• dibco1 2020 chronology of discusion on wsf

last modified August 23, 2020 by facilitfsm

 Presentation of dalogue  about WSF situation - by Pierre

The  controversial discusion about  wsf  is starting  towards a IC meeting in october 10th and  a series of consultation in septembre

Three main  groups are identifiable

1/ the renovators core team  have made a series of inputs since february  dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input20 en - dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input2A en - dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input21 en - dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input2A en

  •  There has been recently an emphatic "message to social forumdibco1 2020 discusionfsm input26 en  rethorical argumentation presented as first step of "campaign to lead to dialogue
  • On 23 august  there is a series of clearer orientation points being presenteed at last by one renovators : dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input33 en  to be commented 
    • @8 We think it is urgent to democratize the Forum, its structures and its governance.  It is crucial to introduce a governance that allows us to go from an open space to a space of action. There are many possibilities to strengthen the governance and to democratize the WSF.
    • @9 We therefore propose that the International Council integrates the new social forces that are mobilizing all over the world,
    • @10  that we try to make a more representative body which can take a look at our Charter of Principles so as to adapt it to the new times of the 21st century,
    • @11  that we give a place to the regional and thematic forums, 
    • @12 that we organise international days of action,  ( this is the only format of participation mentioned ) 
    • @13 that we can discuss the road to follow to make the WSF a global political subject. This will not be an easy road and will require the openness and willingness of all of us in order to 
    • @14 create an efficient body able to speak to the world. 

2/ Those calling for dialogue starting from brasil 

  • with some somehow confusing statements http://openfsm.net/projects/dibco1/dibco1-2020-discusionfsm-input28-en - noting diferences  with  another text signed by brasilians two years ago http://openfsm.net/projects/dibco1/dibco1-2020-discusionfsm-input23-en
    • we see @2 no contradiction between the WSF being a meeting space, a space for articulation of actions and an actor on the international scene
    • @3 We also understand that the WSF has already acted as a global actor, publishing statements, leading global actions, defending ideas and values
    • @6 Therefore, along with this empowerment, of those networks and movements that have led international anti-capitalist struggles it is necessary to deepen a decision-making methodology 
    •  @7 Recognize that overcoming the method is the door to the construction of convergences in diversity
    • @11 If the proposed new WSF broadens democratic horizons in relations between our social movements
  • renovators are seemingly happy to find this group open to dialgue as allies on the willingnes to dialogue now , and also on substance somehow 
  • in fact, there seem to be  two streams in this brazilan group, if not more, some  sticking oto curent principles and some ready for "renovation"


3/ Those more silent,  supportive of current  WSF principles 

  • A/ Some have a defensive position :  let us do the forum as usual by the current principles  and go found something else elsewhere  - this is of course ineffective  for those who want to capture  the potential of wsf for their political strategy, whatever their motivation- even though this would break the current consensus that has kept su together 20 years, whatever our performance as process facilitator may have been
  • B/Also support can come from some  thematic and national forums, see this input  dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input24 en however  there is also a tropism in those smaller scale process-events towards taking distance with some WSF principles such as  final declaration in the space of the forum and networkization of those smaller manifestation of WSF process -see the current process calendar here : http://openfsm.net/projects/wsf2012-support/wsf2018-calendar/#lista   
  • C/ Some  think that going to political strategic discusion , and "decentering it  from the forum", will recontextualize  the debate ,  however the terms of debate are not clear, and  it is quite difficult to maintain a formal frame outside the forum space  and ic legitmacy  itself ,  and then we are drowned in a kind of spontaneous asembleism between political actores  where  categories  shared in the forum faciltaion context do not prevail any more  the facilitation of this shapeless context is unknown
  • D/ An open letter from FBO IC representatives to their membership might be an input in supporting the curent principles 

