• dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input26 comment1 en

last modified August 23, 2020 by facilitfsm

@ 0 introduction -  @ 1   - text  manifesto 2005 -  @ 2  -  functions of charter of principles -  @ 3  Already a space for action - facilitate / participate - "initiative" an emerging self organized format for participation  -  @ 4 - fiction: manifesto 2005 as an initiative -  @ 5  first years WSF -  @ 6  -WSF and global social subject - communication-  @ 7  - function and presence of the forum -  @ 8  - diversity of initiatives / actions -  @ 9  - youth - alternatives - narratives -  @ 10  - potential of the forum -   @ 11  - renewal - revitalization - reactivation -  @ 12  - which initiative and narrative towards WSF XIV




Pierre George

This present document comments on the yellowed text (input26 in DIBCO1) divided into 12 parts that is in the space DIBCO1 as text 26 on the page http://openfsm.net/projects/dibco1/dibco1-2020-discusionfsm/#EN MESSAGE TO WORLD SOCIAL FORUM: PORTO ALEGRE'S SECOND MANIFESTO - FROM OPEN SPACE TO ACTION SPACE


It is a series of 12 comments on the entirety of the text divided into 12 parts  

The purpose of the comments is: 

  • 1 / Qualify step by step formulations / statements of the commented text, in relation to the practice of the WSF process
  •  2 / Propose informative inputs on topics of broad interest that are: “what is to facilitate the WSF process”, ““ Facilitation of the WSF and actions of its participants ”.

This text is an input-comment in the space proposed by the DIBCO1 initiative "dialogue based on comments ", with the topic of use-care-future of the WSF process .

If you want to propose texts or comment on other texts included in DIBCO1 corpus, see here   http://openfsm.net/projects/dibco1/dibco1-facilit-contact

  • Access to the 12 parts of the comment text 

@ 0 introduction -  @ 1   - text  manifesto 2005 -  @ 2  -  functions of charter of principles -  @ 3  Already a space for action - facilitate / participate - "initiative" an emerging self organized format for participation  -  @ 4 - fiction: manifesto 2005 as an initiative -  @ 5  first years WSF -  @ 6  -WSF and global social subject - communication-  @ 7  - function and presence of the forum -  @ 8  - diversity of initiatives / actions -  @ 9  - youth - alternatives - narratives -  @ 10  - potential of the forum -   @ 11  - renewal - revitalization - reactivation -  @ 12  - which initiative and narrative towards WSF XIV



 (go back to HOME )

@ 1 We have signed the letter, Frei Betto, Atilio Borón, Bernard Cassen, Adolfo Perez Esquivel, Federico Mayor, Riccardo Petrella, Ignacio Ramonet, Emir Sader, Boaventura Santos, Roberto Savio, Aminata Traoré, all signatories of the Porto Alegre declaration. We have lost, since 2005, brilliant companions (Eduardo Galeano, José Saramago, Francois Houtart, Samir Amin, Samuel Ruiz Garcia, Immanuel Wallerstein). But we have shared a lot with them and we think we know what they would think.


Here is access to the full text of the manifesto letter of 2005 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porto_Alegre_Manifesto


-------------------------------------------------- ---

@ 2 Those of us who are alive have wanted to send this message to the WSF, so that it may have another element of encouragement and reflection. The spirit of our initiative is represented in the adhesion message of the Nobel Peace Prize winner, Adolfo Perez Esquivel: “thank you for the initiative to revive the strength and hope of the WSF, a long time ago we were thinking of something similar to find new paths that identify us in the diversity of thought and actions to face the challenges of our time. From now on, dear brothers, I add my signature and I hug you ” .


Returning to this quote from Adolfo Perez Ezquivel: "paths that identify us in diversity of thought and actions" 

Here appear the notion of political "identity" of the participant in the WSF process, as a personal participant, or a participating organization, and the notion of "diversity in ideas and actions"

In fact, the WSF charter of principles combines two functions: the “axiological / ideological location” (generic description of goal values ​​and actions of the participants in the process, which occupies half the text of the charter), and the “functional regulation ”Of the forum space-process, (what it is, what it is for, how it operates). 

It is a document that manages, since two decades, to keep together and sustainable, in the same "space", the diversity of organizations and people that participate in the process, inder to progress in their political goals for another possible world, and can contribute to the implementation / facilitation / operation of the process. 


The word "open" from "open space" means that the entry into the space is open, on the condition of respecting, or acknowledgin oneself in, a series of principles The principles contained in the Charter - which must be respected by all who wish to participate in the process

The word "respect" maybe works for the few rules stated in the letter, but is it poorly adapted for the part "ideological location" of the space. What does "respect goals or respect values mean"? Is it taking care of your public expression and at the same time being able to think something else? One can abide by rules to a minimum or can be positively acknowledge a shared "WSF participant" identity


The charter is a document that can also serve as a “positive” identifying element among the WSF participants, and, beyond their diversity, serve as a reference for a new type of “common political identity”.

It can be cultivated, promoted, and formulating a " WSF participant" political identity based on "acknowledging onseelf as participant in a WSF process, as the words" participant "and" process "are described in a common reference document , Here, in this formulation not there is not the word "respect or abide", it is more to assert that the person or entity a / confirms that her values ​​and goals are compatible with the generic values ​​and goals, and b / confirms that she understand what the forum is (a space) and what it is not (an actor), and appropriates the forum as a collective organizing tool.

This shared common identity does not mean that there is a consensus among the participants on all the various “political contenst” produced by the participants in the forum process-space.

The charter, ironically presented as a "sacred text" by its detractors, is simply a conceptually coherent document, and quite well written , and where the expression is consistent with the substance, in most of the text: highlighting, that the forum is not an actor. The political actors and communicators in the forum, seen as a horizontal space, are the participating entities . The methodological and logistical actors working so that the forum exists and be implemented are the facilitating groups 



 (go back to  HOME ) 

@ 3 Is the World Social Forum, which celebrates its twentieth anniversary in 2021, is it just an open space or can it, should it be, also a space for action? This issue has been discussed for years in your International Council and until now there has been no possibility of reaching a conclusion



This distinction between "open space" and "also space for action", which is the central problem of all the commented text, is not productive because it makes a fact invisible: 

The ideal process-space fsm, as described by the charter of principles, has already been conceived since 2001 as an open space for meetings, meetings that serve, among other functions, to articulate effective actions (see article 1 of the letter)  http: / /openfsm.net/projects/ic-methodology/charter-fsm-wsf-en

Reformulating: the WSF process-space is, from the beginning, announced as an open space of self-organized encounters between ideologically and politically located participants, and its function are, among others, to “articulate effective actions”, dealing with the self-organized actions assumed by a diversity of articulations of its participants. 

Hence two clues for reflection  :

1 / It is left to the authors of the commented text (in yellow) to explain precisely the difference they make between what they promote, without defining it: a "space for action", and what the CI-WSF takes care of, according to the charter: a " open encounter space for encounters for articulating effective actions ” , which also concretely implies dialogues / meetings to conceive these actions, or present, promote, compare, evaluate, articulate, plan, prepare, etc. 

It is up to them to make this explicit.

2 / Now taking an interest in “what is there”, within the framework of the current WSF, we can examine “how” this function of “articulating effective actions” has been implemented in practice in the real and historical forum process, which is different from the “ ideal forum process ”that is described in the charter of principles. 

There it is necessary, before this historical chronicle, to introduce the notion of "facilitation" of this process-event-space WSF, since the manifestations of this WSF process - usually an event - do not exist without a "vision and facilitating energy", to implement / specify the ideal vision of the forum, in an environment and a determined time and in a necessarily collective way.



