• dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input29 comment1 en

last modified September 7, 2020 by facilitfsm


Dear
I highlight an excerpt from the text of the journalist Aran: " even, remember, the Brazilian group prevented the International Committee from issuing a statement against the impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff. Democracy was not even defended." IS NOT TRUE! Only one person from the Brazilian group took a stand against the political position of the CI in relation to the defense of democracy in Brazil, all the others were firmly in favor and, it is important to remember, the proposal for the political manifestation of the CI was presented to the Council by the "group of Brazilians / as".
Anyone who attended the IC meeting in Montreal has no doubts about this. We have to be true to the facts.
All the best

Sheila 

-------------------------- 

(Herewith a detailed report of the IC meeting of Montreal 2016 and of Salvador 2018:

http://www.alterinter.org/spip.php?article4654      (Salvador) 

https://www.e-joussour.net/en/the-political-harakiri-of-the-world-social-forum/   (Montreal) 

 Dear Sheila,

You are totally right. It was the Brasilian group that proposed a text to condemn the coup against Dilma and it was one single person, Chico Whitacker to not name him, that stopped us from adopting it. It was a rather 'dramatic' meeting, and together with the  meeting of March 2018 in Salvador de Bahía where the same happened with a text to condemn the assassination of Mariel Franco, these were the events that definitly, convinced me we had to change our rules. This dialogue is now super-urgent. This is the objective of the two initiatives that were taken, one with a group around Boaventura, the other one of Brasilian movements.  I hope all can see the political importance of these initiatives.

Best, un abrazo, amicalement,

Francine 

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

Dear Friends


Aron´s text is correct. I was requested to write de draft of the text about the coup against  Dilma by members of the CI, some brasilians, Gustave, Francine and others whom I dont recall. I read loudly the document. When we were about to vote, Chico and Moema  abruptly interrupt the procceeding with the argument that the CI could not assume political decisions in the name of the FSM and asked for a break of ten minutes. From then on there was much confusion in the room,lots of people protesting, and the result  was the one desired by the minority ( some brasilians but not only brasilians):  the document was not signed in the name of the CI. Below I copy all the dcouments in tw languages and all the corraspondence that immediately followed

abraços,best wishes saludos

Boaventura 

--------------------------- 

 I think Boa's memory of the meeting is correct. What is not correct is to speak of 'el grupo brasileno' when it was precisely that group who made the proposal read by Boa. I understand Sheila when she refuses to take responsibility for this nth refusal of Chico and some other non-brasilenos to defend democracy.

Francine

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

Boaventura 

Compas,  I insist in the truthfullness of what I wrote. I never mentioned " the brasilian group". I said that I was charged with writing the draft by some brasilians etc. I did more than just reading it. The key question is why nobody succeded in changing Chico's mind and what were the consequences?Particularly th brasilians. After all the Brasilian democracy was at stake.

Note: Lack trust is abundant among ourselves and everything (any small detail) is used to avoid discussing the important issue: the serious and lamentable paralisis of the WSF at that moment

Boaventura 

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

Dear Sheila

You are right in reacting against that formulation of the article. As you noticed I never used the term "the Brasilian group" and Y know very well some of you that were with us in favor of the declaration. The problem is that it was not possible to block  Chico's highly minoritatian position. Why? The Brasilians had a special legitimacy since their own democracy was at stake. At that moment the rule of consensus was the same as the blocking veto. Indeed, Chico had once proposed the end  of the CI but then how to take decisions.? If the future is go on taking and make no decisions... that is the best solution. Why a CI?

abraços

Boventura

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

Perdón, when I wanted to defend Aram, who could be perfectly lonely. I wasn’t. But if a sole person managed to block the Brazilian group, the result, seen from afuera, in cambia mucho ...

Roberto 

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

Dear CI-WSF,

I totally disagree with the model of dialogue that is established here. I reaffirm that dialogue, the possibility of looking at the WSF and the planet is fundamental, considering that the world is no longer the same. However, personalizing and continuing a conversation about attacks will not take us anywhere because we have been doing this since 2001. It is not the problem of Chico, Boaventura, Sheila or Francine. It is a problem of the CI-WSF that needs to be reviewed, make a self-assessment and check whether or not it is important for the WSF process to continue.

Many Thematic WSF, local and national happen without the participation or presence of the CI-WSF. What does that mean?

Many organizations withdrew from the CI-WSF and the WSF process. What does that mean?

Many people were better off participating in the WSF process and others were not. What does that mean?

The world remains very unfair, inhuman and unequal. What does that mean?

For the world today, what is the importance of the WSF process? And, what is the importance of CI today, for the WSF process?

If the dialogue goes through these points, you can count on our participation. If you remain personalized, a dialogue will not be possible.

Hugs

Salete

Clacso 

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

Dear all, it is good to remember the path traveled. As well as making the necessary clarifications to what has been said or written. I like the questions raised by Salete, they point to a critical reflection of our actions in recent times. The dialogues that we are programming for the month of September with global movements, thematic and regional forums, will undoubtedly be a great opportunity to rethink ourselves as a great global movement.
We have many challenges ahead and we need to be together.
A big hug for everyone.

