The World Social Forum: the paradoxical quest for strength in plurality

ABSTRACT

In this reflexive essay, I explore how the present and the future of the World Social Forum are intimately related to the ability of its actors to acknowledge and actively address the inherent tensions of open spaces. The former must compose themselves articulating seemingly opposites: ideals shared within the World Social Forum vs. some practices not in accordance with its principles (enhanced in contexts of urgency); claimed horizontality vs. dynamic power relations; internal plurality vs. the need to act in unity to achieve systemic global change, amongst others. I will propose perspectives on how the strength of the WSF can be seen as its capacity to continue building radical hope for a positive shift of paradigm within progressive civil society: from divergences to resilient complementarities.

KEYWORDS:

• World Social Forum
• open spaces
• transnational activism

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 The concept of civil society has different meanings and theoretical implications. I rely on the definition of Pianta and Marchetti (2007, p. 30):

global civil society can be defined as the sphere of cross-border relationships and activities carried out by collective actors – social movements, networks, and civil society organizations – that are independent from governments and private firms and operate outside the international reach of states and markets.

Nevertheless, this concept often leaves aside 'more diffuse formations, including informal collectives and affinity groups, that characterize contemporary transnational activism and the decentralized, dynamic, and rhizomatic nature' (Juris & Khasnabish, 2013, p. 10) of transnational spaces of mobilization.

2 This term will be used to refer to the World Social Forum, acknowledging at the same time the controversy that persists between those that consider the WSF a space or an actor (Whitaker, 2006, p. 37).

3 At the end of the twentieth and the beginning of the twenty-first centuries, extraordinary anti-globalization mobilizations (Genoa, Prague, Gothenburg, Barcelona, Evian) brought together millions of people in reaction to the meetings of the major neoliberal organizations (WTO, IMF, European Summit, G8 Summit, etc.). Already in 1982, the TOS (‘The Other Summit’) had taken place on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Versailles, and in 1992 Associative Forums were organized parallel to the United Nations Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit (Viveret, [2006] in Whitaker, 2006, p. 11). Moreover, in 1996, the Zapatista movement organized in the Mexican state of Chiapas the ‘intercontinental meeting for humanity and against neoliberalism’ (Beaudet, Sen, & Université du Québec en Outaouais, 2004, p. 4), which mobilized several thousand people. The massive demonstrations in Seattle against the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1999 became of paramount importance, marking the ‘birth’ of the twenty-first century (Viveret, [2006] in Whitaker, 2006, p. 10), and revealing ‘in the media the extent of popular discontent with the rise of globalization’ (Beaudet, Sen, & Université du Québec en Outaouais, 2004, p. 4, my translation).

4 The World Social Forum is indeed a symbolic space of transnational encounter, as it has gathered so many people in the last fifteen years. Nevertheless, we need to acknowledge the existence and pertinence of other local, regional and thematic Social Forums, as well as other open spaces that do not relate to the WSF dynamics.

5 My translation: ‘Proposer, et […] mettre en pratique, de nouvelles formes d’action fondées sur la logique des réseaux (horizontalité, non-directivité, respect de la diversité), sur la capacité de se côtoyer dans la diversité, de dépasser les malentendus […], et de prendre appui sur cette diversité dans la recherche d’une efficacité transformatrice’.

6 Since its emergence the World Social Forum has gathered tens of thousands of people every one or two years. According to the initial results announced at the meeting of the WSF International Council in Salvador, Bahia at the end of WSF 2018, the WSF 2018 held in Bahia, Brazil brought together nearly 80,000 people, from more than 100 countries in nearly 2,000 activities.

7 This notion that the governance bodies of the WSF are shared acknowledges that the WSF cannot be defined solely by the perspectives of its facilitators (Conway, 2013, p. 278): ‘As significant as these concerns are, the social forum as a phenomenon enacted in its plateau events has consistently exceeded the (contesting) visions and terms of debates of its facilitators’.

8 Before that I participated in the organization of the Week Against Racism in Montreal, Solidarythmé, the Quebec Social Forums, Occupy Montreal, VIA 22, Global Square, the Collective for a World Social Transition, Transiro, amongst other.

9 Katalizo aspires to ‘catalyze ideas into actions’ through innovative spaces and projects in different countries, mainly in the Americas.

10 The data come from my personal notes taken since 2013 during the nomination process and organization of the WSF 2016, from reports of meetings of the WSF 2016 Collective and the International Council of the WSF, and from research made for my PhD dissertation.

11 www.wsf2016.org, retrieved on February 21, 2018.

12 The principle of ‘prefigurative politics’ holds that activists should prefigure in the present day the world they wish to create in the future, Frezzo and Karides (2007).

13 It took place every Wednesday from May 2013 to October 2016, and often lasted more than 4 hours, being perceived as inaccessible by some local organizations. See www.fsm2016.org for the detailed final report of the WSF 2016, including information on its organizational process.

14 As a member of the Collective for a World Social Transition that inherited the communicational tools and administrative structure of the WSF 2016.

15 Angela Davis, speaking at Occupy Wall Street, Zuccotti Park, October 30, 2011, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlvfPizooII, 3’47, accessed July 21, 2019.

16 Charter of Principles of the World Social Forum: ‘(…) in the certainty proclaimed at Porto Alegre that “Another World Is Possible”, it becomes a permanent process of seeking and building alternatives (…)’. The WSF as a process was commented by many authors including Conway (2004).

17 The convergence of the WSF with Social Forums of different scopes, and other open spaces that share principles with the WSF (with their significant pragmatic experience), holds the potential of greatly invigorating this global process, and its International Council. Different organizers of Social Forums have expressed recognition and asked for support in different meetings of the IC (Panamazion Social Forum, World Social Forum of Migrations, People’s Social Forum, Norwegian Social Forum, to name a few), but there is not a systematic reach-out effort coming from this international body.

18 The word ‘philosophical’ is here understood as the human attempt to understand the world, following Estermann (2015).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Carminda Mac Lorin

Carminda Mac Lorin is a PhD candidate in Applied Human Sciences at the University of Montreal, and is interested in different transnational spaces of mobilization. She was one of the general coordinators of the 2016 World Social Forum in Montreal and is currently a member of its International Council. She is also the founder-president of Katalizo, a Montreal-based nonprofit organization that organizes events and develops programmes focused on grassroots mobilization, socio-ecological transition, education and social entrepreneurship.