"Facilitation" can be defined as "implementing in a concrete way the forms and times of participation in the WSF process-event. These forms and times are proposed and made accessible to the participating organizations in the space - horizontal process of a given forum, and are not accompanied by a prescription of the "political content" produced by these participating organizations (once these contents are compatible with generic values ​​and goals described in the letter, since the space is not open to everyone)

The charter of principles can be seen as a “methodological-political pact” between the member organizations of the international council WSF , bringing together representatives of a diversity of member organizations. It is a vision text / program for the “facilitation” of the WSF process-space, and then the vast territory of the practice of how to implement this program remains. There is much less literature on the forum facilitation experience than on the forum participation experience.

Although the vision / program of the letter has been conceptualized, from a first practical experience of the organization of the first forum event of 2001, the concrete implementations of the forum -concept, over time, and in various contexts, are since then, a challenging task for the various facilitating collectives. These groups, since 2001, face all kinds of limitations: resource, material, financial, human, experience. 

These real implementations of the ideal vision of the forum can be evaluated : 1 / by participants in the process, who have their practices and organizational culture, and their expectations related to "how they see the forum" and "what they intend to do in the", " that they wait in the ", etc. and 2 / between a community of collective facilitators , which can be reinforced, in and around the CI-WSF

This facilitation experience is little documented in the voluminous academic literature on the forum, and at the same time, it is strategic to document and disseminate it, to train and stimulate more people and organizations, to be able to facilitate a larger WSF space in the real world, and reach a process size that allows to stimulate significant counter-hegemonic effects. 

In this perspective, one can also think in terms of "narrative": elaborate some facilitation narratives and some, perhaps one, participation narrative. These narratives are clearly linked to the vision of the WSF that is to be disseminated, and are inherently different from the political narratives developed by the organizations participating in their struggles. 

It is up to the organizations active in the process, and among them IC member organizations, to see - based on the "relevance they see in the process-event forum, for the implementation of their own strategies" (it is a question that has been made for a consultation process), 

1 / what participatory energy will they dedicate to build, - through a process now facilitated by the dissemination of possibilities for massive online dialogues -, the articulations, now more visible in the forum's space-process, and / or 

2 / what facilitating energy will they dedicate to make these formatss and devices accessible to the participants



Like any metaphor, this one has its limits, for example "activities" and "initiatives" are not differentiated here, in the forum space, both are under the metaphor of "dance", but like any metaphor, it can help to enter in the problem of facilitation 

The quality of the "party" is measured by the number of people who come and feel inspired to dance (that is, participate and act) .There is no good party (good forum process) without an orchestra, (facilitating collective) diverse, reactive, that is in good contact with his audience of dancers ( partiicpants). 

An orchestra implies willingness, ability, sinchronicity and dedication to play a certain type of music together (the facilitation is collective and with explicit principles as in defined the WSF charter of principles, which can be updated when the whole orchestra agrees).

The facilitating music is not intended to force / dictate what type of gestures the dancers make (actions, political content), and with whom they like to dance in a group (the composition and size of the "articulations", self-organized)  

Another way to improve "the party" is going on the dance floor itself (the WSF space of which the orchestra location is also part): to a/ invite those who do not dance to dance, (stimulation to participate, to formulate encounter activities, to formulate and support action initiatives), or b / animate on the dance floor “blocks of dancers” with a collective dance (large articulations, with the involvement or encouragement of entities actively participating) that give energy to the party that is perceived as a dance-oriented , (as a space for actions) and makes more people want to dance, create dance blocks or come in existing dance blocks,  

“If I don't like the music played by the WSF orchestra so much, I can go to another place and have another party.” It is a bit of what has been done with the AIP international assembly of peoples, for example, and this does not prevent organizers / AIP participants can come and do activities or promote initiatives in the WSF space. 

What, then, does a forum "renewal" consist in? It is an image that has no specific content in the commented text, that has to be described concretely with proposals, discussed in the orchestra about nuances of the facilitating salsa or frontal change the type of Music. 

Another thing is, wanting to "change the party, without having a ready and attractive alternative orchestra,  

The WSF orchestra ”has played badly or well for 20 years, the “ facilitating salsa ”music inspired by the Charter of principles . One can improve the orchestration and melodic themes, (improve the implementations of the vision of this charter ). Changing music would imply having musicians who are active and influential and skilled in musical practice,( faciltaion) and that there is consensus in the orchestra with newcomers and those leaving for performing this change.



In terms of facilitation for the implementation of the function "to articulate effective actions (article 1 of the charter), adding to this the function" to disseminate results "(article 7), the collective historical path of the IC WSF, can be summarized synthetically by a succession of words that refer either to formats of participation, to facilitating devices, or to documents.

Assembly of social movements 2001 - collection of proposals for activities 2005 - diversity of assemblies of convergence for action, including the assembly of social movements 2008 - guiding principles on how to organize an event 2008, - experience of putting in contact between activities 2009. 

Then comes the cessation of the IC methodology commission in 2012, a place where a more permanent collective reflection could be held. then there is a decade long with unfrequent specific discussions on the agenda of IC meetings, with specific ephemerous working groups,

In Tunisia 2013 and 2015, there is talk of “sharing results of the forum in a public space”, but in practice, this is not implemented collectively from the IC and the collective facilitating the event, because, in fact, for the organizers, the point Important is the number of participants of the forum in the "march for the land", about Palestine in competition with the Tunisian Islamists, a march that is scheduled right at the end of the forum (rather, the forum is scheduled to end on the fixed date of this march). 

In Montreal 2016, there is early, in the organizing collective, the idea of ​​including the participation format "initiative" in the methodology of this event, but there are no conditions for collective reflection and IC support on this, and the format of the final moment of the event (there is no IC meeting in montreal city a few months before the event as it usually happens). The facilitation group let the time pass and introduces the "initiatives" format very late in the process (less than a month before the event) and without much didactic effort. A "calendar of action dates" will be published at the end of the event, made up of initiatives formuated at the last minute in the assemblies reported to the final momento of the event

At the Montreal IC 2016, a group for reflection on an “assembly of struggles” that would be a permanent process was opened, without much discussion in plenary, . It is seen in plenary discussions of January 2017 that in the IC there is no consensus to link this assembly with the IC, and that it should remain as a self-organized process by those who want to encourage it

At the CI October 2017, whose work is immersed in a preparation seminar with the facilitating group, two moments with a methodological approach in relation to WSF and action can be highlighted: 

 1 / a two-hour group exchange time, where a critical evaluation of the notion of convergence is expressed , present in the vocabulary agreed upon since 2008 that “instituted the form of“ convergence assemblies for action ”. It is proposed to revalue the words of articulation, coalition, etc.

 2 / a time of exchange in plenary, on the topic: “ how to integrate in the WSF methodology the actions of the participants for the transformation in societies, and in what should the format of final moment of a WSF event be? ”Resulting in the creation of a CI working group:" Iniciativas é Agora ". 



It is worth describing the proposals described by this group, partially implemented, in various forum processes since 2016 FSM2016, FOSPA2017, FSM2018, FSMM2018 and to consider implementing this format in WSF XIV

This group proposes to implement a new form of participation: “description of self-managed transforming action initiative - (in short,“ initiative ”), It would come next to the main historical form of“ self-managed dialogue activity ”, 

 An initiative describes a project, a campaign, a concrete struggle and highlights some public actions-dates, which are part of its action plan, These action dates invite participants to project themselves into an active future. the initiative also mentions the criteria to consider for an organization that would like to be included and be accepted by co-opting in the conduct of this self-organized initiative.

The general case is of successive inclusions in nascent or existing coalitions and alliances, although an initiative can also be born from a discussion in a self-organized assembly, and reflect a feeling of harmony / convergence etc.

