[WSF-Discuss] Fwd: [DEBATE] : Re: [nigd-list] heads of state in the wsf?
CACIM
cacim at cacim.net
Mon Aug 4 04:55:42 UCT 2008
Monday, August 4, 2008
Here is something from another list (…another two lists) that those
on this list will surely want to know about, and maybe also to discuss.
I am also copying this to the authors, Teivo Teivainen
and Peter Waterman, with the request that if you are already on this
list, please consider posting such information and/or comments here;
and if you are not, then to consider being so… and doing so.
JS
fwd
Begin forwarded message:
> From: "peter waterman" <p.waterman at inter.nl.net>
> Date: August 4 2008 1:26:11 AM GMT+05:30
> To: <nigd-list at nigd.org>, "debate: SA discussion list "
> <debate at debate.kabissa.org>, "CACIM" <cacim at cacim.net>
> Cc: Teivo Teivainen <teivo at nigd.org>, ginavargas at telefonica.net.pe
> Subject: [DEBATE] : Re: [nigd-list] heads of state in the wsf?
> Reply-To: "debate: SA discussion list " <debate at debate.kabissa.org>
>
> I have a simpler answer to the question posed above and argued below:
>
> THE WSF MUST BECOME MORE AUTONOMOUS OF CAPITAL AND STATE, CHURCH
> AND PATRIARCHY, EMPIRE AND MILITARY.
>
> I am well aware of the compromises the Social Forums have made with
> both statespeople and corporations. And of the fact that such
> compromises have NOT been extended to the Zapatistas, whose
> military moment was short and long past. And whose example has
> inspired the global justice and solidarity movement.
>
> The complex and slippery formulations in the proposal below speak
> of bad faith, a messy compromise and are an invitation to endless
> argument about which head, or which state is 'progressive'. (South
> Africa under the ANC Government of Mbeki? In the future under Zuma?)
>
> The originality and prestige of the WSF rests on its
> 'representation' of global civil society. 'Representation' is, of
> course, a disputed concept, as is 'civil society'. I take these
> terms to be aspirational and processal: that means that the WSF
> should be seeking ever more energetically to engage and speak for
> civil society - the latter understood as that social force that
> emancipates society from the hegemony of capital, state, organised
> religion, militarism, patriarchy, etc.
>
> With the proposal below, it will be leading figures and/or organs
> of the WSF that will split the WSF rather than those 'extremists'
> they have castigated. In so far as 'politics' is taken to be that
> which pertains to state power, it will be the WSF that
> 'politicises' the forum, rather than those who have been accused of
> wishing to do so.
>
> Oh, and I am not relieved that Sarkozy will remain univited.
> Firstly, who the hell would invite him? Secondly, however, this
> leaves open the possibility that a 'progressive' European leader,
> of some 'progressive' state will be found suitable for a future
> invitation.
>
> I am appalled that whilst the embattled Zapatistas continue to be
> excluded, the argument below would allow for the possible presence
> of the head of a one-party dictatorship (addressed here by his
> first name!), and one condemned by feminists and (global) civil
> society - if not his courts - of raping his step-daughter.
>
> What this whole exercise smacks of is the social-partnership
> politics of Social Democratic, Communist and Populist parties and
> movements of the 20th Century - compromises that led to the
> irresistible rise of the Neo-Liberalism the WSF is supposed to be
> against!
>
> It makes possible invitations to 'socially-responsible'
> corporations or CEOs. Also to heads of 'progressive' inter-state
> organisations, such as the International Labour Organisation
> (itself profoundly compromised with capital, state and globalisation).
>
> Finally, it cannot but confuse an international public increasingly
> confronted by state-sponsored, corporation-supported efforts that
> have long been trying to profit from the successes of the WSF and
> the global justice and solidarity movement, such as 'Make Poverty
> History!'.
>
> Should we not now change the slogan of the WSF from 'Another World
> is Possible!' to 'An Old World is Possible Again!'?
>
>
>
> Peter Waterman
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Teivo Teivainen"
> <teivo.teivainen at helsinki.fi>
> To: <nigd-list at nigd.org>
> Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 6:11 PM
> Subject: [nigd-list] heads of state in the wsf?
>
>
>> Dear NIGD,
>>
>> One of the controversial issues in the WSF events since the
>> beginning has
>> been the relationship with states and, more particulary, with
>> heads of
>> states. One of the issues to be debated in the Copenghaguen
>> International
>> Council meeting is the following draft document on this question.
>>
>> Love & peace,
>>
>> Teivo
>>
>>
>> Outline for the debate about the participation of Head of States
>> at the
>> WSF 2009
>>
>> This document is a draft for discussion prepared by a working group
>> composed by WSF International Council Content and Methdology
>> commission
>> members: Ana Maria, OCLAE Brasil; André, MST Brasil; Chico W.,
>> CBJP Brasi;
>> Gina, AFM Peru; Gustavo, CUT Brasil; Isolda, MMM Brasil; José
>> Miguel, CTC
>> Cuba; Rodrigo, CLACSO Brasil; Salete, IPF Brasil). This draft is
>> still
>> being discussed by its members and it will be submitted for the
>> assessment
>> of the International Council members gathered in its next meeting
>> (September, in Copenhague, Denmark).
