• poa20 input4.65

last modified May 8 by facilitfsm


5 may

Espanol – Anglais - Français

 

 

Estimad@as amig@s del Consejo Internacional,

Habrán recibido tod@s los documentos del Colectivo Facilitador del FSM México con una pre-convocatoria.

Quisiera muy brevemente explicar proque voté ‘no’ a la pregunta propuesta, porque pienso que, en este momento, este colectivo facilitador no puede organizar un Foro Social.

1)     El colectivo es sumamento frágil y todo salvo democrático. Comentos y preguntas de miembros que no están totalmente de acuerdo con lo propuesto son sencillamente ignorados. Es una interpretación muy peculiar del principio de ‘consenso’. Por ejemplo, como los ejes temáticos tienen que ser el resultado de las iniciativas de los movimientos, he propuesto un marco dentro del cual las propuestas pueden ser acogidas. Sin embargo, el grupo continua de trabajar con una lista predeterminada totalmente caótica donde falta, por ejemplo, la lucha contra el autoritarismo y el fascismo ! Es lógico puès que varias organizaciones ya han dejado este colectivo.

 

2)     En 2021 el FSM va a celebrar su 20 aniversario ! Sería una buena oportunidad para convocar a movimientos y organizaciones que todavía no participaron en el Foro, o sea para ampliarlo. Pero también para reflexionar sobre las reglas y principios del FSM. Es lo que propone un pequeno grupo de miembros del CI, que quisieran, dentro del Foro, organizar un debate sobre la relevancia de la carta de principios despuès de 20 anos. Son dos razones porque pedimos de pedir a todos los facilitadores y participantes en el foro, no de ‘estar de acuerdo con la carta de principios’ sino de ‘respetar la carta de principios’. Eso también es totalmente rechazado y es propuesta una ‘carta de compromiso’ de dos páginas a firmar por cada uno !

 

O sea, el proceso actual es excluyente y burocrático y le hace falta la más mínima democracia. Podría darles muchos otros ejemplos. Sin cambios fundamentales, no puedo adherir a este proceso. Despuès de casi veinte anos de trabajo para y dentro del foro, eso duele mucho. Me parece que cada uno y cada opinión merece el respeto.

 

Dear friends of the International Council,

You will have received the documents of the Facilitating Committee of the WSF Mexico with a pre-invitation.

I would like to explain very briefly why I voted ‘no’ to this proposal. I think that, at this moment, the Committee is not able to organize a Social Forum.

1)     The Committee is extremely weak and all but democratic. Comments and questions of those who do not totally agree with the proposals are simply ignored. It is a very weird interpretation of what they see as ‘consensus’. For instance, as the thematic axes necessarily have to be the result of the proposals of participating movements, I proposed a simple framework within which these proposals can be integrated. Nevertheless, the group continues to work with a predetermined list of axes in which even the struggles against authoritarianism and fascism are failing! You will understand that various organisations already have left this facilitating committee.

 

2)     In 2021 the WSF will celebrate its 20th anniversary! This is an excellent opportunity to invite movements and organisations that till now did not take part in the Forum so that the process can be enlarged. It is also an opportunity to reflect and discuss the rules and principles of the WSF. This is what a small group of members of the IC has proposed. They want to organize, inside the Forum, a debate on the relevance of the Charter of Principles after 20 years. For these two reasons, they propose to ask all facilitators and participants in the Forum not to ‘agree with the Charter of Principles’ but to ‘respect the Charter of Principles’. This simple change is also totally rejected and people are asked to sign a ‘letter of commitment’ of two full pages!

In other words, the current process is excluding and bureaucratic and it lacks the most minimal sense of democracy. I could give you many other examples. Without fundamental changes, I cannot participate in such a process. After almost twenty years of work for and in the WSF, this really hurts. But I think that all persons and all opinions deserve some respect.

 

Cher(e)s ami(e)s du Conseil International,

Vous aurez reçu les documents du collectif facilitateur du FSM Mexique avec une pré-invitation.

J’aimerais vous expliquer très brièvement pourquoi j’ai voté par la negative à la question proposée, pourquoi donc je ne pense pas que, en ce moment, le collectif facilitateur puisse organiser un FSM.

1)     Le collectif est très fragile et tout sauf démocratique. Les commentaires et les questions de ceux et celles qui ne sont pas totalement d’accord avec ce qui est proposé, sont tout simplement ignorés. C’est une interprétation très bizarre du principe de ‘consensus’. Par exemple, comme les axes thématiques doivent nécessairement être le résultat des propositions des mouvements sociaux, j’ai proposé un cadre dans lequel ces propositions peuvent être intégrées. Néanmoins, le collectif continue de travailler avec une liste prédéterminée totalement chaotique où manque même la lutte contre l’autoritarisme et le fascisme. Vous comprendrez dès lors que plusieurs organisations ont déjà quitté le collectif.

