-
It seems rtf does not open. L'archive en rtf ne semble pas ouvrir. O arquivo em rtf parece que não está abrindo. Thanks, Chico Whitaker
Attachments
- Thread Outline:
-
-
RE: Chico Whitaker texts in doc
by
mestrum
- Re: RE: Chico Whitaker texts in doc by chicowf <chicowf@...>
- Re: Chico Whitaker texts in doc by Chico - UOL <chicowf@...>
-
RE: Chico Whitaker texts in doc
by
mestrum
-
Dear Chico, Many thanks for your new text. It is very clear and helps a lot to learn what the plans are. Let me try to summarize and tell you how I understand it. Please let me know if my interpretation is right or wrong. 1. A movement Action for a Possible Other World is created, called APW Members are individuals who can, nationally or regionally, create GRAPS (grupos de apoyo) which can also create support offices, in fact national or regional secretariats These GRAPS can also create denser cores of movements (this point is not yet very clear to me what these denser cores are for, what they can/should do- or is it just that they can work together?) The APW can also create working parties, e.g. on expansion or on strategy. 2. I understand this as a de facto decentralization of the WSF process with the main decision-making power lying with the GRAPS. Participants from countries or regions with less organizational capacity, funds or with less advocates of the WSF process take Belgium may get marginalized. Participants without GRAP may have difficulty making their voice heard, or not? 3. Can there not be a problem with individual membership? We all know the old tricks of the left: have all members of one single organization register, and they automatically have a majority I very much like your comparison of the IC with an affinity group, I think you are right for a small core of people. But I would not be so optimistic as to ignore all power struggles, however relative that may be. 4. My impression is you are still very afraid of any decision-making, of positions that might be taken by the APW. Will it ever be possible to arrive at real consensus? I am not promoting this decision-making, but I do not want to exclude it a priori. 5. Will the APW only convene when there is a World Social Forum or also at thematic or regional forums? Who will still be able in the future to organize WSF? GRAPS can go their own way 6. Are there any thoughts on financial contributions to APW or GRAP? 7. It seems to me the power is shifted from IC to GRAPs, with less possibilities for global action, and more focus on regional issues. 8. I also wonder, yes there may still be WSFs, but is the dissolution of the IC not the beginning of the end? I have no answer. These are my first thoughts. Let us hope we can discuss it all. I wish you all, and especially you Chico, a very happy and healthy 2013. Francine Van: Chico - UOL [mailto:chicowf@...] Verzonden: 06 January 2013 19:58 Aan: wg-about-future@... Onderwerp: [WG about future] Chico Whitaker texts in doc It seems rtf does not open. L'archive en rtf ne semble pas ouvrir. O arquivo em rtf parece que não está abrindo. Thanks, Chico Whitaker -- Archive: http://openfsm.net/[ <http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/ 01/1357498850972> ]/1357498850972 To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to wg-about-future@.... Please contact wg-about-future-manager@... for questions.
-
Thank you very much, Francine. Give me two or three days to answer to you. In the next days I must absolutely finish what I am now doing. It will be easier for me now to answer, as there are not so many questions and they are very direct... Fraternally, Chico Whitaker Em 07/01/2013 19:06, Francine Mestrum < mestrum@... > escreveu: Dear Chico, Many thanks for your new text. It is very clear and helps a lot to learn what the plans are. Let me try to summarize and tell you how I understand it. Please let me know if my interpretation is right or wrong. <![if !supportLists]>1. <![endif]>A movement ‘Action for a Possible Other World’ is created, called APW Members are individuals who can, nationally or regionally, create ‘GRAPS’ (grupos de apoyo) which can also create support offices, in fact national or regional ‘secretariats’ These ‘GRAPS’ can also create ‘denser cores’ of movements (this point is not yet very clear to me – what these denser cores are for, what they can/should do- or is it just that they can work together?) The APW can also create working parties, e.g. on expansion or on strategy. <![if !supportLists]>2. <![endif]>I understand this as a de facto ‘decentralization’ of the WSF process with the main decision-making power lying with the GRAPS. Participants from countries or regions with less organizational capacity, funds or with less ‘advocates’ of the WSF process – take Belgium – may get marginalized. Participants without GRAP may have difficulty making their voice heard, or not? <![if !supportLists]>3. <![endif]>Can there not be a problem with ‘individual’ membership? We all know the old tricks of the left: have all members of one single organization register, and they automatically have a majority … I very much like your comparison of the IC with an ‘affinity group’, I think you are right for a small core of people. But I would not be so optimistic as to ignore all ‘power’ struggles, however relative that may be. <![if !supportLists]>4. <![endif]>My impression is you are still very afraid of any ‘decision-making’, of positions that might be taken by the APW. Will it ever be possible to arrive at real consensus? I am not promoting this decision-making, but I do not want to exclude it a priori. <![if !supportLists]>5. <![endif]>Will the APW only convene when there is a World Social Forum or also at thematic or regional forums? Who will still be able in the future to organize WSF? GRAPS can go their own way … <![if !supportLists]>6. <![endif]>Are there any thoughts on financial contributions to APW or GRAP? <![if !supportLists]>7. <![endif]>It seems to me the ‘power’ is shifted from IC to GRAPs, with less possibilities for global action, and more focus on regional issues. <![if !supportLists]>8. <![endif]>I also wonder, yes there may still be WSFs, but is the dissolution of the IC not the beginning of the end? I have no answer. These are my first thoughts. Let us hope we can discuss it all. I wish you all, and especially you Chico, a very happy and healthy 2013. Francine Van: Chico - UOL [mailto:chicowf@...] Verzonden: 06 January 2013 19:58Aan: wg-about-future@...: [WG about future] Chico Whitaker texts in doc It seems rtf does not open. L'archive en rtf ne semble pas ouvrir.O arquivo em rtf parece que não está abrindo.Thanks, Chico Whitaker --Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1357498850972To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to wg-about-future@.... Please contact wg-about-future-manager@... for questions. --Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1357592978161To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to wg-about-future@.... Please contact wg-about-future-manager@... for questions.