>>
>> The debate had as starting point the fact that Heads of State or
>> governments have been present to the WSF, invited by the
>> organizations
>> participating at the event and in accordance with its Charter of
>> Principles. It was like so in 2005 and 2006. It is highly probably
>> that
>> the issues will be posed for 2009, considering that WSF will be
>> carried
>> out in a region where there are many national governments which are
>> considered progressists or also left governments. If only the Amazon
>> region is considered (the 8 sovereign countries of the Amazon
>> region and 1
>> French colony struggling for its independence), the list, can
>> include,
>> according who prepares it, the following governments (in alphabetical
>> order): Chávez / Venezuela; Correa/Ecuador; Evo / Bolivia, y Lula/
>> Brasil.
>> If we consider all Latin America, the list is even longer and polemic
>> (again, the order is alphabetical): Bachelet/Chile; Cristina/
>> Argentina;
>> Lugo/Paraguay; Ortega/Nicaragua, Raúl/Cuba y Tabaré/Uruguay. [It
>> was a
>> consensus, however, that following head should not be invited as
>> they are
>> considered undesirable right wings: [Uribe / Colombia , García /
>> Peru and
>> Sarkozy / president of the colonial metropolis which subdue
>> Guyana]. (this
>> would have to be discussed concretely with those who think in
>> inviting
>> them. if there are crazy enough to do so.)
>>
>> There were different and coincident evaluations about the previous
>> experiences of Head of States participation in the WSF events.
>> However,
>> the following consensus was reached and the issue remained open
>> for new
>> consultations and debates.
>>
>>
>> Consensus
>>
>> In case of having the presence of Head of States, we need to
>> consider that
>> they attract an exceptional attention from the press and even from
>> WSF
>> participants. In this way, it is necessary to avoid that any event
>> with
>> them be held at the same time of self-organized events held by the
>> movements and organizations taking part at the WSF.
>>
>> For evident reasons, an activity with Head of States must not be
>> placed in
>> the Opening session, and even less, in the Closing session, in
>> order to
>> avoid that the media consider it as WSF "conclusion". Answering to
>> these
>> concerns, in case one or many Heads of States be present at the
>> WSF, the
>> methodological proposal is:
>>
>> 1) That the event be held after the program of self organized
>> activities
>> (comprised between the 8 am and 6:30 pm), that is: they can only be
>> registered after the 6:30 pm
>>
>> 2) That the event do not be placed in the opening session (27),
>> nor in the
>> Pan Amazonian day (28), which will be a moment for presenting
>> contents and
>> issues to the participant organizations, particularly the Amazonian
>> issues.
>>
>> 3) That the activity be not held in the Closing day (February 1st)
>> when
>> there are scheduled events for presenting results and conclusions
>> by the
>> participant organizations and movements.
>>
>> 4) It is proposed, as consequence, that those events with Head of
>> States
>> be held the 29 and/or 30 January 2009, after 6 pm and outside of
>> the WSF
>> territory (composed by UFPA and UFRA).
>> Open issue
>>
>> There were three (3) proposals on the table about who organize the
>> activity:
>> a) Being a co-organized activity, according to the experience made in
>> other WSFs: the WSF "Organizing Committee" (which could mean the
>> Brazilian "Facilitating Group", the Pan Amazonian Council - under
>> constitution - or the WSF International Council) organizes the
>> event. This
>> would mean to do the invitations (setting up the list of those who
>> would
>> be invited or not, etc.) and arrives to a consensus on the
>> methodology
>> and issues to be dealt with (someone has proposed a "round table of
>> dialogue and controversies" model, as it happened with some
>> governments
>> and political parties in other WSF events in Porto Alegre, only
>> that now
>> it would be held with head of States and who would talk from the
>> side of
>> the civil society etc.)
>> b) That the International Council decides in its meeting in
>> Copenhague
>> only the general "framework" in which those activities could be held
>> (points 1 to 4, listed before), but that all the rest be solved in
>> a self
>> organized way, by those who invite the head of States.
>> c) A co-organized activity on the 29, only with the head of States
>> from
>> the Amazonian region, and other with head of States outside from the
>> Amazoni on the 30th, debating with those who invite them the
>> possibility
>> of having the activity in only one place and time (always after 6
>> pm) or
>> in many different venues. To be seen.
>>
>> [Reporter, even being late: Gustavo, CUT Brasil / July 26 2008, with
>> amendments made by by Chico Whitaker - CBJB Brazil]
>>
>> THIS IS A FIRST VERSION, SUBJECT TO AMMENDMENTS BY THOSE
>> PARTICIPATING AT
>> THE WORKING GROUP AND, AFTER A CONSENSUS IN THE GROUP, WILL BE
>> SENT TO THE
>> INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL.
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Dr. Teivo Teivainen
>>
>> Head of Department, Professor of World Politics
>> Department of Political Science
>> Unioninkatu 37
>> POB 54, 00014 University of Helsinki
>> Finland
>> *phone: +358-9-19124858
>> *cell: +358-50-3505120
>> * e-mail: teivo.teivainen at helsinki.fi
>>
>>
>> _______________
>> This message was sent to NIGD-list at nigd.org
>> To unsubscribe, send the command "unsubscribe NIGD-list"
>> to majordomo at nigd.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DEBATE mailing list
> DEBATE at debate.kabissa.org
> http://lists.kabissa.org/mailman/listinfo/debate
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openspaceforum.net/pipermail/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net/attachments/20080804/f96b148e/attachment-0001.html
More information about the WorldSocialForum-Discuss
mailing list