 

2)     En 2021 le FSM fêtera son 20ème anniversaire. Ce sera une excellente opportunité pour inviter des mouvements et des organisations qui, jusqu’à présent, n’ont pas participé au FSM, et donc d’élargir le processus. Ce sera aussi une occasion pour réfléchir et discuter de la pertinence des règles et des principes qui régissent le FSM. C’est ce que propose un petit groupe de membres du FSM qui aimerait organiser, au sein du Forum, un débat sur la Charte de Principes après 20 ans. Voilà deux raisons pour demander que les facilitateurs et participants au Forum signent un document, non pas pour confirmer leur ‘accord avec la Charte de Principes’ mais bien de ‘respecter la ‘Charte des Principes’. Une fois de plus, rejet total de la proposition. On va demander aux participants de signer une ‘lettre d’engagement’ de deux pages !

En d’autres mots, le processus bureaucratique du Mexique exclut ses ‘dissidents’. Je pourrais vous donner un grand nombre d’autres exemples. Sans changement fondamental, je ne peux participer à ce processus. Après près de 20 ans de travail pour et dans le FSM, cela fait très mal. Mais je pense que chacun/chacune et chaque opinion mérite un minimum de respect.

 

 

5 may

Dear Francine

Grateful for the frankness that is characteristic of you, I would like to add some aspects that we should consider.

The consultation on whether or not there is an WSF 2021 in Mexico was made by deliberation of the International Council itself alongside other decisions taken at the January meeting in Porto Alegre, and not by any Mexican committee, and so I stick to its effects.

The January decisions were

1) Do not call WSF 2021 until after a dialogue with organizations inside and outside the process.
2) Prepare a pre-call as the base text for this dialogue
3) Maintain the WSF 2021 proposal in Mexico as "indicative", awaiting acceptance and commitment from the organizations consulted within and outside the International Council.

Post meeting in Porto Alegre

1) The coronavirus crisis has made dialogue the more urgent step to determine how the WSF process can contribute so that civil society can influence the situation
2) As a face-to-face debate is not possible, this dialogue must take place over the internet and is being proposed for June.
3) Consultations on movements, next to the pre-call, are just beginning.

In Mexico

I agree with Francine that the Mexican process is going through turbulence in some aspects. However, it is natural for this to happen, since
 this is not yet clearly guided by an official decision of the International Council, even if there is the collaboration of some organizations more attentive to the process.

Our contributions do not always lead to what we seek. Francine even took part in a debate with Mexican organizations to which was posed, especially by Boaventura, the possibility that the Mexicans would refound the WSF, changing the charter of principles. This also created natural confusion, as the WSF in México was just an initial proposal.

As some participants are still arriving at the process, without really understanding it, they interpreted the criticism in their own way. They want to be admitted to facilitate the process, despite disagreeing with the existence of neoliberalism in the world and advocated for the services of corporations such as google. This has led facilitating organizations to invoke the Charter of Principles as a condition for joining a facilitating group. This attitude, although aimed at protecting organizational instances, contradicted those who criticize aspects of the letter, even for more noble reasons.

None of this turbulence seems to me a reason to decide the future of the WSF or if we should have a 2021 edition in Mexico. Mexican construction will find its way at the moment when international organizations and movements take over the process together with local organizations.

What is on the table is the need for dialogue between organizations on the next steps of the WSF at this time. Making this dialogue was the decision of Porto Alegre, with openness to proposals for changes in direction. This call is still the last major event in the process. The consultation that begins is the present fact. The next one will be the success or not of the June meeting.

Hope to see you there.

 

_____ 6 may

Dear Rita,

Thank you very much for your feedback which is always very important.

As I explained, I just wanted to give the reasons why I think that, at this moment, the facilitating committee is not able to organize a WSF; That is all. I fully agree with all your first points.

But: the famous round table we organised in Mexico City was after the IC meeting in Porto Alegre, so the WSF was a bit more than 'just an initial proposal', it was a provisional decision. And please tell me what is wrong with Boa's proposal? Several members of the IC think that after twenty years we should be able to re-think the WSF formula and its charter of principles. We propose to do that in the WSF, respecting its Charter of principles. Why should this not be possible? What are people afraid of? You know very well that such a group would only be able to make a proposal. I really do not understand what the panic is about.

Secondly, yes, there are people within the facilitating committee that do not know what is neoliberalism, there are also people who work with ecofascists, there are people who do not know the difference between organising and content, there are people who think you can cure COVID with aromatea... and so much more. Just take a look at the chat at 'rumbo al FSM', you will find amazing messages ...  It is one of the reasons I think the facilitating committee is rather weak. But the 'letter of commitment' was 'adopted' before summer 2019! So it has nothing to do with all that. And please tell me why 'respecting the Charter of principles' is not enough? Do you think it will be possible to attract new movements and organisations when you demand full agreement and a two-page letter?

When above all that some people suggest that our meeting for the round table in Mexico City was not a coincidence but part of some secret plot, and when you see then Chico defending these crazy people, well, I can tell you this hurts.

During the past three months, after the 'assembly' of 14 March, we have tried again and again to dialogue with the organizers, without any result. We can talk but doors are closed. That is why I conclude it is an excluding process.

My voice is only one voice within the IC, as Boa's voice is only one voice and Pierre's voice is only one voice. But I have always believed we were in favour of diversity. If 'consensus' can only be reached by excluding others, there is a problem.

Big hug Rita, difference of opinion should not hurt personal feelings and love.

Francine