The World Social Forum at a Crossroad
20/01/2004
- Opinión
Written for presentation at WSF Panel "Neoliberalism, War and the
Significance of the WSF", 20th January 2004
The crisis of neoliberal globalization - which itself was an
attempt to overcome the structural crisis of capitalism as rate
of profit fell - is becoming more and more evident. From the
economic crisis in Asia in 1997 to the series of crises in Latin
America, from the desperation of imperialist countries to
maintain and strengthen its hegemony through military means, to
the collapse of two WTO ministerial meetings - we are seeing and
directly experiencing the signs that the neoliberal project of
capital has failed.
This sense of crisis in neoliberal globalisation puts us - as
movements that desire Another World, another sort of
globalization - at a very important and critical situation.
Historically, political and economic crises have always rendered
an opportunity for resistance to grow out of the weight of the
crisis on the people. I believe we are at that moment in history
now - a moment where need for a radical change is growing
increasingly bigger.
Indeed, at the same time that the cleavages of this global
capitalist system deepen, we see the growth of global resistance
against neoliberal globalisation and imperialism. From the
struggles in Europe against cuts in public budget to the general
strike of Korean workers against the IMF, from the global
solidarity against the MAI, World Bank and WTO to the toppling of
governments in Latin America, from the struggles of African
people for sovereignty and the endless struggles of peasants,
women, the poor, the oppressed, and to the thousands of millions
of people who poured onto the streets in protest against the war
on Iraq – all point towards the emergence of a new militant
movement against neoliberal and imperialist globalization, coming
out of the very heart of globalization itself.
The World Social Forum is a direct result of the accumulation of
these struggles. The birth of the WSF came out of the need to
form solidarity between national and international movements, and
between different forces and sectors, to start on our road to
find alternatives and actually put them to practice.
During the last three years, we have built a whole process of
local, regional and international forums. They have grown in
sheer size, in the topics that are discussed and in the amount of
strategies for action that come out of these forums.
However, it is now time for us to assess this process, in order
to move forward. After all, the WSF came out of our need to deal
with the crisis in the neoliberal project, to find alternatives,
to build Another World. It is not enough to be self-satisfied by
the fact that 100,000 or more people have gathered, that we have
more than 1,000 workshops and seminars taking place. We are at a
very important moment in history, at a crossroad where either the
ruling elite continue to oppress us or the mass majority of the
world finds another solution. In this sense, the WSF, as a symbol
and space for resistance against globalisation of capital and
imperialism, is also at a crossroad. Is it truly playing its role
- and continue to do so - in making Another World possible? We
cannot delay any further in answering this question.
I would like to raise two interrelated issues in our discussion
on the WSF and the struggles against neoliberalism and
imperialism.
The first is the matter of national and international
mobilisations and actions in relation to the WSF.
The WSF came out of the struggles against neoliberalism and there
is no doubt about that. However, after having implemented three
forums, is the WSF, in turn, contributing to strengthening the
national movements and mobilisations? In comparison to all the
energy and resources we put in just to make the event happen, in
comparison to the amount of money we spend on traveling half way
across the globe to make a new record in the amount of people who
participate in the forums? The answer is yes - in terms of
international agendas for common action, such as the February 15th
action and the September 13th action against the WTO. These were
extremely important decisions that came out of WSF 2003. However,
the WSF was much more than those two mobilizations that took
place on specific dates. There is so much going on inside WSF, so
many issues raised and so much discussion – however, is the
richness of the WSF truly being fed back into the mass movements
of each community and nation?
There has been alot of criticisms about the lack of action in the
WSF. There has also been alot of discussion on whether the WSF is
a movement of movements - is it, as it is, an agent for change or
is it merely a space for many diverse actors to "come and use"? I
think that this agent/space dichotomy is rather misleading, and I
both disagree and agree to the criticisms against the WSF in this
context. Whether it is an agent or space is not really important,
because the real agent or subjects of change, of forming
alternatives are not merely the participants in the WSF per se,
nor the WSF itself, but the workers, the peasants, women, the
racially oppressed in each respective community and country. They
are the subjects of change. We can analyse the world economic and
political situation, we can make many speeches about our vision,
and formulate common agendas for action and alternatives, but the
force that will ultimately realise those alternatives are the
oppressed mass, whether they participate in the forums or not.
Thus, the World Social Forum can be a space (not in a static
sense of the word) or a bridge where different ideas can be
shared, international activities proposed and coordinated, and an
active process where we can experiment, learn and get to know how
a democracy led by the people feels like, as a sort of a practice
for real Another World. However, the important thing is how to
get those experiences and learning to motivate and promote the
mass movements - the grassroot movements fighting against
neoliberalism and imperialism.
After all, there have been very strong struggles around the world
before the WSF was even conceived, and will continue to do so
even without the WSF. The workers and peasants in Korea who are
fighting against neoliberal restructuring and trade
liberalization have been doing so without knowing the WSF exists.
The people of Argentina and Bolivia did not overthrow their
governments under the sole initiation of the WSF.