-
2013/1/7 chicowf <chicowf@...> > Thank you very much, Francine. > > Give me two or three days to answer to you. In the next days I must > absolutely finish what I am now doing. It will be easier for me now to > answer, as there are not so many questions and they are very direct... > > Fraternally, Chico Whitaker > > ------------------------------ > Em 07/01/2013 19:06, *Francine Mestrum < mestrum@... >* escreveu: > > Dear Chico, > > > > Many thanks for your new text. It is very clear and helps a lot to learn > what the plans are. > > Let me try to summarize and tell you how I understand it. Please let me > know if my interpretation is right or wrong. > > > > <![if !supportLists]>1. <![endif]>A movement ‘Action for a Possible > Other World’ is created, called APW > > Members are individuals who can, nationally or regionally, create ‘GRAPS’ > (grupos de apoyo) which can also create support offices, in fact national > or regional ‘secretariats’ > > These ‘GRAPS’ can also create ‘denser cores’ of movements (*this point is > not yet very clear to me – what these denser cores are for, what they > can/should do- or is it just that they can work together?)* > > The APW can also create working parties, e.g. on expansion or on strategy. > > > > <![if !supportLists]>2. <![endif]>*I understand this as a de facto > ‘decentralization’ of the WSF process* with the main decision-making > power lying with the GRAPS. Participants from countries or regions with > less organizational capacity, funds or with less ‘advocates’ of the WSF > process – take Belgium – may get marginalized. Participants without GRAP > may have difficulty making their voice heard, or not? > > > > <![if !supportLists]>3. <![endif]>Can there not be a problem with > ‘individual’ membership? We all know the old tricks of the left: have all > members of one single organization register, and they automatically have a > majority … I very much like your comparison of the IC with an ‘affinity > group’, I think you are right for a small core of people. But I would not > be so optimistic as to ignore all ‘power’ struggles, however relative that > may be. > > > > <![if !supportLists]>4. <![endif]>My impression is you are still > very afraid of any ‘decision-making’, of positions that might be taken by > the APW. Will it ever be possible to arrive at real consensus? I am not > promoting this decision-making, but I do not want to exclude it a priori. > > > > <![if !supportLists]>5. <![endif]>Will the APW only convene when > there is a World Social Forum or also at thematic or regional forums? Who > will still be able in the future to organize WSF? GRAPS can go their own > way … > > > > <![if !supportLists]>6. <![endif]>Are there any thoughts on > financial contributions to APW or GRAP? > > > > <![if !supportLists]>7. <![endif]>It seems to me the ‘power’ is > shifted from IC to GRAPs, with less possibilities for global action, and > more focus on regional issues. > > > > <![if !supportLists]>8. <![endif]>I also wonder, yes there may still > be WSFs, but is the dissolution of the IC not the beginning of the end? I > have no answer. > > > > These are my first thoughts. > > Let us hope we can discuss it all. > > > > I wish you all, and especially you Chico, a very happy and healthy 2013. > > > > Francine > > > > > > *Van:* Chico - UOL [mailto:chicowf@...] > *Verzonden:* 06 January 2013 19:58 > *Aan:* wg-about-future@... > *Onderwerp:* [WG about future] Chico Whitaker texts in doc > > > > It seems rtf does not open. > > L'archive en rtf ne semble pas ouvrir. > > O arquivo em rtf parece que não está abrindo. > > > Thanks, Chico Whitaker > > > > -- > Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1357498850972<http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1357498850972> > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > wg-about-future@...<http://../../../undefined/compose?to=wg-about-future@...>. > Please contact wg-about-future-manager@...<http://../../../undefined/compose?to=wg-about-future-manager@...>for questions. > > > -- > Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1357592978161<http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1357592978161> > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > wg-about-future@.... Please contact > wg-about-future-manager@... for questions. > > > > -- > Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1357596120709<http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1357596120709> > > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > wg-about-future@.... Please contact > wg-about-future-manager@... for questions. >
-