There may even be groups that propose self-organized “second level initiatives”, i-e initiatives that propose a narrative and an agenda selecting / promoting certain other initiatives and action-dates 

The word "initiative" insists on the autonomy of the participating organizations, "they do what they decide to do, and there is semantically no invisible interlocutor" - to whom they make "recommendations" and "proposals": who is it? a government? a forum political leadership? -

From a “facilitation” point of view, it is worth reflecting on what the proactive introduction of this new participation format of “initiative” can bring to the WSF. A series of documents, situations, device, moments, and expected effects can be derived from the existence of the “initiative” format of participation. 

Facilitating moments and spaces can be proposed in the event, such as “agora of futures” and “inter-initiatives space ”. After the event, a document such as a “ calendar of futures” can be assembled without any selection and disseminated with the action dates of all the initiatives placed in the process (which can be filtered by dates, languages, themes, type of actions, geographic areas, number of organizations promoting , but that does not incorporate the subjective notion of "priority" (defined by who? how?))

These elements embrace the diversity and self-determination of participants. They allow wide dissemination of the actions of acting participants, affirming themselves as a WSF participant, and placing their self-organized resistance and / or transformation initiatives in the forum process.  

These elements create occasions for multiple horizontal contacts between participants and with legitimate representatives of self-organized coalitions, large or small, that take up and promote certain initiatives.

These elements, created without intervention in the initiaves content, invite the participants in the process, whether in an event, outside and after it, to join local actions-dates and to project themselves concretely in the short and medium term in an active future

The "agora of futures" moment comes after activities and self-organized assemblies , and the formation of groups promoting initiatives. These assemblies can have preliminary dialogue processes "from below", where protocols of representation, decision, approval, delegation are defined, explicitly accepted among their participants. These assemblies can then decide to remain active after the event, or be the manifestation, in a WSF event, of a permanent assembly process, which already exist outside the forum event.

All this creates a framework, a "facilitating environment" that stimulates, and makes easier, many dialogues and interactions between participants about their actions in society and stimulates an elevation of the "public action component" of self-organized political content in the forum space. ( In the forum space there is reflex-action or manifest-action, and many more are being planned, in particular argument-action, involve-action, expose-action )

One can see that the theme of the "space of action" is also linked to the following problem: what can be format of the final moment of a social forum event ?

It is difficult to see what the imaginary "large final WSF assemblies of the event" can offer, to advance in this problem, which is to date unresolved in the consensual advances of the WSF IC , for example "by axis" that would be convened (by whom and with what legitimacy?) with the purpose of stating that "the forum is a space for action". 

Also, the form of "assembly of assemblies" that was practiced in 2009 and 2011, was unanimously perceived as boring by the participants put in a passive situation, listening to discourse already known etc. In assemblies,  due to the very form of assembly, few speak (selected how?), And many listen, who are placed in a situation of "apparent consent" to what is said by those few , - if this is not only informative -. This apparent consent does not materialize into a concrete commitment after the end of he assembly The word "Agora" has an imaginary of diversity of simultaneous dialogues coexisting in the same space

In conclusion, the introduction of the initiative format in the WSF implementation methodology seems to be a promising path in order to specify the “space of action” that the commented document invokes, without proposing a “how” . This path has the advantage of being coherent with the charter of principles and not questioning the current constitutive pact of the charter among the member organizations of the IC, which makes it realistic to pool facilitating energies to advance.  

Here is very quickly summarized, the current state of the production of formats and devices from the IC-WSF to implement "an open space for meetings to articulate effective actions "



Since the termination of commissions in 2011, the CI has not given itself the time, nor the continuity that the matter requires for a collective production of quality of formats and common moments that is in relation to the strategic importance of the topic “WSF and actions of its participants ”. This is where we are. And this has consequences on the quality of dialogue within and around the IC-WSF

Also the non-existence of a place-process of continuous and focused discussion (such as the IC- WSF methodology commission that ceased activities like the others in 2011) slows down the collective facilitation work in relation to the formats of implementation of the process 

A person present at the October 2017 meeting on how to take the actions of participants into consideration said: “I think I understood well, that the proposal (of introducing initiatives ) is simple, announcing or supporting initiatives is not mandatory, so it is easy to accept the proposal, what is needed is a small text with the proposal so that we all understand - all this seems interesting to me, but it will not advance if we do not have an easily accessible website. It can be thought that several people who had formulated perceptions like this, could have cooperated and somewhat advanced within the framework of a methodology commission. 

It so happens that now, in 2020, three year later this same person is promoting the rhetorical narrative proposed by the commented text to "renew the forum" to make it a "space for action", and where no concrete ways are proposed to implement the "space for action" that it invokes. Much time lost for strategic issues for the future of the WSF   

At the same time, the IC-WSF continues to be the best potential place to have collective discussions in a coherent framework, in a perspective of revitalizing the process, and dedicate time to them, through a system of working groups and commissions. 

There are perspectives: 1 / the practice of collective discussion online is now widespread and accelerated in times of pandemic 2 / thanks to the facilitating dedication of some organizations, (where the action of a few people can make a big difference), the IC has had the first online meetings in its history in May June 2020. 

An online methodology commission/group, and the IC initiatives and Agora working group can be reactivated in the current perspective of the WSF 2021 process-event . What has been proposed to discuss on the methodological topic "WSF and actions of its participants" can be done on other topics such as “WSF and digital culture of online participation”, “manifestations of the WSF process; from event to process-event ”,“ the desire for forum, sustainability of a forum process over time ”etc. Obviously there are interconnections between those topics

These are elements for a "methodological / strategic" work agenda that will  allow exchanges of experience in the WSF facilitating community, which exists in and around the CI-WSF, even more so as representatives of facilitating committees of other forum processes are included. CI ed according to an early decision made in 2018, although little documented to date



 (go back to  HOME ) 

@ 4 At the 2005 Porto Alegre WSF some of us launched the "Porto Alegre Manifesto", concerned about the growing marginalization of the WSF on the global scene. We knew we were breaking the rule that the Forum cannot make statements but it seemed like a way to contribute the rich Porto Alegre debates to international politics. The following year the "Bamako Call" was spread, in the same vein. None of them had an answer .


In the commented paragraph, saying that "we broke the rules" is an unnecessary semantic dramatization. 

The fact that 19 people sign and disclose a manifesto on their behalf in the forum space " does not break with any rules, in the forum ", and the signers themselves said it in the 2005 text: 

The signatories of the Porto Alegre Manifesto, who express ourselves in a strictly personal capacity and who do not intend in any way to speak on behalf of the Forum, have identified twelve of these proposals, which together give meaning to the construction of another possible world. 

If applied, they would allow citizens to finally begin to reappropriate their future.

We submit these fundamental points to the appreciation of the actors and social movements of all countries. It is they who, at all global, continental, national and local levels will be able to carry out the necessary fights so that they become reality 

The specific question for the signatories of this 2005 manifesto, as they had made it explicit, was rather: “what will be the reaction of the actors towards whom we are directing, in this manifesto initiative, from our personalities. 

It is a comfortable short-path for a dramatized narrative to say 15 years later "there was no response to our manifesto initiative", as if "someone" could respond, or had to respond, and chose not to,  

As has been clarified in other comments to this commented text, in 2005 there were a series of self-organized discussions around this manifesto document. Then, if this did not arouse a political dynamic of significant adhesion among "the actors and social movements of all countries", it was not because "something" or "someone" opposed it,

Rather, mechanisms of political adhesion of these actors were not activated by the mere existence of the manifesto document and some dialogues around it, and by the mere identity, perhaps prestigious, of its signatories. These signatories did not manage to provoke significant political articulation processes in relation to this document.. 



