Will capitalism absorb the World Social Forum?

[1]

From Jan. 21 to Feb . 2, 2010, Eric Toussaint and Olivier Bonfond -- both involved in alterglobalization activism, members of the International Council of the WSF, of the world co-ordination of social movements, and of the international network CADTM (Committee for the Abolition of the Third World Debt) -- participated in various international events and meetings in Brazil.

They included: the international seminar of social movements (Sao Paulo, Jan. 21 to 23), an international youth camp at Novo Hamburgo, an international seminar entitled ‘10 years later: challenges and proposals for another possible world' organised by the Group of Reflection and Support for the WSF Process, that consists of several Brazilian organizations (including IBASE, Ethos and Instituto Paulo Freire -- Porto Alegre, Jan. 25 to 29, 2010, the assembly of social movements -- Porto Alegre, Jan. 29).

Toussaint and Bonfond believe the World Social Forum can still act as a positive stimulant, but only in specific conditions.

Marga Tojo Gonzales: Ten years after the first use of the catchphrase "another world is possible, " a majority of humankind still live in subhuman conditions, and with the international financial crisis the situation has become even worse. Does this mean that the alterglobalist movement has failed?

Olivier Bonfond: When the question is asked in these terms, we have to acknowledge that the WSF and the alterglobalist movement in general have failed to genuinely change the course of the world. At the origin of these World Forums, we find the objective of changing society into something better, with more social justice, less inequalities, where the fundamental human needs of all citizens are met.

But, in fact, the question should be asked differently. We have to establish whether the WSF and the alterglobalist movement played a positive part in the construction of a power relationship more favourable to the exploited and oppressed. The answer is then rather positive. But there is nothing miraculous about the WSF, it is still a dynamic process, with its weaknesses and contradictions. It is also quite "young": the WSF is only 10 and the alterglobalist movement hardly older, which is very short [term] compared to the forces they fight against, namely those of an international capitalist oligarchy and trans-national companies served by such powerful instruments as the World Bank, the IMF, the WTO, NATO...

MTG: After 10 years what do you see as the main asset of the movement?

Eric Toussaint: The WSF has played a major part at two levels. First in delegitimizing neo-liberalism as the one and only possible model for humankind. Obviously, the battle of ideas is not over and the logic of fatality is still at work in many minds, but the alterglobalist movement has been able to show and demonstrate the necessity and possibility of a global alternative. It has exposed the vanity of fashionable claims such as the "end of history" (Fukoyama) or Margaret Thatcher's famous TINA (There Is No Alternative).

The WSF's other important asset is that it has allowed, on the one hand, the construction and strengthening of international networks, and on the other hand the interconnection between these various networks. In the context of our struggle against global capitalism, this is essential. Indeed, faced with strategies and power relations that lead to isolation and/or competition among countries and peoples, it is essential to go beyond the national context and propose global alternatives that weave threads of solidarity, but also and perhaps more importantly still, that co-ordinate international mobilization and strategies for action.

In the first years of the Forum, there was obviously an interesting dynamic at work among the various forums, between them and the social movements, as well as ongoing international campaigns on issues such as the debt, the WTO, militarism, the environment, women's rights, etc., and the organization of large-scale mobilizations on the occasion of WB, IMF, WTO, G8 and NATO meetings, or the overwhelming global mobilization against the planned invasion of Iraq in February 2003.

MTG: Is it no longer quite the case today? Are you among those who consider that the World Social Forum is running out of steam?

OB: The Forum has clearly lost some of its vitality and usefulness, and part of its legitimacy (especially with the WSF in Nairobi [2] in January 2007). There are various reasons for this: the WSF's institutionalization, the stronger influence of some large NGOs with significant financial resources, the propensity of some delegates for four- or five-star hotels, the inability to really merge events (over 1,500 events within five days at the latest WSF in Belém), the collection of funds from mixed or private companies (Petrobras, the large Brazilian oil company with 61 per cent private capital, the Ford Foundation, the CELTEL trans-national company in Africa...).

Political developments over these last years have also had a deep influence. We have to remember that since 2003 the two countries where the Forum was most deeply rooted at the beginning, namely Brazil and Italy, have each been subjected to a government experience that has had a deep influence on the WSF: Lula's presidency in Brazil and the Prodi government in Italy. Significant forces that had initiated the WSF supported and in some cases still support those governments that have implemented social-liberal or downright neo-liberal policies.

We also have to recognize that the WSF and the alterglobalist movement have failed to achieve global "victories." Fortunately, on the Latin American continent, the struggle against the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA, directed from Washington D.C.), which triumphed in 2005, is partly to its credit. But on the global stage, while capitalism is facing a major crisis, we can even get a tax on financial transactions adopted to curb speculation. Imperialist war adventures are more spunky than ever. Putschists are still in power in Honduras. Copenhagen was a patent failure for the superpowers. The very fact that on an international level the movement has been unable to achieve any victory has resulted in many who were expecting prompt tangible results feeling discouraged. In this respect we can thus say that the WSF is running out of steam, in the sense that it needs air or fuel to get into higher gear.

