• isaandwsf wsfdiscussion2020 dialogue proposal and comments

last modified October 6 by facilitfsm

ISA & WSF | inputs       @I1 - @I2 - @I3 - @T4 - @I5

PROPOSAL

Dear friends,

As you are certainly aware, we have two sessions (panels) on the WSF at the next ISF in Porto Alegre, July14-2018.

When I took the initiative to organize a session on the Future of the WSF on behalf of RC10 and RC26, I even got commended by Geoffrey.

This situation witnesses to the joke I shared with Boa about his answer to my invitation, saying that "the" ultimate question was not the future of the WSF but "the" Future WSF.

The joke goes as follows: A couple at the psychiatrist for their first session of family therapy for a friendly divorce purposes (as I once personally did to no avail). Just to check the situation, the psychiatrist asks: Do we agree that we are here to discuss your friendly divorce? She says Yes! He says No! 

I asked Geoffrey about it, and his answer went something akin the following: Well, since it is POA then there will be several sessions on the WSF...Maybe so.

Let me share a bit about the background of the proposed session on the Future of the WSF, hosted by RC 10 and jointly supported by RC26.

Already in 2002, RC 10 gave me and Walter mandate to organize sessions at the WSF 2003 and 2005 in Porto Alegre, in the capacity of participant-observers. We had a magnificent response, especially from Brazilian colleagues.

This success was reflected in the number of Brazilian colleagues that joined RC-10. Since then, Erik and myself organized sessions on the WSF at the following ISA international conferences, conducted as a dialogue, chosen as democratic praxis and not merely as bla bla bla.

For those not aware of what RC10 is about, it is about "Participation, Organizational Democracy and Self-Management," in other words very much in line with the leit motiv of the WSF as a process.

It happens that we are not up to our lofty aims and expectations, and in fact we continue to be incoherent and contradictory in the ways we go about how to construct Other Possible Worlds with Humanity and Solidarity at the center of Society and not greed, which points to the World Economic Forum and the 1% of Humankind.

Given the impasse shortly summarized by those who joint the RC10 & RC26 session on The Future of the WSF - and the other on "The Future WSF," let me propose the following:



Proposal:


Taking into account the existing abstracts in both ISF2020 
RC10 & RC26 sessions on The Future of the WSF, with previous agreement by the colleagues who registered their abstracts before the 30th September deadline and/or those who wish to join us, this is a cordial invitation to develop: 

  • a first round of debate based on the existing abstracts or joining abstracts of 300 words in a space http://openfsm.net/projects/isaandwsf/,  opened by Pierre in www.openfsm.net .  Comments should not be more than 500 words long in that phase,  and can have the format of a complete version of the commented abstract highlighted in yellow and sequenced in several sections, commented consecutively see a model here

    To access the proposed format for commenting an input  click on the link Comment this input#x?  that is above the title o each input 

  • This first phase will be followed by a second round, this time with your respective papers or inputs.

 

The task for those who wish to join us is to bring their abstract or early contribution (300 words)  and shortly comment some if not  all the enclosed arguments/abstracts published in the "ISA & WSF" space

Their inputs will be published as "comment-inputs"  in the "commented by"   and "commenting on" lines on visible on top of each input page

 ISA & WSF |          @I1 - @I2 - @I3 - @T4 - @I5

Commented by                                               
Commenting on                                            

After the second round, we could explore publishing the outcome, respectful of all the "voices" and particular visions and motivations behind our visions. 

That's about it.

Let me hear from you at your earlier convenience.

Fraternalmente

/Azril

Board member RC10 and RC 26

 

Answer 1

Dear all WSF proponents,

Great to see the engagement in the possibility of alternative worlds, hopefully with ISA 2020 as a reinvigorating and revitalizing conversational platform. Critical in these days where we are acutely reminded that we live in a world borrowed from future generation, with no possibility of an alternative planet. Today’s broad activism for climate action

Thanks Azril for your efforts at enabling open, democratic dialogues, as I understand it in the spirit and values of WSF, together with a broad network of proponents and creators of futures of WSF.

So much thoughts and engaged discussion has gone into the understanding and practice of WSF as a space and as a movement itself. Can this dialectic be resolved in some sort of fruitful and forceful Hegelian aufhebung? 

Something that can inspire and release renewed interests and efforts in influencing globalization and creating sustainable and just planetary (and multiple local) futures based on those willing to commit themselves to the responsibilities of planetary citizenship. 

I do not know what it will be, but is willing to take part in ISA- WSF conversation and future action. As Wallerstein early argued in the WSF future debate, dialogue is already action, so the issue is more one of enable scaffolding that can generate more, richer and reflexive action.

Thinking of the ongoing climate action, with Greta  as a quite surprising leader figure, it starts in the center of concerns with a call for action to leaders and all of us as implicated in the climate problematic and its possible resolution. 

Maybe it is something to learn from and link to? E.g. its media coverage (the third sector of power), addressing prevailing power holders, its urge for action, its symbolic leadership, and point of departure in science.

I believe agency, leadership, and transformational, global entrepreneurship can provide some useful perspectives on WSF and its future. Enclose an abstract that I and Azril been working on, with potentials for pointing to some WSF futures. 

In addition, science in the shape of participatory research and PAR might be an additional dimension, e.g. in recognizing the knowledge and research capacities of people and indigenous epistemic systems.

Looking forward to further dialogues.

Erik