Thanks Chico for your positive vision of future global mobilisation & coordination mechanisms for our unforgettable WSF. We in the Southern Africa Social Forum Regional Organising Committee (SASFROC) more or less operate on similar principles that you've outlined in your text. Happy New Year to us all and hopefully meet again in Tunis! Sara On 8 January 2013 18:08, gina vargas <ginvargas@...> wrote: > > > 2013/1/7 chicowf <chicowf@...> > >> Thank you very much, Francine. >> >> Give me two or three days to answer to you. In the next days I must >> absolutely finish what I am now doing. It will be easier for me now to >> answer, as there are not so many questions and they are very direct... >> >> Fraternally, Chico Whitaker >> >> ------------------------------ >> Em 07/01/2013 19:06, *Francine Mestrum < mestrum@... >* escreveu: >> >> Dear Chico, >> >> >> >> Many thanks for your new text. It is very clear and helps a lot to learn >> what the plans are. >> >> Let me try to summarize and tell you how I understand it. Please let me >> know if my interpretation is right or wrong. >> >> >> >> <![if !supportLists]>1. <![endif]>A movement ‘Action for a Possible >> Other World’ is created, called APW >> >> Members are individuals who can, nationally or regionally, create ‘GRAPS’ >> (grupos de apoyo) which can also create support offices, in fact national >> or regional ‘secretariats’ >> >> These ‘GRAPS’ can also create ‘denser cores’ of movements (*this point >> is not yet very clear to me – what these denser cores are for, what they >> can/should do- or is it just that they can work together?)* >> >> The APW can also create working parties, e.g. on expansion or on strategy. >> >> >> >> <![if !supportLists]>2. <![endif]>*I understand this as a de facto >> ‘decentralization’ of the WSF process* with the main decision-making >> power lying with the GRAPS. Participants from countries or regions with >> less organizational capacity, funds or with less ‘advocates’ of the WSF >> process – take Belgium – may get marginalized. Participants without GRAP >> may have difficulty making their voice heard, or not? >> >> >> >> <![if !supportLists]>3. <![endif]>Can there not be a problem with >> ‘individual’ membership? We all know the old tricks of the left: have all >> members of one single organization register, and they automatically have a >> majority … I very much like your comparison of the IC with an ‘affinity >> group’, I think you are right for a small core of people. But I would not >> be so optimistic as to ignore all ‘power’ struggles, however relative that >> may be. >> >> >> >> <![if !supportLists]>4. <![endif]>My impression is you are still >> very afraid of any ‘decision-making’, of positions that might be taken by >> the APW. Will it ever be possible to arrive at real consensus? I am not >> promoting this decision-making, but I do not want to exclude it a priori. >> >> >> >> <![if !supportLists]>5. <![endif]>Will the APW only convene when >> there is a World Social Forum or also at thematic or regional forums? Who >> will still be able in the future to organize WSF? GRAPS can go their own >> way … >> >> >> >> <![if !supportLists]>6. <![endif]>Are there any thoughts on >> financial contributions to APW or GRAP? >> >> >> >> <![if !supportLists]>7. <![endif]>It seems to me the ‘power’ is >> shifted from IC to GRAPs, with less possibilities for global action, and >> more focus on regional issues. >> >> >> >> <![if !supportLists]>8. <![endif]>I also wonder, yes there may >> still be WSFs, but is the dissolution of the IC not the beginning of the >> end? I have no answer. >> >> >> >> These are my first thoughts. >> >> Let us hope we can discuss it all. >> >> >> >> I wish you all, and especially you Chico, a very happy and healthy 2013. >> >> >> >> Francine >> >> >> >> >> >> *Van:* Chico - UOL [mailto:chicowf@...] >> *Verzonden:* 06 January 2013 19:58 >> *Aan:* wg-about-future@... >> *Onderwerp:* [WG about future] Chico Whitaker texts in doc >> >> >> >> It seems rtf does not open. >> >> L'archive en rtf ne semble pas ouvrir. >> >> O arquivo em rtf parece que não está abrindo. >> >> >> Thanks, Chico Whitaker >> >> >> >> -- >> Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1357498850972<http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1357498850972> >> To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to >> wg-about-future@...<http://../../../undefined/compose?to=wg-about-future@...>. >> Please contact wg-about-future-manager@...<http://../../../undefined/compose?to=wg-about-future-manager@...>for questions. >> >> >> -- >> Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1357592978161<http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1357592978161> >> To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to >> wg-about-future@.... Please contact >> wg-about-future-manager@... for questions. >> >> >> >> -- >> Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1357596120709<http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1357596120709> >> >> To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to >> wg-about-future@.... Please contact >> wg-about-future-manager@... for questions. >> > > > > -- > Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1357661492364<http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1357661492364> > > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > wg-about-future@.... Please contact > wg-about-future-manager@... for questions. > -- Longwe Clarke & Associates Development Consultants 36 Villa Wanga, Chelston. P.O. 37090, Lusaka, Zambia Tel: +260-1-283484/283646; Fax: 260-1-283646; Cell: +260 97 786915 E-mail: longwe5000@...