Rosy Zúñiga - CEAAL 

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

Gracias Rosy, I totally agree that we have to look to the future. but it is not possible to prepare the future without knowing the past and the inheritances that have left and continue to exist. That is why it is so important for everyone to volunteer and a minimum of openness and dialogue. We are not going to achieve with only the negations and exclusions.

Francine 

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

 On 12/05/2016 20:03, Rita  wrote:

Coup and setbacks in Brazil - Message to the WSF Organizations

Dear friends 

 We've just lived today a sad morning marked by the mandate of the suspension of President Dilma Rousseff, in an attack on our young democracy. It is also a coup against the social policies headed by the governments cycle in which  Brazil was ruled by a worker and then by a woman.

Errors aside, which have always been appointed by the Left and social movements, it is not because of them that the government is being away, but , according to the words of President Dilma, a political legal farce organized by the parties which lost the election in 2014

Rousseff said she has faced in her life the unspeakable pain of torture, alsol the pain of the disease, but now she is facing the pain of injustice, the worst pain to be imposed to a human being. Embraced by supporters who were receiving her at the exit of the Planalto Palace, Dilma added, besides the word injustice, the denunciation of treason. Her government will be taken over by the vice president whose party held the key ministries of her mandate but has left the government to vote for impeachment and thereby occupy the interim presidency.

I never imagined it would be necessary to fight back against a coup in my country, said Rousseff in a press declaration 

The conservative and patriachal profile of this interim government is clear: no woman has even been designated (or accepted the designation) as a minister and it has already been decided the summary extinction of the strategic ministries for social emancipation as the Ministry of Culture and the Secretariat of Racial Equality and Women. The plan for the economy is all that the WSF combat, with the application of the neoliberal model of fiscal adjustment and loss of social and labor conquests

Accompanied by the former President Lula when leaving the Planaldo, Dilma Rousseff asked the Brazilian people to continue mobilizing and fighting peacefully for democracy.

While Congress decides the final impeachment vote, which may last from 3 to 6 months, we thank the international mobilization to denounce the ongoing coup in Brazil. 

The World Social Forum has always been for us an international space marked by pressure for rights and democracy, which influenced the struggles in Latin America. We live now serious setbacks and threats in our continent So it is very important to recognize the WSF as a space for articulation of resistance and solidarity.

Fighting continues

May 12, 2016

Brazilian Collective of the WSF

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

 Boaventura:

Le 13/05/2016 00:36, Boaventura de Sousa Santos a écrit :


Dear Friends

This should be the moment for all of us that have been with the WSF from the beginning  and specially for those of us that are members of the IC to do some soul searching and ask some strong questions:

1-Why do we remain silent? Why no motion can be approved in the IC against  the parliamentary coup currently unfolding in Brazil or against any serious breach of democratic rule occurring  in any other country? Of course, because according to the dominant understanding of our Charter of Principles we are not allowed, as IC or as WSF, to take a stand on any issue. 

2-What is the price we pay for this political abstention if not omission? No price because we have already self-declared ourselves as politically  irrelevant?

3-Turbulent times approach as global financial neoliberal capitalism takes hold of country after country. We designed the WSF for a different time, a time of offensive rather than defensive struggles. Are we going to rely on inertia as the only reason to go on without deeply rethinking the WSF?

4-Brazil is not special in spite of having been the country that invented us all as WSF. But what is going on in Brazil is it not the most cruel metaphor of our historical failure? Will the WSF-Montreal be a living ruin? What should be done in order not to be?

warmly

Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Popular University of the Social Movements

 -----------------------------

 On 13/05/2016 05:36, Chico - UOL wrote:

I fully understand the anguish of our dear Boaventura with our inefficiency while participants of the WSF process to face the monster of neoliberalism, in defeats like in Brazil or where it seems that tend to be repeated throughout Latin America.

I just do not understand why he insists on finding that our inefficiency results of an inflexibility in the understanding of the guidelines of the WSF Charter of Principles.

It is impossible to put in three lines - like the three destroying ones of Boaventura - the tons of arguments that have already been written to say why it is impossible and undesirable that the WSF CI or the WSF itself take positions as such.

Instead of talking so negatively (and falsely) in "ruins" of the WSF in Montreal, why he does not help the young people that are facing there the challenge of organizing this edition of the WSF – I repeat: young people, as always we wished -  to have the success that everything indicates they will have? For example organizing a nice activity in this FSM to reflect on what is happening in Latin America - after having appeared for all the world as the continent of hope towards the "other possible world" - and to make proposals for concrete action to overcome the frustrations of current trends?

Why not also participate more actively of the efforts being made by the working group set up in Tunis in March 2015 to redefine the role, function and mode of functioning of the WSF IC?

For some reason the WSF is coming to its 16th. year of life (incredibly, in the history of the left). However, it is very tiresome to have to repeat and repeat things for those that, on insisting on using for something an instrument made for something else, will end up by destroying the little we have to overcome the obstacles that we are facing.


Chico Whitaker, 13/05/2016