• dibco1 2020 discusionfsm input55 en

last modified October 11, 2020 by facilitfsm

DIBCO1 initiative FSM/WSF | >>      

Discussion 2020EN  |  Index  |    



 | @-1   @+1  |  Comment
Dibco-seul-mini.png   EN - ES - FR - PT 

WORLD-MEXICO SOCIAL FORUM RENEWING GROUP (GRFSM-MEXICO) It seems that Chico Witaker's intention in his last text (26/09/20) by Whatsup aims to point out not only the difficulties of deciding without breaking the unity of the FSM, but also to address the nature and viability of an action. What can and can't the Forum do? How to act, with whom, for what? These are open questions, which have no easy solution. That's why we have to deal with them as something truly substantial. All right, if we decide to act, it's to do what? Just statements, or something else? In this there is a golden rule: the one who proposes acts. And acting on global problems involves defining goals and paths very well, seeking support, gathering strength, right? 

Freedom of expression and manifestation are powerful but insufficient weapons. Its scope is conditioned in large part by the dissemination of these events, and as we know the great media are in the hands of the right in almost everywere. That is why peaceful, non-violent action has to go from digital networks to the street and to the public square, but also to universities, churches, trade union and peasant headquarters and to the companies themselves; strikes, partial or general, to suspend the payment of taxes, to boycott for the use or consumption of certain products or services. 

For example, if we decide to act against tax havens and money laundering (irrecusable and clearly illegal and illegitimate facts in the field of global finance) is it unreasonable to think of a boycott (suspension of movements, cancellation of accounts) against banks and parent houses and owners of off-shore paradises? Or is this an illusory, unworkable action? Or can actions and boycotts be thrown against arms-producing or marketing companies? Or against the most anti-ecological and polluting industries? Marching for the liberation of Assange, who gave us very strong information about war crimes and property crimes around the world, is asking too much? 

No one has the solutions at hand. They must be searched individually and collectively, discussed on the basis of a clear definition of substantial issues or problems with agendas. That's exactly what we're looking to raise and share from the GRFSM-MEXICO. It is not a question of ignoring or denying what has been achieved in twenty years, but by assessing the process with objectivity and respect for differences of opinion, we will already be on the path of launching in-depth discussions without false fears. It's time to do it, it's necessary, it's useful. Let's do it now, Oscar Glez.