This is the reality of horizontal open space: there are no "institutional" mechanisms for visbilizing, promoting and legitimizing the discourse of certain participants , as there usually is in an organization, for legimitizing the discourse of its "leadership".

In the forum, the promotion of the speeches, and the generation of commitments to action in relation to those speeches, are done through dialogue and organizational work of their authors and promoters, "from below" 

Now let's have a moment of "fiction history", imagining that the participation format "initiative ” described in part 3 above had been included in the implementation of WSF 2005. What could the group of 19 people that intended this “manifesto 2005” do? ,

Darfting The document "Manifesto Porto Alegre 2005 perhaps took a few hours of consultation for this group of intellectuals. Writing it would be the easiest part.  

The manifest is structured like this: 

  • A) Another Possible World must respect the right to life of all human beings, through new economic rules. Therefore, it is necessary… (7 points).
  • B) Another Possible World should encourage life together in peace and justice,on the scale of all humanity. Therefore, it is necessary:(3 points) 
  • C) Another Possible World must promote democracy from the local to the global scale. Therefore, it is necessary: ​​(2 points)

The 12 points are formulated in a generic way, typical of the speech of a government, the UN, etc.

Now once the idea of ​​the initiative is adopted, there are formal steps , formal participation acts, accessible to its 19 promoters

First register this group of personalities as a participating entity , This leads to a little better definition of this group that can announce initiatives and organize self-organized activities, alone, or with other organizations  

Second: describe the initiative 

"We submit these fundamental points to the appreciation of the actors and social movements of all countries." How does this group intend to implement this "submission"? 

What does the initiative realistically consist of? what is the purpose? what is the way?

How to name the initiative ? choosing the title  is delicate:

let us imagine that the group of 19 would have decided "Towards a global agenda of the peoples" una formulation that reflects the idea of a necessary process of submission to /onwership by its recipients (" the peoples") , better so than "manifesto de Porto Alegre 2005", which after all, will remain as a manifesto from 19 personalities, without ownership by third parties

For example, the "group of 19" could imagine proposing a series of dialogues with large networks, to see how those would envision the generation of campaings on the 12 points of the document , or how they would place existing campaigns in the 12 categories of topics, or how a mechanism could be elaborated to stay in contact, or mutualize information, increase cross-participation in the campaigns; And fnally how could another text be formulated " Global agenda of the peoples",as another intiative that this time would bear the signature of legitimate representatives of large networks that would circulate it to their "bases"

What would be the "public actions dates" within reach of this group of 19 people, to show the progress of this initiative "Towards a global agenda of the peoples"

Going to the simplest: There may be the press conference of the days of the WSF Porto Alegre 2005, that would be included in the calendar of futures of WSF 2005 as a Manifest-action

There may be another press conference announced , say 3 months later, with an indicative date, in another place on the planet, and with online participations from all members of the group , to communicate outcomes of the dialogues announced at the first press meeting

What would be the activities organized by this group of 19 for the days of the WSF 2005 forum event

There may be one, or more, presentation activity titled " presentation of the initiative "  Towards a global agenda of the peoples", it all depends on how these 19 19 people estimate the level of priority for them to promote this initiative, in relation to their other commitments in the dense days of the WSF 2005 event

These activities would be open dialogue workshops to collect comments and feedback and suggestions, inviting a series of representatives of potentially interested organizations, the dialogue can be in rountable , or only in a simple round of discussion with the participants. It is not enough to announce the activity , also a promotional task is needed before the event, making contacts, etc.  

Then the participants who look at these presentation activities included in the "program" on the WSF 2005 website, will see a link between these activities and the initiative page "Towards a global agenda of the peoples" that contains the manifest text and the description of the initiative, they can come in the inter initiative space to meet with the representativs of the group of 19, the can express interest on line so the group of 19 come back to them etc 

This dialogue activity presentation of initiative Towards a global agenda of the peoples will allow the promoting group to refine the narrative about its initiative, and better prepare the upcoming public press conference activity, placed as a self-organized public activity,  

The promoter group, through representatives, could also be present in the " inter initiatives space", a common space maintained during the days of the WSF 2005 event, to locate possible links with other initiatives, and make contact in this regard or to schedule dialogues in the months to come, etc. 

If the dynamics are strong, the group of 19, in alliance with 4 other groups from at least two continents, could enroll in the program an assembly of articulation for action, "Towards a global agenda of the peoples", with more visibility than a simple activity. But if it is not strong yet, better not to do it and have a quasi-empty room 

The promoter group of Towards a global agenda of the peoples , could decide to be present at the common final moment "agora of futures WSF 2005" at the end of the event, presenting to other participants its updated initiative thanks to all these contacts made in the event, and making more contacts for dialogues to come, perhaps creating during the agora the nucleus of an international promotion team

What is the "news in fsm 2005" that the group can produce on its own behalf before during and after the event ?

A critical dimension in the horizontal forum process is "communication from the participants"   and, there may be devices/schemes proposed by the facilitating collective of WSF 2005 that stimulate each participating entity, initiative promoter group,, activity organizer group, to produce a certain number of "news in the WSF" in their own name, on "what we do in the forum" or "how we see the forum" or "info we want to circulate in the forum", and that they be published and visible in an equitable way in the horizontal WSF space, by means of a "news in the WSF" website accessible through equitable protocols. each entity can then select and promote in its networks its selection of such news in WSF . Implementing such a device/scheme is a way to empower each participant as a communicator in the FSM process. 

The promoter group of "Towards a global agenda of the peoples" would be led to choose whether or not to establish relationships with promoters of other "global agenda formulation initiatives" that could emerge in the 2005 WSF, with none having more legitimacy than the other. it could identify these other initiatives early when they are placed in the initiatives directory WSF 2005 , and contact them in the context of the event and its comon moments to see if they want to discuss together possible articulation. 

After the WSF 2005 event

The promoting group of 19 plus new allies can arrange and implement a series of dialogues, with organizations that have been evoked with such or such interlocutors in the WSF 2005 event, continue to publish news in WSF 2005, open a website where they can show the dynamics of the initiative,  

Meanwhile, the initiative  Towards a global agenda of the peoples is visible in the calendar of future WSF 2005 , by means of the two action dates, public defined and updated in their description, it can be updated, a version 2 of the text can be made, adding a text on "how" "the appreciation of the movements " is going in relation to the proposed agenda of the peoples, it can even be proposed online visible on the forum site connected to the initiatives directory, a way to express support online for the initiative, in a personal capacity or in the name of organizations, using an online form,

The promoting group there can decide if it is going to follow the initiative, Towards a global agenda of the peoples if it is going to be reformulated and as if other actors "social movements" are included in the initiative itself, etc. with next public action dates , as the initiative

Perhaps the promoting group will develop the idea of ​​a seminar with some representatives of more interested organizations, whose objective would be to formalize a framework for collective articulation, and move to a version two of initiative, which involves more actors. This would be shown as a first level of result during the second press conference announced as action date.

Stopping here this imaginary 2005 scenario. It was developed to illustrate a few points:  

0 / The vision of the WSF as a "space for participation for action" is generic, now the base question is: what forms of participation are implemented and how to develop the aspect participacion for action? . We have just seen some possible: initiatives, activities, (including assemblies), interinitiative space, agora of futures, calendar of futures, news in the WSF,. There are forms of self-organized participation (activity, initiative) and there are forms that are moments and common scheme based on these 2 forms (program, space between initiatives, agora and future calendar, news in the fsm, ...) .

A common characteristic is that these forms are containers and the political content they contain is such that the participants choose to put in their own name when using them. The combination of both types of forms allows to specify the potential of the forum, and multiply stimulating situations for participants. If these forms do not exist or if they are not well implemented , which means also appropriated by participants, the potential of the forum is limited to the potential of self-organized activities, which is great, but has its evident limits in term of intercomunicacion between participants.