-
-
-
Dear Francine and Gina, My two or three days to answer to you became one or two weeks... Not only other engagements took my time but specially the notes I decided to wrote demanded much time for reflection... In fact, trying to make more clear my proposal, in particular in what concerns the GRAPs, I discovered more aspects I had not seen, and I understood better my own proposal... I have to thank you for giving me this opportunity... So, you will see annexed the notes I wrote. I will put below your questions and answer more rapidly(in red) what was not considered in the notes. I wrote the notes directly in my bad English. So... It seems I will have not time to translate them to French and Spanish. I will ask for Babels people but it will be not so easy. If you can help me it would be great. Let us continue, Chico Whitaker Le 07/01/2013 19:06, Francine Mestrum a écrit : > > Dear Chico, > > Many thanks for your new text. It is very clear and helps a lot to > learn what the plans are. > > Let me try to summarize and tell you how I understand it. Please let > me know if my interpretation is right or wrong. > > 1.A movement 'Action for a Possible Other World' is created, called APW.OK > > Members are individuals who can, nationally or regionally, create > 'GRAPS' (grupos de apoyo) which can also create support offices, in > fact national or regional 'secretariats'. OK, but I would prefer to > say support offices. > > These 'GRAPS' can also create 'denser cores' of movements (/this point > is not yet very clear to me -- what these denser cores are for, what > they can/should do- or is it just that they can work together?) /See > my notes, specially point 7.// > > The APW can also create working parties, e.g. on expansion or on > strategy. OK, but the APW would create only special "parties" (the > working groups are "parties"?): those taking on the IC funcions, > formed by its partcipants deciding freely to be part of them, as we do > always in the IC. Other Groups inside the network would be created > freely by its paritcipants, autonomusly.(see points 5 and 13 of the > notes) > > 2.*I understand this as a de facto 'decentralization' of the WSF > process* with the main decision-making power lying with the GRAPS. NO, > see notes. Participants from countries or regions with less > organizational capacity, funds or with less 'advocates' of the WSF > process -- take Belgium -- may get marginalized. Participants without > GRAP may have difficulty making their voice heard, or not? See notes, > specially 18. > > 3.Can there not be a problem with 'individual' membership? We all know > the old tricks of the left: have all members of one single > organization register, and they automatically have a majority ...(see > note 20) I very much like your comparison of the IC with an 'affinity > group', I think you are right for a small core of people (but all of > us greet warmly the others when arriving in the IC meetings. We are at > least good friends...). But I would not be so optimistic as to ignore > all 'power' struggles, however relative that may be. Yes, but we would > overcome it more easily without IC and its doubious non directing > functions... > > 4.My impression is you are still very afraid of any 'decision-making', > of positions that might be taken by the APW. Will it ever be possible > to arrive at real consensus? (see note 20) I am not promoting this > decision-making, but I do not want to exclude it a priori. See notes. > We could discuss it better. Which decisions the IC takes now in fact? > Next WSF and creation of Working Groups (about the decisions to be > taken...). > > 5.Will the APW only convene when there is a World Social Forum or also > at thematic or regional forums? For regional or thematic questions the > APW participants of these forums could naturally take decisions, but > not on behalf of all the APW. And at the world and general level, the > APW participants could also suggest world meetings in between the > World Foruns. Who will still be able in the future to organize WSF? > GRAPS can go their own way ... Not the GRAPs but local organisations > and movements when decided where the World Foums would take place, as > it happens now. > > 6.Are there any thoughts on financial contributions to APW or GRAP? > Not so much, but see notes point 18 and my other previous texts. > > 7.It seems to me the 'power' is shifted from IC to GRAPs, with less > possibilities for global action, and more focus on regional > issues.Absolutely No. See notes > > 8.I also wonder, yes there may still be WSFs, but is the dissolution > of the IC not the beginning of the end? Also absolutely no. It would > be a new and different stage of the WSF process. I have no answer. > different > > These are my first thoughts. > > Let us hope we can discuss it all. > > I wish you all, and especially you Chico, a very happy and healthy 2013. > > Francine > TAKING NOW GINA QUESTIONS Dear Chico, thanks for all these elements to reflect and to begin to have a clearer picture of possible changes in the dynamics leading to another possible world. Thank you... The proposal for a "new movement" with a new charter of principles, assumed by individuals / people, not institutions, along with the principles of horizontality, decentralization seems very suggestive. I am worry, as Francine, about several things, of which only dwell on some particular points that are tricky for me: -In relation to the possible Charter of Principles of the new movement: ... to create a new political culture as a necessary tool for the advancement of the struggle to overcome neoliberalism is not enough. Atthis stage of the process, is absolutely indispensable to explicit guidance from the broad field which we work, as for example to overcome capitalism(and not only neoliberalism), patriarchy, racism, homophobia, making in this way explicit some of the most pressing dimensions for which bet on the exchange. We would