4/ On the times and rythms of dialogue 

  • A/ Renovators and some brasilian seem eager to mix this debate about WSF  with the ongoing consultation metings in septembrer - and "surf" on the  spontaneous expectations of some consulted organizations  to  impose emotionnally a "renovation narrative " , with the goal to be mixing  debate on principles and preparation of WSF 2021: "to develop actions and outward communication in WSF , we need to renovate WSF" ( see input 26   and here is how input  33 above )
  • B/ There will be probably an attempt to request discusion time  next october 10 IC meeting for this  WSF debate on the  organizing practices in  IC - let us see how it will be  
  • C/ maintaining separated  this dialogue about WSF and the concrete preparation of WSF 2021 event -process, on substance and on times /places  will be a challenge ,because of the overlooking of  many IC members of the relevance of focusing after consulting on defining  forms of participation, which will structure and refresh  the participation narrative  and attractivenes of WSF 2021
  • D/ http://openfsm.net/projects/dibco1/project-home/#index  this link is more or less giving inputs in chronology

5/ On places for dialogue 

6/ On themes of dialogue  

  • A/ renovators want to impose  as a priority  themes on representativeness and democracy,  essentially in IC, they care little about the formats of self organized participation and  for common moments proposed to participants methodology   - see part 1 
    • There is a  sub discussion activated from some brazilian members is about the "IC taking political positions"  that echoes  renovators Here in input about this longstanding issue : http://openfsm.net/projects/dibco1/dibco1-2020-discusionfsm-input31-en   the relevance of this issue is i practice  very small, as  immanuel wallerstein, recently invoked by renovators, stated clearly some years ago 
    • Note : there is a sub discusion about the "democracy in iC" or elsewhere in WSF  which echose that  of renovators  - it remains to be commented if the category of democracy is relevant in the openspace  -process which is not a place like a partiament  where decisiones HAVE to be made within a divided national community - this import of democracy  needs more comment
  • B/ a fourth working group in IC to document terms of dialogue in view on the internal IC discuson phase  coming afrer consutation  has been proposed in last IC meeting -  It has not yet been taken in consideration, at the time when some claim a "dialogue is necessary "- here are some issues identified about this debate :   http://openfsm.net/projects/cifsm2021/cifsm2021-articulacion-insumo19/#EN  this comes after discusion in the preparation of WSF 2018, where two vision faced one another with two formats of participation that where not equivalent - http://openfsm.net/projects/ic-extended/icextension-salvador17-16oct-evening-methodology-discussion-en

7/ Current silences on political-methodological approach focusing on facilitation

  • A/ What would be the most relevant and political consensual option  in IC at present  would be to focus on  to enhancing WSF open space  as better space for actions   working on new  formats of participation in WSF event process, consistent with current principles , to make the forum more attrractive for those who expect political outcomes -  with a convincing narrative of participation
  • B/ This problematics is discarded by renovators, on the ground that "methodology comes after strategy" , which can be argued is not the case in the task of developing a social forum  - because political strategy is content /participation - while metodology is about forms and moments. / facilitaiton for participation with a clear cut separation between those tasks  - renovators wnat political decision made in or around IC 
  • C/ Of course the distinction  participation- contents and  facilitation-forms of participation can be also  by renovators -  and a participation narrative saying  somehow "we have been lazy ten years and need to focus on methdology for good to revitalize WSF 2021,  is a delicate self critical exercise for IC members , some of them mesmerized  by the renovation narrative, which  very IC centered, and not focused about the  participants .   Formulation of challenges of facilitation dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input25 en is  valuing these tasks
  • D/ "Brasilians for dialogue" claim to be open to "discussing  methodology"  however its seems reading their text ( open to signature)  to be more a methodology for political decision between particicipants or in IC , than  a methodology for enhaced participation towards more action related contents in the forum space process- the distinction between participation and facilitaion  is not clear ( see part 2) 
  • E/ Also for a not explicited yet reason , this approach " yes we can make the openspace a better space for articulation action"  is not necessarily  pushed by all supporters of the current principle. it is about making out of this option  a positive  narrative more owned in IC, contrary to the narrative of guiltiness to be ngos and smaller organizations and lazy about methodological responsability , and being pushed emotionally to give  political space to  newcomers in iC for representativeness, without in depth discusion about their vision of the forum-