Note: It is therefore relevant, among facilitators, to make a history of the forms of participation and their various implementations:An example: In the heat of 2003 WSF there was a pityful unattended “mural of proposals” installed in PUC univesity consisting in a few thin horizontal metal poles affixed in a wood wall, and from where a dozen “proposals” documents inserted in a plastic sheet were hanging in general indifference. It was shamefully covered with a white cloth on the last two days of the event. This can be seen as a  starting point for" implementing" article 7 of the charter The World Social Forum ( rather its facilitating committee?)  undertakes to circulate such decisions widely by the means at its disposal, without directing, hierarchizing, censuring or restricting them, but as deliberations of the organizations or groups of organizations that made the decisions.. And how far have we got since then in implementing this principle? Maybe a permanent  inter initiave space  physical and online and the calendar of futures would be a more relevant implementation...

1 / One problem and specific task of the participating groups in a given manifestation of the WSF space-process is to use the various "forms of participation proposed from the facilitation" in a relevant way. That is, based on goals and initiatives with realistic action plans based on the "participation resources" of the participating entity, time, size of the entity and its participating delegation in the WSF process, internal collective organization to participate in simultaneous activities , ability to write news, to make internal decisions, experience of its members, ability to communicate in other languages, etc. There may also be self-organized initiatives that propose support to other participant entities in order to reinforce these empowering resources

2 / How to combine form of participation to advance towards one's goals can be part of the narratives of participation in the forum, a narratives that the IC WSF can foster develop promote. This narrative make participation in the forum perceived in a realistic and attractive way, according to a variety of goals of participants, as visible through the charter vision : reflective thinking, democratic debate of ideas, formulation of proposals, free exchange of experiences and interlinking for effective action

3 / The quality of the website of the process and of a site of "news from participants in the WSF" is important for the dissemination and ownership of this participation narrative as user manual of th WSF 

4 / Critical intellectuals, may be celebrities in the forum space, while having the same rights and duties as other participants. They can collectively organize their participation in a procedural way,i-e using the forms, as was described above for the case of 2005 manifesto : which initiative to promote, which activities to propose, what presence to have in common moments, to promote ideas and discourses. They are participants like everyone else, and they cannot blame anyone if the response to their ideas or speech, turned into visible effects, does not live up to their spontaneous expectations. 

They will also be able to write, based on their own experience, about this practice of “ active participation in perspective of action” that the forum space welcomes, and contribute in the facilitating community to the strategic task of spreading the culture and narrative of participation and facilitation in the forum, instead of focusing only on participation



 (go back to  HOME ) 

After 15 years, our concern has proven extremely real. The Forum was born in 2001 due to the generous and visionary effort of the Brazilian group and the support they found in Lula's time. The progressive internationalization brought the WSF to all continents. The idea of ​​opening a space for social movements and critical intellectuals to exchange experiences and ideas, in order to combat the single thought of neoliberalism, was a revolutionary idea with great impact in the world. Faced with the threat of the start of the US war against Iraq, the WSF showed its immense potential by convening massive rejection marches coordinated globally. @ 5 However, these types of initiatives did not prosper. 

FROM THE "FACILITATION VISION" comesome comments on this paragraph 5: 

5A On the historical dissemination of the "idea of ​​the forum" in the various continents

This dissemination of the vision of social forum, as a radically new format of colective organizing, has been done with a very different level of autonomy or appropriation, and in a large number of cases, the resulting implementations have been a “straw fire” that was put out more or less quickly; There was no manifestation of the vitality of the forum process afterwards,

How to analyze this, to find ways to reactivate the social forum as a collective practice, when, decades later, the social forum form seems very relevant for civil societies to resist the massive diffusion, through a series of actors and channels, of authoritarian, nationalist or fundamentalist narratives coexisting with the neoliberal framework.

This indicates that the work of self-education about facilitation in solidarity, in and between facilitating collectives is more significant and necessary than could be thought, so there be a collective appropriation in autonomy, between various organizations willing to sustain a global forum process on the planet. through a diversity of manifestations  

If there is a distorted or superficial understanding of the concept of "open space for fostering actions", reaching consensus among facilitators is more difficult, disseminating a powerful narrative of participation is more difficult, the implementation of the forum is less creative and appropriate, and consequently, participation becomes politically less relevant and attractive. The disappearance of many forum processes can be commented with this look

The commented text and the present comment share a positive appreciation of the potential of the WSF, but the facts are: there was no continuity in many general forums SF India stopped in 2006, SF Europe got exhausted in 2010, SF Americas in 2010, SF United States in 2015, SF West Africa in 2016. Also there is another question , apart from Porto Alegre brasil, where the forum started, and where there are regularly manifestions of the process, what is the legacy in terms of the manifestations of the forum process, in the hosting countries/cities of the bigs WSF held in Africa, Montreal, in Belem, in Salvador, in Karachi , in Caracas, in Bamako ?  

This could be the object of an exchange of point of view in the IC environment with the organizations involved. 

5B on the task of popularizing the forum: In the IC this task of developing a narrative of participation in relation to the vision of the charter of principles and its implementations has been the object of little collective effort, particularly in the second decade. And on the other hand, some critical narratives of the current WSF process have been developed, which instead of making a critical didactic on the forum, are feeding, for their argumentative rhetoric, basic confusions.

5C on the participation of critical intellectuals: The charter vision values ​​participating entities and the collective organization. Critical intellectuals do not have a special status there. The personal invitations of WSF facilitating group to intellectuals, that had been made in the first events have disappeared, and the methodology was oriented towards the self-organized. Intellectuals can organize among themselves, or be part of organizations, or be invited by organizations in self-managed activities. They have many options and have the cultural and relationship capital to develop those

5D on Singularity of the action date of November 15, 2003: In fact, there was an effective articulation of the presentation marches against the war in Iraq since the agreement, in the forum of January 2003, of many anti-war movements, mobilized for months Due to the American preparation for war, it allowed us to have the same date of February 15, 2003. It is a logistically simple and emotional case to say no to an announced war.

It can be seen that after February 15 2003,  there was no other "action date" planned in the context of war already initiated, with forms of action that would not have been only manifest-action , but also argument-action, involv-action expos-action. This question would have appeared within the framework of the attempt to formulate of a common initiative that could have been called "delegitimizing the war in iraq." February 15 was like a very shared action date, which was not included in the action plan of a concerted initiative among many organizations that was never formulated .

This historical case invites us to wonder whether, behind an "initiative of agenda of action dates", there is or is not articulacion between the groups promoting the initiatives that have announced some of the action date on the agenda, as part of their own action plan . It is the level of articulation between these groups that will,or will not, give energy to the dynamics about this agenda. 

5E on the diversity of actions in the initiatives and the level of commitment to them: Other dates with propositional and sectoral action did not gather as many people as February 2003. Due to lack of having a common vocabulary, elaborated through dialogues touching the notion of "initiatives" in the forum process, there is little documentation and reflection in the activities organized in the forum, on the omparative effectiveness of forms of descentralized action-dates, the implementation of which be within the reach of certain coalitions


-------------------------------------------------- -

 (go back to  HOME ) 

Unfortunately, the WSF has not accepted any changes to its rules and practices, although we are on the eve of two decades of its creation. @ 6 The idea of ​​an open space, without the possibility of interacting with the outside world as a global political subject , has made the Forum a marginal actor, which is no longer a point of reference. 