no have to "repeat" in the APW Charter of Principles the WSF one. We could complete and even ameliorate many things, maintaining the spirit of the WSF process. - -I don t have clarity yet about the relationship with the FSM I. If it is almost reduce to the choice of location, the risk is that this decision originated tensions and power plays, as has been the experience of several previous experiences. Remember how was taken the decision to organize the WSF in Belem 2009: the decision was made by consensus after almost being obliged to accept that the next one should be in Dakar, indicating that consensus can also be intransigent blackmail (see point 20 of my notes). The proposed sites for the headquarters of the Forums may have important reasons relating to movements, possible logistical facilities, etc. Or they can be extremely arbitrary, cares more for personal or small groups. Yes, but with all the new things introduced, I am expecting we would be more able to overcome these difficulties, coming always from the dubious IC function (directing or not the WSF) as well as from the old political culture we are exactly trying to overcome. -That also means rethinking the mechanisms to achieve consensus (see point 20). As Francine, I'm not necessarily against it; I think the reach of consensus can be a very democratic practice and articulation. At the same time, in instances, groups, or people with weak democratic political culture can be a double-edged sword. -The preparation of the Forums is blurred for me: as proposed, what were the functions of the committees would become features of this new movement? In the final convergence of the Forum, without statements, as has been claimed to do so far, would be the space of the new movement (O Graps articulated?) to decide where, how and when these forums were held?. How will be the relationship with-the organizers of these forums? How to maintain a global perspective of the board and not just national or, at best, regional, in the preparation of the Forums? Many questions. See my notes but let us continue to discuss. I THINK THAT IS ALL I AM ABLE TO SAY FOR THE MOMENT. Hoping to continue, fraternally, Chico Whitaker > *Van:*Chico - UOL [mailto:chicowf@...] > *Verzonden:* 06 January 2013 19:58 > *Aan:* wg-about-future@... > *Onderwerp:* [WG about future] Chico Whitaker texts in doc > > It seems rtf does not open. > > L'archive en rtf ne semble pas ouvrir. > > O arquivo em rtf parece que não está abrindo. > > > Thanks, Chico Whitaker > > > > -- > Archive: http://openfsm.net/[...]/1357498850972 > <http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1357498850972> > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > wg-about-future@... > <mailto:wg-about-future@...>. Please contact > wg-about-future-manager@... > <mailto:wg-about-future-manager@...> for questions. > > > > -- > Archive: http://openfsm.net/[...]/1357592978161 > <http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1357592978161> > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > wg-about-future@... > <mailto:wg-about-future@...>. Please contact > wg-about-future-manager@... > <mailto:wg-about-future-manager@...> for questions. > > Aucun virus trouvé dans ce message. > Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr <http://www.avg.fr> > Version: 2013.0.2805 / Base de données virale: 2637/6015 - Date: > 07/01/2013 >
-
Thanks a lot Chico! I will be travelling in the coming days, but will read the text next week. Francine Van: Chico - UOL [mailto:chicowf@...] Verzonden: 16 January 2013 16:25 Aan: wg-about-future@... CC: Francine Mestrum; ginavargas@...; Stella Whitaker; Celina Whitaker; 'Gustave Massiah'; Nathalie Péré Marzano; x.ricard@...; bernard pinaud Onderwerp: Re: [WG about future] Chico Whitaker texts in doc Dear Francine and Gina, My two or three days to answer to you became one or two weeks... Not only other engagements took my time but specially the notes I decided to wrote demanded much time for reflection... In fact, trying to make more clear my proposal, in particular in what concerns the GRAPs, I discovered more aspects I had not seen, and I understood better my own proposal... I have to thank you for giving me this opportunity... So, you will see annexed the notes I wrote. I will put below your questions and answer more rapidly (in red) what was not considered in the notes. I wrote the notes directly in my bad English. So... It seems I will have not time to translate them to French and Spanish. I will ask for Babels people but it will be not so easy. If you can help me it would be great. Let us continue, Chico Whitaker Le 07/01/2013 19:06, Francine Mestrum a écrit : Dear Chico, Many thanks for your new text. It is very clear and helps a lot to learn what the plans are. Let me try to summarize and tell you how I understand it. Please let me know if my interpretation is right or wrong. 1. A movement Action for a Possible Other World is created, called APW. OK Members are individuals who can, nationally or regionally, create GRAPS (grupos de apoyo) which can also create support offices, in fact national or regional secretariats. OK, but I would prefer to say support offices. These GRAPS can also create denser cores of movements (this point is not yet very clear to me what these denser cores are for, what they can/should do- or is it just that they can work together?) See my notes, specially point 7. The APW can also create working parties, e.g. on expansion or on strategy. OK, but the APW would create only special "parties" (the working groups are "parties"?): those taking on the IC funcions, formed by its partcipants deciding freely to be part of them, as we do always in the IC. Other Groups inside the network would be created freely by its paritcipants, autonomusly.