ET: It has to be added that a majority of the WSF leadership refused to move towards a movement determined to call for mobilization on a common platform. And without the concerted determination to mobilize on an international level, without the determination to establish common goals, it is difficult to move on. Inevitably the WSF looks more and more like some huge market for ideas (and proposals) that has not resulted in a convergence of objectives to struggle for.

We do need an international instrument to set up priorities in terms of demands and objectives, a common schedule of actions, a common strategy. If the Forum cannot fulfill this function, we will have to build another instrument, without turning away from the Forum. I think it serves a purpose. But since part of the WSF does not want it turned into an instrument of mobilization, we had better build another instrument with the individuals and organizations that are convinced that this is what we need. This will not prevent us from still being active in the Forum. I am saying this to avoid a scission and endless debate that would lead to a sterile standstill.

MTG: What new instrument are you referring to?

ET: A proposal was made which, in point of fact, has had relatively little repercussion. I'm talking about Hugo Chávez's call at the end of Nov. 2009 for the creation of a Fifth International [3] composed of social movements and left-wing parties. I think it's very interesting in principle. There could be a new perspective if there were reflection and dialogue between parties and social movements: a Fifth International as an instrument of convergence for action and for the creation of an alternative model [4]. 

But in my opinion it would not be an organization like the previous Internationals were -- or still are, since the Fourth International still exists -- that is to say, party organizations with a fairly high level of centralization. In my view the Fifth International should not be highly centralized and it should not require the self-dissolution of international networks or of an organization like the Fourth International. They could join the Fifth International and still keep their own specifics, but their membership would demonstrate that all the networks or major movements are determined to go further than the present ad hoc coalitions on climate or social justice, food sovereignty, the debt, etc. We have common causes among many networks and that's a positive thing.  

MTG: The WSF is financed by transnational corporations who want to be seen as "greener" or more humane and is courted by political groups who want to use it as a campaign tool -- some think it has been completely co-opted by the system and is therefore unlikely to do much good now. How do you feel about that? 

OB: It is perfectly possible that the WSF could be gradually "absorbed" by the capitalist system. That would hardly be surprising. The capitalist system has long since proved capable of adapting and appropriating the ideas behind attempts to resist it. Like the NGOs, social movements and individuals that make it up, the WSF is constantly under threat of being co-opted. However, as a radical network, we at the CADTM believe that the WSF still has a role to play as a place for discussing alternative ways of ensuring authentic human development, based on social justice and respect for nature. The WSF must also strengthen convergence between all the movements that want to join in collective action. The movements will find their common ground during the Forum's activities. Indeed the CADTM will continue to take an active part in the worldwide Assembly of Social Movements that emerged from Porto Alegre in Jan. 2001, at the first WSF.

MTG: Could you remind us in a few words what exactly the Assembly of Social Movements is? In fact just before the Forum in Porto Alegre, you took part in an international seminar in Sao Paulo on the social movements. What was the outcome?

OB: The Assembly of Social Movements (ASM) developed within the framework of the World Social Forum. Its main interest was as an open space for working out a common agenda of mobilizations. It is composed of miscellaneous social movements and networks such as Via Campesina, the World Women's March, the CADTM, Jubilee South, No Vox, trade union organisations, the Social Continental Alliance of the Americas, COMPA, ATTAC, etc., which all have specific regional or national objectives but want to get together to fight capitalism in its neo-liberal, imperialist and military phase, against racism and patriarchy.

From Jan. 21 to 23, 2010 in Sao Paulo, different social movements that have been participating in the ASM, some for a long time, some for less, held a seminar to examine the new international conjuncture, and also, more importantly, to see how the various forces present could be organized and better co-ordinated so as to strengthen struggles round the world. Debates about the conjuncture emphasized the gravity and the multidimensional nature of the systemic crisis we are faced with at the moment mainly because of the militarization and the criminalisation of social movements.

When it comes to a strategy for action, the most important decision was undoubtedly to work towards organizing the next seminar of the Assembly for Social Movements in Africa, a few months before the 2011 WSF, which is to be held in Dakar in Jan. 2011. There are two reasons for this. The first is to reinforce communication on the African continent, while keeping a worldwide perspective, since it will be an international meeting with the presence of African, Asian, American and European social movements. The second is to [make more dynamic] mobilization for the next World Social Forum and make sure that it will have a positive, concrete impact for the social movements and African struggles.

A version of this article first appeared in The Committee For the Abolition of Third World Debt. Translated by Vicki Briault and Christine Pagnoulle.

RELATED LINKS:
The World Social Forum: Canadian contexts [5] and questions
 
The World Social Forum: Taking stock [6] and moving forward
 
After World Social Forum 2009: Time to bring the WSF to the U.S. [7]

Comments