Noting here a major semantic distortion: “the WSF” is a “facilitated” mass process-space, and it is not an actor or a formal network or a social movement - It is rather in the “facilitation collectives”, be it the IC- WSF, be a general, thematic, national WSF process-event facilitator collective, that decisions on “rules and practices” for the implementation of the vision of the forum are taken collectively and implemented, and where evolutions take place 

It is worth mentioning the written expressions that “actuate” the forum, and that are present in the commented text: they designate the forum as a confusing entity: The title of the document is “message to the world social forum”, as if this space would be a group a base, an audience, to which to address in a large assembly. 

These "actorizing" formulations permanently feed a confusion between the space and its participants, between the space-process and the facilitating collectives, etc. This discursive practice also feeds two symmetrical positions


A passive stance "what is the forum going to do for me?"   - is what happens in point 4 because the foor did not answer us? This feeds the expectation or tolerance of behaviors delegating the forum or representative of the forum

An empowered posture to the representation of the forum that allows semi consciously identify among those who are tempted to authorize themselves to make the WSF space speak, through a series of mechanisms: vocerism (speaking "we" on behalf of the forum actor), assembly (assembly with parliament of the forum ) agenda-ism (agenda actions on behalf of the forum and not of certain initiatives) ventriloqusmo (speaking the narrative of the forum) etc  


Now, there is in the commented text, another indirect message, and also without argumentation, or concrete proposals on the notion of global subject / actor . This concept of global actor subject that appears twice in points 6 and 7 of the commented text, is not in the vision of the letter of principles. 

In the discussion of the IC of Porto Alegre 2020, there was a consensus that could be formulated thus "revitalizing the forum as a global process, and with many initiatives of actions to face crises",  

But there is no consensus in the IC to declare in these terms that “the objective of the IC in the fsm 2021 process was to“ reinforce “the / a global political subject”, and even less that “the forum” itself is this global subject.


It can be understood that this concept of "global subject, or global actor", is an important part of some political narratives present in the forum space, and attracts a part of the participant in the forum or in the IC. But no consensus in the IC  

It would be appropriate for the promoters of the commented text to specify: 

  • 1 / What is this global subject, which would be, in the consensus of the IC, different from the forum?  It seems evident to everyone that there is no actor who calls himself a global subject and has a spokesperson: the college of people X
  • 2 / as described, how it manifests, 
  • 3 / How its promoters are going to use their participation and contribution to maintain the forum as a tool at the service of participants in order to reinforce this global subject, to make its political existence visible, being very clear that this subject is not the forum itself.  

The idea would be to make a procedural description of the efforts imagined by its promoters to reinforce this global subject. A bit like what has been imagined in the case of the promotion of the 2005 initiative in point 4 above: describe who would use which forms of participation and propose which content for this objective


Answering questions 1 and 2 from the vision of the forum space-process-tool ,

The “global subject” can perhaps be described as a  set, a fabric, a partially self-concerted network of coalitions and initiatives “built or reinforced, or articulated from below, in the forum process, according to dialogic processes, that have been able to strengthen among participants in the forum, each one of these articulations then "building power", through action plans with decentralized implementation. This fabric is maintained by having organizations that have cross participations among several of the joints that compose it. 


One way to give more forcefulness to this notion of subject or quasi-actor   is that the interactions, which give life to this informal network of coalitions and initiatives, are carried out according to freely defined protocols of dialogues and decisions, in these coalitions, and between them, for example, handle explicit signer list. This maintains ownership, legitimacy, and meaning for the participating organizations that link to these various coalitions and initiatives. 


The coalitions in this informal group "global actor", would then be able to cooperate within the framework of some broad and global initiatives ", including" initiatives articulating initiatives "that are formulating" narratives "and affirming" agendas "with priorities on behalf of long lists of leading organizations etc.


Caberia, to those who want to reinforce this quasi global actor, working at the same time to the growth of powerful coalitions, and to the quality of the dialogue protocols in and between them. The forms of participation in the forum, activities and initiatives, are available for this. Other organizations can act in the same direction, without necessarily using the same term of global actor in their participation narrative.

It is then possible to clarify correspondences between a / "narratives of participation on the reinforcement of the global subject (of organizations and movements of civil society)", and b / "narrative / objective of common participation agreed in IC of revitalization of the fsm process", so that there is no feeling of ambiguity between the forum-tool and this "quasi global actor"


In this paragraph 6 the commented text says: "An open space without the possibility of interacting as a global subject with the outside world"

The commented text cannot want intrinsically incompatible things at the same time 

1 / in part 2 is the problem  only an open space or can it, should it be, also a space for action? 

The forum is an open space with participants coming and going, and they have no "duty" towards any "political leadership of the forum", which does not exist. Their only duty would be to be sincere, in a negative way in their respect to the principles (which may apply to people who have not declared themselves as participants, or in a positive way in their affirmation of identity as a participant in the process, if it can be space for action (point x,) but it cannot have representation and is not a global subject.  

Perhaps there are present in the forum an informal network of actors who constitute such a quasi-actor, as described in the previous chapter, but, as conscious WSF participants, they are careful not to give in to the temptation to confuse their network with the forum. This does not prevent them from communicating “from the forum” on the calls of coalitions that have been reinforced in the forum and on the agendas that they agree on behalf of these coalitions active in the forum

the presence of a global subject can be manifested in the forum, but not as a forum, the main condition for that is that ... these coalitions exist! . It is not a problem of principles, it is a question of construction from below, of relevance, quality and numerical threshold of participants

On the other hand, the forum space is not a closed enclave . It can be implemented in a very open way, through the self-inclusion of participants, according to forms that give them the right to organize activities and promote self-organized initiatives. This does not prevent people who did not register as a participant to participate in the dialogues, respecting the principles and values ​​in force in the space where they are invited.  

A strategic element is to empower the participants in a fair and transparent way to communicate "how they see the forum" and "what they do in the forum" . In other words, each participating collective entity is invited to be a communicator and to spread these "news from the fsm" in their networks - These are guidelines according to the letter of principles, where there is much potential to be developed, making the forum a self-media from mass communication and from education to social communication 



 (go back to  HOME )  

@ 7 In recent years at least three major popular movements have mobilized millions of people in the world: the fight against climate change, for gender equality, and anti-racism. @ 7 The WSF has been there totally absent as a global collective actor . But the creative idea of ​​the WSF , of fighting against neoliberalism with a holistic and non-sectoral vision, maintains all its force and validity, together with the anti-colonial and anti-patriarchal struggles and for respect for nature and the common goods that today summon us. .


The forum is not a social movement, it is something else. It is a dialogical process with a counter-hegemonic view that is not in instantaneity. It is conceived as a tool co-maintained between facilitating colleges, for civil society organizations, seeking autonomy and power from parties and governments, This tool is not maintained by an NGO such as the world economic forum, since 1971, it is not under control of governments or parties, but is co-maintained between facilitating groups, brought together by a methodological political pact that is reflected in the WSF charter of principles, carefully and eventually updated by these groups. It is a process that is exhausted if this tool does not serve its participants

The forum process has its times and its forms to offer moments of dialogue of reflection, exchange of experience, formulation, coordination, preparation of action. Its functions described in the letter of principles do not include the function of conducting action initiatives, and in this operation reacting to events and accompanying the flow of events. This  is up to each movement or organization or coalition participating WSF according to its strategy and its action tactic on which it can exchange experiences.

Also, the fact that the WSF has been totally absent as a global collective actor   is not in itself a problem, to the extent that the forum is not conceived as a global actor. 

Rather, the question would be “ what relevance do these movements see to the WSF process to implement their international strategies ”. It is precisely one of the questions proposed in the listening and dialogue meetings that are currently being organized in the CI-WSF in the framework of an ongoing effort of political revitalization of the WSF process

But yes, to answer this question, civil society organizations have to know the forum, the forum that is on its pragmatic horizon as a tool. 