(see points 5 and 13 of the notes) 2. I understand this as a de facto decentralization of the WSF process with the main decision-making power lying with the GRAPS. NO, see notes. Participants from countries or regions with less organizational capacity, funds or with less advocates of the WSF process take Belgium may get marginalized. Participants without GRAP may have difficulty making their voice heard, or not? See notes, specially 18. 3. Can there not be a problem with individual membership? We all know the old tricks of the left: have all members of one single organization register, and they automatically have a majority (see note 20) I very much like your comparison of the IC with an affinity group, I think you are right for a small core of people (but all of us greet warmly the others when arriving in the IC meetings. We are at least good friends...). But I would not be so optimistic as to ignore all power struggles, however relative that may be. Yes, but we would overcome it more easily without IC and its doubious non directing functions... 4. My impression is you are still very afraid of any decision-making, of positions that might be taken by the APW. Will it ever be possible to arrive at real consensus? (see note 20) I am not promoting this decision-making, but I do not want to exclude it a priori. See notes. We could discuss it better. Which decisions the IC takes now in fact? Next WSF and creation of Working Groups (about the decisions to be taken...). 5. Will the APW only convene when there is a World Social Forum or also at thematic or regional forums? For regional or thematic questions the APW participants of these forums could naturally take decisions, but not on behalf of all the APW. And at the world and general level, the APW participants could also suggest world meetings in between the World Foruns. Who will still be able in the future to organize WSF? GRAPS can go their own way Not the GRAPs but local organisations and movements when decided where the World Foums would take place, as it happens now. 6. Are there any thoughts on financial contributions to APW or GRAP? Not so much, but see notes point 18 and my other previous texts. 7. It seems to me the power is shifted from IC to GRAPs, with less possibilities for global action, and more focus on regional issues. Absolutely No. See notes 8. I also wonder, yes there may still be WSFs, but is the dissolution of the IC not the beginning of the end? Also absolutely no. It would be a new and different stage of the WSF process. I have no answer. different These are my first thoughts. Let us hope we can discuss it all. I wish you all, and especially you Chico, a very happy and healthy 2013. Francine TAKING NOW GINA QUESTIONS Dear Chico, thanks for all these elements to reflect and to begin to have a clearer picture of possible changes in the dynamics leading to another possible world. Thank you... The proposal for a "new movement" with a new charter of principles, assumed by individuals / people, not institutions, along with the principles of horizontality, decentralization seems very suggestive. I am worry, as Francine, about several things, of which only dwell on some particular points that are tricky for me: 9. In relation to the possible Charter of Principles of the new movement: ... to create a new political culture as a necessary tool for the advancement of the struggle to overcome neoliberalism is not enough. At this stage of the process, is absolutely indispensable to explicit guidance from the broad field which we work, as for example to overcome capitalism (and not only neoliberalism), patriarchy, racism, homophobia, making in this way explicit some of the most pressing dimensions for which bet on the exchange. We would no have to "repeat" in the APW Charter of Principles the WSF one. We could complete and even ameliorate many things, maintaining the spirit of the WSF process. 10. 11. I don t have clarity yet about the relationship with the FSM I. If it is almost reduce to the choice of location, the risk is that this decision originated tensions and power plays, as has been the experience of several previous experiences. Remember how was taken the decision to organize the WSF in Belem 2009: the decision was made by consensus after almost being obliged to accept that the next one should be in Dakar, indicating that consensus can also be intransigent blackmail (see point 20 of my notes). The proposed sites for the headquarters of the Forums may have important reasons relating to movements, possible logistical facilities, etc. Or they can be extremely arbitrary, cares more for personal or small groups. Yes, but with all the new things introduced, I am expecting we would be more able to overcome these difficulties, coming always from the dubious IC function (directing or not the WSF) as well as from the old political culture we are exactly trying to overcome. 12. That also means rethinking the mechanisms to achieve consensus (see point 20). As Francine, I'm not necessarily against it; I think the reach of consensus can be a very democratic practice and articulation. At the same time, in instances, groups, or people with weak democratic political culture can be a double-edged sword. 13. The preparation of the Forums is blurred for me: as proposed, what were the functions of the committees would become features of this new movement? In the final convergence of the Forum, without statements, as has been claimed to do so far, would be the space of the new movement (O Graps articulated?) to decide where, how and when these forums were held?. How will be the relationship with-the organizers of these forums? How to maintain a global perspective of the board and not just national or, at best, regional, in the preparation of the Forums? Many questions. See my notes but let us continue to discuss. 14. I THINK THAT IS ALL I AM ABLE TO SAY FOR THE MOMENT. 15. Hoping to continue, fraternally, Chico Whitaker Van: Chico - UOL [mailto:chicowf@...] Verzonden: 06 January 2013 19:58 Aan: wg-about-future@... Onderwerp: [WG about future] Chico Whitaker texts in doc It seems rtf does not open. L'archive en rtf ne semble pas ouvrir. O arquivo em rtf parece que não está abrindo. Thanks, Chico Whitaker -- Archive: http://openfsm.net/[ <http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/ 01/1357498850972> ]/1357498850972 To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to wg-about-future@.... Please contact wg-about-future-manager@... for questions. -- Archive: http://openfsm.net/[ <http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/ 01/1357592978161> ]/1357592978161 To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to wg-about-future@.... Please contact wg-about-future-manager@... for questions. Aucun virus trouvé dans ce message. Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr Version: 2013.0.2805 / Base de données virale: 2637/6015 - Date: 07/01/2013