Of course, I am not trying to cut down on the significance of the
WSF - on the contrary, the WSF should have the role of further
strengthening the movements and sharing the experiences, and
building bridges. What we should always realise is that the WSF
is not the objective itself, but the means. We should be careful
not to fetishise the WSF. We should also be cautious not let a
"strata" develop inside the WSF, consisting of "intelligent and
well-educated" people from international NGOs and large
organizations with sufficient resources, while the real agents -
the mass movements – become increasingly marginalized and
detached from the process, or become objects instead of subjects
of the WSF. Building the WSF into a bottom-up process, while
integrating the initiatives of mass movements, is one of the
major tasks that we face today, in relation to forming resistance
and alternatives to globalization of capital and imperialism.
The second issue that I would like to raise, related to the
first, is that the characteristics and the way the whole event
functions should change, in order to truly fulfill its role in
promoting and strengthening the "global" movements against
neoliberal globalization and imperialism.
We say that the WSF is an open space, and yes, it is pretty much
so (although there is still work to be done in this area) among
the actual participants. But is it really open to the richness
and diversity of movements and people in that particular country
where the WSF is being held? Is it a space, with or without walls
around it?
During the few days that I have spent in Mumbai, as I travel on
the train or the rickshaw and pass the streets of so much
activity, as I move from one venue to another in such difficulty
amidst all the actions that are taking place inside the NESCO
grounds, or as I think about what it would be like to have a
social forum in my own country, I wonder whether the WSF is
really interacting with and taking in the richness of culture and
methods of political expression that many Asian and Third World
countries have. A couple of days ago, a member of the Indian
Organizing Committee mentioned, at one event, that the reason why
there were hardly any Indian people at large events (leaving alot
of empty chairs) is not because the Indian movements lack
political consciousness, but because their way of expressing
themselves is through colourful marches with dancing and chanting
on the streets. As I wandered around between the various tents
where variety of events were taking place, I passed some in which
the participants were practically spilling out of the tents –
many of them seemed to have been organized by local movements –
and they were filled with chanting and singing – more of a
"rally" than a typical "seminar" as one may know it in the
"Western" rationale.
What the Indian comrade said and what I saw (which unfortunately,
was not all that much), made me think further than just the empty
chairs or "loud" tents, to the whole WSF process itself. Is it
operated and functioning in a way that it can accommodate the
culture and the issues of the movements, the intensiveness and
the vitality of the long struggle against economic and political
oppression of the Third World, particularly of Asia? The decision
to have the WSF in India is very much contributing to the true
internationalization of the WSF process, and balancing out the
biased spotlight that focused only on movements of the so-called
"West" until now. In this sense, I believe that the Mumbai WSF
will have quite a positive impact on the WSF process. However,
the "positive impact" will not just be given to us to take for
granted - we have to make it so. It is not enough to have quotas
for African and Asian organizations in the International Council,
or increasing the number of participants from those continents.
The characteristics of the WSF itself have to change. Is the
methodology in the way WSF functions or the language in which
discourse is formulated inside the WSF still not overcoming the
West-orientation of previous anti-globalisation movements? Are we
truly open to, and ready to accommodate the vitality and energy
of the diverse Indian movements and their sense of the world? Are
our movements flexible enough to accommodate the dynamics and the
political atmosphere that may be so much different from what we
have previously experienced through the WSF and other
international gatherings and demonstrations? The task at hand for
us after Mumbai and under the prospects of having future World
Social Forums in other parts of the world, would be how the WSF
process is going to be fed and enriched by the mass movements of
that respective community/country – and vice versa.
I think these two are some of the major tasks that face us as
movements against neoliberalism and imperialism participating in
the WSF. As I mentioned, we are at a very important moment in
history. Crisis in the global capitalist system is increasing. We
must think carefully about where to go from here, and how to
proceed.
The ruling elite knows very well about the WSF, the significance,
its strength. As we have seen historically, the ruling elite
always finds a way to incorporate and institutionalize the so-
called "civil society", especially in moments of crisis when they
need a "cushion" to further promote their agendas, and the WSF is
already becoming their target. The fight against this oppressive
system is a fight against the ruling elite, but it is also a
fight within ourselves. We face a crossroad - in our movements
and in the WSF process. Will the WSF become a "department store"
of ideas and discussion, fall into mannerism and co-opted into
the hands of the ruling elite, or will it become a political
space and a bridge for strengthening and radicalizing our
movements? How can the WSF function to make their crisis into our
opportunity?
* Sohi Jeon, Korean People's Action against FTA & WTO (KoPA)
https://www.alainet.org/es/node/109311?language=es
Del mismo autor
- The World Social Forum at a Crossroad 20/01/2004
Clasificado en
Clasificado en:
FSM
- Sergio Ferrari 10/02/2021
- Sergio Ferrari 10/02/2021
- Sergio Ferrari 08/02/2021
- Celeste Serra 02/02/2021
- Sergio Ferrari 01/02/2021
![Suscribirse a America Latina en Movimiento - RSS](https://www.alainet.org/misc/feed.png)