This means that the forum process has widely visible manifestations, which offer possibilities for active participation and are accessible to organizations that see relevance to this specific WSF process, and recognize themselves as its participants.  



The problem would then be, in terms of facilitation: what forms of manifestation of the process to implement, and how?, For the effective presence of the fsm process throughout the planet 

Without going into details here, this issue is another element on the agenda of the WSF facilitating community, with three tracks 

1 / Make events evolve, in process-event so that they have quality: a long initial period - an event preparation phase, - an event culmination - a post-event phase, a practice of inclusion of local activities and that the event-process is extend in time like 18 months without permanent intention 

2 / Stimulate the development of extension dynamics processes , with a facilitating group that is not responsible for an event, and the logistical tasks that this implies, and moreover, it provides, through a website, a "decentralized forum environment". In this environment, participants across the planet, - who do not have proximity, either in time or space, with the heat of a process-event -, can place their local or online activities and their initiatives and dialogue with others participants. They can connect local struggles and global coalitions, and can nurture mechanisms of inter-local cooperation and solidarity.

One could imagine that an WSF process-event facilitator collective could - instead of leaving inert or closing the website of its event-process -, reinvest its experience and energy in transforming itself into a collective facilitating extension dynamics, at the end of the event process, proposing participants to continue in interactions in this new context   

It is important to note that the same activity, local or online, can be placed by its organizers in several manifestations of the WSF process , and there is no competition between facilitating groups. These groups are the critical resource of the WSF process and it is important to offer them in or around the IC, an environment where they can cooperate for the development of the WSF process.

3 / For active participation in these two types of manifestations of the process, described in 2 /, a collective digital self-education is necessary   : 1 / develop, through organization and solidarity, situations of interactive dialogue online as a generalized practice and accessible to many participants and 2 /, combining the counter-hegemonic use of corporate social networks and the use of free technologies, find ways to make accessible, digitally and horizontally and especially for the younger participants, the contents produced by other WSF participants, in their activities, inicaitas, and in their "news from the WSF"  

Progress in implementing these three tracks provides each WSF participant with the possibility to frequently engage with the forum process   and stay connected with global problems and concrete self-organizing initiatives that propose decentralized public action dates of all kinds, while helping to organize and promote local actions for another possible world.

In this case, it is very likely that there would be, on the part of WSF participants practicing the process, the will to place in it some activities of local dialogues open to distant participation, closely connected to phases of local struggles and projects,  

But the creative idea of ​​the WSF , to fight against neoliberalism with a holistic and non-sectoral vision

Here too the formulation is important - the idea of ​​the WSF is to propose a space for encounters without impositions that is useful and relevant for those who fight against neoliberalism and for another possible world. The WSF process was not designed to "champion" the political struggle against neoliberalism. This is due to a diversity of stakeholder coalitions that may or may not use the forum space as a tool.



 (go back to  HOME )  

@ 8 Action is needed. The world has changed, and not for the better. Today, we are not only faced with the devastating consequences of forty years of neoliberal capitalism, we are dominated by financial markets and threatened by rapid climate change that could make human life on earth impossible. Mass poverty and growing inequalities divide our societies, along with racism and discrimination.


Little to comment on this "conjuncture synthesis" paragraph, an exercise that is frequently practiced in the IC, with exchange on behalf of its member entities, and that emphasizes the need for action 

Instead of just talking about "action" a more complete picture could be put: visibility and communication tools need to be given to promoter groups of all kinds that formulate and articulate "initiatives" of all kinds (struggles, campaign, projects) with dates- Public actions of all kinds, and forms  , and activities, where they decide and plan and promote and articulate among themselves. 

Here an illustrative categorization of the diversity of types of actions refl-action (dialogue together), manifest-action, argument-action, (towards them not convinced) involve-action, (in projects struggles) expose-action (physical legal media) , according to a gradation of the level of personal and collective commitment necessary to carry out these actions, with a concern to formulate dates decentralized actions to feed networks and international solidarity It is worth noting that a / The dates-actions can combine different types of actions - and 2 / the same action date can be co-promoted by several promoters of several initiatives. It is an element of flexibility to articulate. All of this contributes to articulation   

But then, in coherence with this need for action, from the facilitating vision, in and around the CI-WSF, it should be a priority for organizations to contribute resources of time, attention, and energy to , in practice, reinforce the effectiveness of the “ Space-process fsm of encounters for the articulation of effective actions” (see point 3 ). 

This implies discussing, proposing, and implementing, in perspective of the fsm 2021 process event, some   suitable, new forms and moments of participation , consistent with the principles of the forum  



 (go back to  HOME )  

@ 9 Resistance is also growing. 2019 has seen an overwhelming flow of primarily youth movements , in a host of major cities around the world. They know that the old world is dying, and with impatience they want to build a new world, of justice and peace, where all men and women are equal, where nature is conserved and the economy is at the service of society. Many alternatives are being prepared , @ 9 but there is no space that can bring them together and build new common and global narratives, based on grassroots experiences and capable of guiding future actions . Progressive activists and academics are so fragmented who risk losing not only the battle but also the war.


This point is largely touched on in point 7, on the clues for “presence of the forum on the horizon of people across the planet  

In WSF events, there have always been many young participants, for whom the forum is a significant opportunity for learning, education and contacts. The level of education went up and there are many precarious young people who have an education.  

Now, in what form are young people included in facilitating groups, beyond the commission "youth camp" that has been effective mainly in Brazil? What specific measures and criteria to promote young people in situations of responsibility of work groups, of facilitating tasks? What accompaniment of volunteers, so that they form their identity as a WSF participant? They can also be organized as activities, "dialogues of perceptions and knowledge", organizational between generations. This without pretending to cover the matter.   



It is worth relating the notion of alternative and that of transforming initiative 

Initiatives with their public action dates are necessary throughout the alternatives development cycle: Conceiving, documenting, evaluating an alternative is a reflection, imposing it in the concrete can be through struggles with manifest-action, argument-action, exposition. action, or by making it viable with argument-action and involve-action 

the relationships and articulations between alternatives 


 a space that can bring together the alternatives and build new common and global narratives,

It is not the space that builds narratives, but the more or less conscious or tuned effort of actors who seek to develop global narratives. This formulation is surprising by acting the forum, and it was enough to write: "a space where narratives can be built"

Noting that the construction of these common and global narratives can be done in the form of initiative, and in the name of those who want them, in relation to their struggles 


Some notes: What would be the reasons for this fragmentation of critical intellectuals? What is the generational effect? There is a lot of intellectual participation from academics, who mention their university as their organization, which is not true. How to assess developed self-organizing or non-institutional cooperative practices among intellectuals. This without pretending to cover the matter.



 (go back to  HOME )  

@ 10 COVID-19 is just another crisis, affecting all people at the same time for the first time, even though not with the same intensity. The world has become a village in which we are interdependent. Never before has it been so clear that we actually have to act and do it together. @ 10 The World Social Forum still has great potential to give a voice and help movements to put their alternatives in a global context where new discourses and practices can converge.


It has never been so easy and widespread to talk at a distance at low cost, without plane tickets involved. Therefore , it is realistic to rely on the self-organization of coalitions. These can grow or articulate, through the efforts of entities with experience in animating dialogic processes, largely online, that create conditions for dialogues focused on coalition-building from below, seeking to bring together local problems, and propose forms of public action that are "decentralizable", replicable and show solidarity between actors in the WSF, etc. All this in complete harmony with the principles of the FSM charter.

This "weaving" experience can also be acquired through participation in process-events in social forums and familiarity with the use of forms of participation. 

How the CI-FSM facilitating community evolves 

This community is in some consolidation. 