-
Gracias Chico! yo tambien estoy viajando mañana, pero llevo tus reflexiones para verlas en el camino. Regreso el 20. besos gina 2013/1/16 Francine Mestrum <mestrum@...> > Thanks a lot Chico!**** > > I will be travelling in the coming days, but will read the text next week. > **** > > Francine**** > > ** ** > > *Van:* Chico - UOL [mailto:chicowf@...] > *Verzonden:* 16 January 2013 16:25 > *Aan:* wg-about-future@... > *CC:* Francine Mestrum; ginavargas@...; Stella Whitaker; Celina > Whitaker; 'Gustave Massiah'; Nathalie Péré Marzano; x.ricard@...; > bernard pinaud > *Onderwerp:* Re: [WG about future] Chico Whitaker texts in doc**** > > ** ** > > Dear Francine and Gina, > My two or three days to answer to you became one or two weeks... Not only > other engagements took my time but specially the notes I decided to wrote > demanded much time for reflection... In fact, trying to make more clear my > proposal, in particular in what concerns the GRAPs, I discovered more > aspects I had not seen, and I understood better my own proposal... I have > to thank you for giving me this opportunity... > So, you will see annexed the notes I wrote. I will put below your > questions and answer more rapidly (in red) what was not considered in the > notes. > I wrote the notes directly in my bad English. So... > It seems I will have not time to translate them to French and Spanish. I > will ask for Babels people but it will be not so easy. If you can help me > it would be great. > Let us continue, Chico Whitaker > > > Le 07/01/2013 19:06, Francine Mestrum a écrit :**** > > Dear Chico,**** > > **** > > Many thanks for your new text. It is very clear and helps a lot to learn > what the plans are.**** > > Let me try to summarize and tell you how I understand it. Please let me > know if my interpretation is right or wrong.**** > > **** > > **1. **A movement ‘Action for a Possible Other World’ is created, > called APW. OK**** > > Members are individuals who can, nationally or regionally, create ‘GRAPS’ > (grupos de apoyo) which can also create support offices, in fact national > or regional ‘secretariats’. OK, but I would prefer to say support offices. > **** > > These ‘GRAPS’ can also create ‘denser cores’ of movements (*this point is > not yet very clear to me – what these denser cores are for, what they > can/should do- or is it just that they can work together?) *See my > notes, specially point 7.**** > > The APW can also create working parties, e.g. on expansion or on strategy. OK, > but the APW would create only special "parties" (the working groups are > "parties"?): those taking on the IC funcions, formed by its partcipants > deciding freely to be part of them, as we do always in the IC. Other Groups > inside the network would be created freely by its paritcipants, > autonomusly.(see points 5 and 13 of the notes) **** > > **** > > **2. ***I understand this as a de facto ‘decentralization’ of the > WSF process* with the main decision-making power lying with the GRAPS. NO, > see notes. Participants from countries or regions with less > organizational capacity, funds or with less ‘advocates’ of the WSF process > – take Belgium – may get marginalized. Participants without GRAP may have > difficulty making their voice heard, or not? See notes, specially 18.**** > > **** > > **3. **Can there not be a problem with ‘individual’ membership? We > all know the old tricks of the left: have all members of one single > organization register, and they automatically have a majority … (see note > 20) I very much like your comparison of the IC with an ‘affinity group’, > I think you are right for a small core of people (but all of us greet > warmly the others when arriving in the IC meetings. We are at least good > friends...). But I would not be so optimistic as to ignore all ‘power’ > struggles, however relative that may be. Yes, but we would overcome it > more easily without IC and its doubious non directing functions...**** > > **** > > **4. **My impression is you are still very afraid of any > ‘decision-making’, of positions that might be taken by the APW. Will it > ever be possible to arrive at real consensus? (see note 20) I am not > promoting this decision-making, but I do not want to exclude it a priori. See > notes. We could discuss it better. Which decisions the IC takes now in > fact? Next WSF and creation of Working Groups (about the decisions to be > taken...).**** > > **** > > **5. **Will the APW only convene when there is a World Social Forum > or also at thematic or regional forums? For regional or thematic > questions the APW participants of these forums could naturally take > decisions, but not on behalf of all the APW. And at the world and general > level, the APW participants could also suggest world meetings in between > the World Foruns. Who will still be able in the future to organize WSF? > GRAPS can go their own way … Not the GRAPs but local organisations and > movements when decided where the World Foums would take place, as it > happens now.**** > > **** > > **6. **Are there any thoughts on financial contributions to APW or > GRAP? Not so much, but see notes point 18 and my other previous texts.