With its return to Porto Alegre, the World Social Forum is set for a change of approach, both in terms of its preparations and during the event itself.
In the wake of Mumbai, everyone following the fortunes of the Social Forums - at whatever level - agreed that the time had come for a rethink. Many outsiders felt that the Forums were almost totally bogged down, incapable of drawing on the proposals resulting from the Forums to give concrete form to this alternative world; insiders were less critical. But no one can deny that the Forums are faced with the challenge of rendering visible some elements of this alternative world, both in terms of form and content, without breaking with the fundamental principle of avoiding a definitive declaration. It is true that the Social Forums are only 5 years old. But they have established themselves as an ideal platform for alternative-globalisation struggles and movements. At a time when certain events tend to give us the impression that there are in fact no, or very few, alternatives - from Bush's re-election in the face of a largescale anti-war movement to Lula's inability to implement promised reforms - it is more important than ever that the Forums help to keep hope alive. Even if this means that expectations of the Forums are contradictory: they need to be more popular and proposition-oriented, more international and participative, radical but realist, diverse but credible, and so on.
The Forum's International Council has therefore decided to introduce a number
of major changes in the 2005 WSF preparatory
process.
Another programme
The decision was taken that the programme for the 2005 Forum would be made
up of independent activities. At the first
three events, the activities organised by
the Forum (the Brazilian Committee or International
Council), ranging from panels and accounts
to round table sessions for discussions and
debates, were given the highest profile both
in the programme and at the physical Forum
site. Only these activities were translated.
Which meant that the "official" activities
had the highest media profile. They set the
general tone for the Forum. The independent
activities, on the other hand, were relegated
to second place, even though the participants
showed growing interest in them, and despite
the fact that many of them were far more innovative
and comprehensive that the big conferences
where the speakers repeated the same things
they had said at the previous Forum.
[read more]
* Nicolas Haeringer
http://allies.alliance21.org/fsm/article.php3?id_article=195