A strategic element to mention is the capacity, recently demonstrated and assumed to have a collective activity of the IC, relevant online, plenary meetings, and working groups at a very low cost, when compared to the cost of face-to-face meetings that during two decades it has been the main way of functioning. It is seen that the tuned involvement of a small group is enough to revitalize the CI dynamic, and this can stimulate other member organizations to dedicate more human resources to facilitating the process.

There is also a promising orientation to reinforce the IC with representatives of collective facilitators of live thematic or national forums . These representatives have a framework of representation somewhat different from that of representatives of member organizations. Has experiences and resources to contribute to the dynamics of the CI process.

A website of the CI process can be prepared  where each member organization could speak on their behalf, either on their policy, or on their contributions to the facilitating action in the CI, and a light technical secretariat would provide the information on the plenary meetings and of working groups, and would collaborate with working groups embracing diversity in the IC, and helping to encourage the process. This would give a renewed visibility and clarity to the IC 

For the autonomy and operational agility of the IC, it is possible to have a reduced budget operation as a goal . The contribution of organizations, in terms of time of their employees and volunteers, could grow if there is an encouraging narrative and collective experience of facilitation, and if organizations perceive more relevance for them in investing in facilitation, or in active participation  



 (go back to  HOME )  

@ 11 That is why those of us who have participated in the WSF since its inception and signed the declarations of Porto Alegre and Bamakò, ask for a “renewed world social forum,”


These words do not have a clear meaning, if we do not refer to the referent of the letter of principles, and to the practices to implement the process described by the letter   (point 1 and 2 of this comment document)

If we place ourselves in the conceptual framework of the charter of principles, which has been collectively sustainable for 20 years, what are the “ renovating modifications ” that the commented text proposes, from which diagnosis? no elements are visible in the text.  

If we place ourselves in the reality of the facilitating practice of manifestations of the forum process , the fact appears that the time and energy dedicated to reflection and collective implementation on facilitation, in coherence or not with the letter, is little and can be revitalized. this internal process at CI-FSM capital for the forum (see point 10)  



 (go back to  HOME )  

We are facing a multidimensional global crisis; action is needed at the local, national and global levels, with adequate coordination between them. @ 12 The WSF is the ideal framework to promote this action. That's what this initiative is about.


The text speaks of action in the singular, but on the other hand it speaks of diversity of actions of participants

On the other hand, actions do not exist alone, and are part of action plans of struggles, projects, initial campaigns that unfold over time with persistence.


In points 3 and 4 of this paper, it has been described how the WSF can be a space perceived as relevant, useful, educator and stimulating, where to dialogue in a committed way of initiatives and actions in which participants are already involved or consider getting involved. 

A diversity of groups promoting initiatives is visualized that have planned a diversity of actions to advance their goals. 

The articulations between these promoter groups are woven and structured to the rhythm of the discussions between them, or of cross participation between them.

These groups may or may not also agree to be included, to articulate themselves in “articulation initiatives”, developed among themselves, and this with or without non-tax external input / stimulus. 


It is not clear what the commented text proposes, a statement by a group of people who call themselves an “initiative” - 

The "manifesto de Porto Alegre 2005" was a transparent initiative of a small group of critical intellectuals  that "submitted to the appreciation of the group of movements" an agenda in 12 very generic points

We have seen that it was not partly taken over by some movements. It has been described in part 4 how it could have been, if there had been more forms and culture of participation related to action developed thanks to the practical implementation of the vision / program of the charter of principles. 

If today some proposals for "action agendas" appeared from a small group, the problem for this promoter group would be how to convince more organizations to adhere to such an agenda, and the range of forms of participation to do so would be more or less the one mentioned in point 4. formalization of groups and entities, activities, initiatives, news from participants

This text message to the WSF 2020, discussed here, is just a one-page “narrative”, with some notable elements:


1 / The text "Opens doors already open"   dramatizes, and spells out the desire to have, "at the same time, an open space and also a space for action" . In part 3, elements have been given showing at the same time a / that we already have space for actions, at least conceptually in the ideal forum, and that the urgency for the CI-WSF is to implement it in the real forum of the best form that we can as facilitators, probably adding the initiative form to the activity form

Why renew the forum under these conditions? 

So, what is more accessible and encouraging is to define how the IC organizes itself to carry out its facilitation task, within the framework of the letter of principles, on the topic of “fsm and actions of its participants”. A collective facilitating effort contributed by CI organizations can, based on the concrete proposals that exist, define some proposals and implement them responsibly for the fsm 2021 process-event, taking into account their form and time.

2 / The text tends to mention “action” in the singular. The WSF is the ideal framework to promote this action   , which in the end may seem ambiguous, the plural showing diversity, the singular: “this action” 

It is necessary to clarify which action is "this"? Can it be the concept of action, or can it be something that would be unique and centralized, and articulated multi-level, a global agenda of the WSF?

In any case, if it were to be an initiative of "specific mega action", devised from a small group, we would return to the problem of point 4: "who" promotes it? , and like this "who" wants to self-organize the popularization of his proposal in the forum,? with the also self-organized support of convinced supporters 

This would be done without access to an “institutional” support from the WSF, to vertical dissemination of these contents that would be associated with the fact that this “who” (promoting the mega-action) would be within the IC or the facilitating collective, which are not political directions of the forum. 

Such “institutional” support from the WSF to certain agendas is excluded by the vision of the charter of principles that clearly distinguishes: a / the facilitation of the process, which is a real power over forms and times, at the service of the participants, in co -responsibility of the facilitating group and the IC, and

b / political participation in the forum, where all participants have the same rights to use the forms of participation (activities, initiatives, agora, calendar, etc.) and forms of accessible communication (visibility of fsm news from participants) 


3 / The text is incoherent in wanting an “open space and action”, and lamenting the impossibility of confusing forum and global subject / actor

The idea of ​​an open space, without the possibility of interacting with the outside world as a global political subject , …… ..; the WSF, absent as a global collective actor

Note that it has been commented how, in practice, it is possible to have an effect close to what the commented text implicitly proposes and without ambiguity: a possible multi-coalition quasi-actor, if it becomes perceptible in the forum, can manifest itself according to its expression protocols, taking care not to enter into ambiguities of "speaking on behalf of the forum". 

Here the bet is to work, through anticipated dialogues in the CI WSF and with active participants in wanting to build coalitions that would be components of this quasi-global actor, the clarity of their use of the forum as a tool, and not of invocation as a figure. global actor comfortable. It is less rhetorically comfortable, but it is much more accurate for the dynamics of the forum in the short and longer term   


4 The text does not specify a "how": it simply installs the words "renewal" and "space for action" 

The text uses a debatable rhetoric, which has been commented step by step, in the preceding points and does not propose a clue as to what this "renewal" would be like, a word that is a clearly different concept from that of political "revitalization", which the IC agreed to describe your current goal for fsm 2021?

This silence on the "hows" may be due to the will of media progressivity : There have been informal statements that this commented text is only the first element of a campaign, perhaps this is the first "message to the WSF" of this campaign, an emotional message , trying to resonate with the frustrations of many participants about the geopolitical situation and the current state of the fsm process in front of them , then it is possible that there is more critical and propositional content. in the later stages

This first text aims to install in minds and languages  the word "renewal" and the word "space for action" with the basic narrative implicit: " to have the WSF as a space for action, it is necessary to renew the WSF "

Another narrative that has been tried to be based on this text of comments, with concrete facts and proposals, is: 

To better implement the “space for action” that we already have conceptually in the WSF, we are going to revitalize the collective facilitating effort in the CI. In the framework of the current concept charter of principles, there are many perspectives for improving implementation, dialogue and pooling energy and enthusiasm.