**** > > **** > > **7. **It seems to me the ‘power’ is shifted from IC to GRAPs, with > less possibilities for global action, and more focus on regional issues.Absolutely No. See notes > **** > > **** > > **8. **I also wonder, yes there may still be WSFs, but is the > dissolution of the IC not the beginning of the end? Also absolutely no. > It would be a new and different stage of the WSF process. I have no > answer. different **** > > **** > > These are my first thoughts.**** > > Let us hope we can discuss it all.**** > > **** > > I wish you all, and especially you Chico, a very happy and healthy 2013.** > ** > > **** > > Francine**** > > TAKING NOW GINA QUESTIONS **** > > > Dear Chico, thanks for all these elements to reflect and to begin to have > a clearer picture of possible changes in the dynamics leading to another > possible world. Thank you...**** > > The proposal for a "new movement" with a new charter of principles, > assumed by individuals / people, not institutions, along with the > principles of horizontality, decentralization seems very suggestive.**** > > I am worry, as Francine, about several things, of which only dwell on > some particular points that are tricky for me:**** > > **** > > **9. ** In relation to the possible Charter of Principles of the new > movement: ... to create a new political culture as a necessary tool for the > advancement of the struggle to overcome neoliberalism is not enough. At > this stage of the process, is absolutely indispensable to explicit guidance > from the broad field which we work, as for example to overcome capitalism > (and not only neoliberalism), patriarchy, racism, homophobia, making in > this way explicit some of the most pressing dimensions for which bet on the > exchange. We would no have to "repeat" in the APW Charter of Principles > the WSF one. We could complete and even ameliorate many things, maintaining > the spirit of the WSF process.**** > > **10. ** **** > > **11. **I don t have clarity yet about the relationship with the FSM I. > If it is almost reduce to the choice of location, the risk is that this > decision originated tensions and power plays, as has been the experience of > several previous experiences. Remember how was taken the decision to > organize the WSF in Belem 2009: the decision was made by consensus after > almost being obliged to accept that the next one should be in Dakar, > indicating that consensus can also be intransigent blackmail (see point > 20 of my notes). The proposed sites for the headquarters of the Forums > may have important reasons relating to movements, possible logistical > facilities, etc. Or they can be extremely arbitrary, cares more for > personal or small groups. Yes, but with all the new things introduced, I > am expecting we would be more able to overcome these difficulties, coming > always from the dubious IC function (directing or not the WSF) as well as > from the old political culture we are exactly trying to overcome. **** > > **** > > **12. ** That also means rethinking the mechanisms to achieve consensus (see > point 20). As Francine, I'm not necessarily against it; I think the reach > of consensus can be a very democratic practice and articulation. At the > same time, in instances, groups, or people with weak democratic political > culture can be a double-edged sword. **** > > **** > > **13. **The preparation of the Forums is blurred for me: as proposed, > what were the functions of the committees would become features of this new > movement? In the final convergence of the Forum, without statements, as has > been claimed to do so far, would be the space of the new movement (O Graps > articulated?) to decide where, how and when these forums were held?. How > will be the relationship with-the organizers of these forums? How to > maintain a global perspective of the board and not just national or, at > best, regional, in the preparation of the Forums? Many questions. See my > notes but let us continue to discuss.**** > > **14. **I THINK THAT IS ALL I AM ABLE TO SAY FOR THE MOMENT. **** > > **15. **Hoping to continue, fraternally, Chico Whitaker > > **** > > > > **** > > **** > > *Van:* Chico - UOL [mailto:chicowf@... <chicowf@...>] > *Verzonden:* 06 January 2013 19:58 > *Aan:* wg-about-future@... > *Onderwerp:* [WG about future] Chico Whitaker texts in doc**** > > **** > > It seems rtf does not open. > > L'archive en rtf ne semble pas ouvrir. > > O arquivo em rtf parece que não está abrindo. > > > Thanks, Chico Whitaker **** > > > > -- > Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1357498850972<http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1357498850972> > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > wg-about-future@.... Please contact > wg-about-future-manager@... for questions.**** > > > > -- > Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1357592978161<http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1357592978161> > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > wg-about-future@.... Please contact > wg-about-future-manager@... for questions.**** > > Aucun virus trouvé dans ce message. > Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr > Version: 2013.0.2805 / Base de données virale: 2637/6015 - Date: 07/01/2013 > **** > > ** ** > > > -- > Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1358372014672<http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/lists/wg-about-future/archive/2013/01/1358372014672> > > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > wg-about-future@.... Please contact > wg-about-future-manager@... for questions. >
-
-
-
-
WG about future
-
Attachments
-
-
text.html (text/html) 1 kB
Sobre (application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document) 28.7 kB
text.html (text/html) 11.0 kB
Dear (application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document) 13.1 kB
More (application/msword) 114.9 kB