in their strategy?

I spent the week in Madrid to prepare our conference and attend a seminar on the third sector in Spain and the rest of Europe.

The research presented at the seminar is an interesting piece of work commissioned by the Luis Vives Foundation to improve practices in Spain through learning from other countries. All the big players from all the countries in the research were there. What do they share? Fear for the future.

The sector is too dependent on government and stuck in the old mindset and habits. It’s funny how little they trust government and the Commission to get us out of the crisis. Ignacio, leader of the foundation, confessed that they are asking Zapatero to stick to his commitment to Social Europe and put pressure on the Commission. Other national organisations such as Once are part of the discussion.

The situation is precarious. I witnessed what happened when citizens stopped trusting their institutions. I was in Genoa in 2001 and found myself in the middle of the riots for the G8.

I wasn’t able to have a love story but at least I learnt a lesson: people power can be highly destructive when it’s not channeled toward a positive goal.

So let’s be clear: what do we really want from Europe? Are we asking for money as usual or looking for something else? Do we need more money to eradicate poverty and bring about social justice as the old receipt says or do we need a new strategy?

In the US and other English speaking countries the sector is driven by a polemic on philanthrocapitalism. The believers in Bill Gates and his pundits claim that their leadership in saving the world. They succeed in making money so they will do it spending it.

On the other side, there are the civil society fundamentalists: they don’t want the sector to compromise with capitalism. Its strength lies in its values, not business results.

Would Mary Kaldor and Michael Edwards enjoy my definition?

It’s funny to find a similar clash of visions in francophone countries. On one side, the old fashion social economy is proud of its glorious history but scared of leaving the known territory. On the other side, social entrepreneurs who don’t fit in to just one category. It’s the new generation just keen on doing something for society rather than defining a shared identity.

There are other divisions that I consider this time, dear readers. I would summarize that the sector’s scattered identity is mirrored in its lack of capacity in providing a shared vision and clear requests. We can’t go back but we must find a new unity which addresses the needs of different strands.

The sector can’t ask for more money because we don’t have anything else to ask. More funding might actually increase dependency from public subventions. While we need a culture of independence, social investments and innovation.

Today Hackney Transport Community, a British social enterprise, has raised 5m pounds in the market issuing its first ‘social loan’. Bridge Ventures, Sir Roland Cohen’s hedge fund, has backed the offer.

The sector needs a new vision and strategy to liberate people’s power. The Commission has to back the sector in such an endeavor, recognizing its role for Europe 2020