• dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input34 en

Comparing

Current Version

by facilitfsm, modified September 20, 2020
to ←

Version 8

by facilitfsm, modified September 20, 2020

Key

  • inserted
  • deleted
DIBCO1 initiative FSM/WSF|>>

Discussion 2020EN |Index|

>

ContactEN|@-1@+1 |

CommentLink: /projects/dibco1/dibco1-2020-discusionfsm-input34-comment0-en
Dibco-seul-mini.pngENLink: /projects/dibco1/dibco1-2020-discusionfsm-input34-en -ESLink: /projects/dibco1/dibco1-2020-discusionfsm-input34-es -FRLink: /projects/dibco1/dibco1-2020-discusionfsm-input34-fr -PTLink: /projects/dibco1/dibco1-2020-discusionfsm-input34-pt

Situation of "dialogue about WSF" - by Pierre 24 08 2020Input34

The controversial discussion about wsfis gathering speed, probably towards a IC meeting in october 10th and a series of consultation in september

Three main groups are identifiable

1/ the renovators core teamhave made a series of inputs since februarydibco1 2020 discusionfsm input20 en-dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input2A en-dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input21 en-dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input2A en

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


2/ Those calling for dialogue, startingfrom brasil

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

3/ Those more silent, a good part supportive of current WSF principles

  • A/ Some have a defensive position telling to "renovators" : let us do the forum as usual by the current principles and go found something else elsewhere - this is of course ineffective for those who want to capture the potential of wsf for their political strategy, whatever their motivation- even though this would break the current consensus that has kept us together 20 years, whatever our performance as process facilitator may have been, and it has been poor in the last decade
  • B/Also support can come from some thematic and national forums facilitating committees, see this inputdibco1 2020 discusionfsm input24 enhowever there is also a tropism, in those smaller scale process-events, (2000 people size events) towards taking distance with some WSF principles : having final declaration in the space of the forum and having a temptation of "networkization" of those smaller manifestation of WSF process . see the current process calendar here :http://openfsm.net/projects/wsf2012-support/wsf2018-calendar/#lista
  • C/ Some think that going to political strategic discusion , and "decentering it from the forum", will recontextualize the debate , however the terms of debate are not clear, and it is quite difficult to maintain a formal frame outside the forum space and ic legitmacy itself , and then those interested might be drowned in a kind of spontaneous asembleism between political actors where categories shared in the forum faciltaion context do not prevail any more and ways for facilitation of this shapeless context are unknown. It might be sheer political competition

4/ On the times and rythms of dialogue

  • A/ Renovators and some brasilian seem eager to mix this debate about WSF with the ongoing consultation meetings in septembrer - and "surf" on the spontaneous expectations of some consulted organizations to impose emotionnally a "renovation narrative " , with the goal to be mixing debate on principles and preparation of WSF 2021: "to develop actions and outward communication in WSF , we need to renovate WSF" ( see input 26 and "here is how" input 33 and 37 above )
  • B/ There will be probably an attempt to request discusion time next october 10 IC meeting for this WSF debate on the organizing practices in IC - let us see how it will be
  • C/ maintaining separated this dialogue about WSF and the concrete preparation of WSF 2021 event -process, on substance and on times /places will be a challenge, because of the overlooking by many IC members of the relevance of focusing ,after consulting, on defining forms of participation, (see input 36) which will structure and refresh the participation narrative and attractivenes of WSF 2021
  • D/http://openfsm.net/projects/dibco1/project-home/#indexthis link is more or less giving inputs in chronology

5/ On places for dialogue

6/ On themes of dialogue

  • A/ renovators want to impose as a priority themes on representativeness and democracy, essentially inside IC, they care little about the formats of self organized participation made available to participants and for common moments proposed to participants methodology - see part 1
    • There is a sub discussion activated from some brazilian members is about the "IC taking political positions" that echoes renovators.Here in input about this longstanding issue :http://openfsm.net/projects/dibco1/dibco1-2020-discusionfsm-input31-enThe relevance of this issue is i practice very small, as immanuel wallerstein, recently invoked by renovators, stated clearly some years ago in Monteal
    • Note : there is a sub discusion about the "democracy in iC" or elsewhere in WSF which echoesthat of renovators - it remains to be commented if the category of "democracy" is relevant in the openspace-process facilitation, which is not a place like a partiament , where decisiones HAVE to be made within a divided national community - this invoking of democracy needs more comment
  • B/ a fourth working group in IC to document terms of dialogue in view on the internal IC discuson phase coming afrer consutation has been proposed in last IC meeting - It has not yet been taken in consideration, at the time when some claim a "dialogue is necessary "


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

  • A/ What would be the most relevant and political consensual option, in IC at present , would be to focus on enhancing WSF open space as better space for articulating actions which is a base function of WSF porcess . This could be done working on newformats of participation in WSF event process,consistent with current principles , to make the forum more attractive for those who expect political outcomes - with a convincing "narrative of participation", not selling dreams, but proposing concrete ways to actively participate along one's goals
  • B/ This problematics is discarded by renovators, on the ground that "methodology comes after strategy" . It can be argued that there is a need to qualify "strategy" is it facilitation strategy of faciltating committee or is it political strategy? and if so of who. -because "political strategy" is content /participation - while facilitation strategy as about "developing the forum process", and metodology is about forms and moments.for participation with a clearcut separation between those fields- renovators want essentially political decision made in or around IC. They do not take the participants shoes, while in a 50 000 participants forum those are one hundred time more numerous thand IC of faciitating collective
  • C/ Of course the distinction participation- contents and facilitation-forms of participation can be also questionned by renovators - and a participation narrative saying somehow "we have been lazy ten years, and we need to focus on methdology for good to revitalize WSF 2021 wiht new formats of participation , is a delicate self critical exercise for IC members , some of them mesmerized by the IC centered renovation narrative . Formulation of challenges of facilitationdibco1 2020 discusionfsm input25 enis valuing these tasks
  • D/ "Brasilians for dialogue" claim to be open to "discussing methodology" however its seems reading their text ( open to signature) to be more a methodology for political decision between particicipants in IC , than a methodology for enhanced participation towards more action related contents in the forum space process- The distinction between participation and facilitaion is not clear ( see part 2)
  • E/ Also for a not explicited yet reason , this approach " yes we can make the openspace a better space for articulation action" is not necessarily pushed by all supporters of the current principle. it is about making out of this option a positive narrative more owned in IC, contrary to the narrative of "guiltiness to be ngos and smaller organizations" or guiltiness to be lazy about methodological responsability , and being pushed emotionally to give political space to newcomers in IC for representativeness, without an in depth discusion about their vision of the forum- process