The Forum as logo, the Forum as religion: scepticism of the intellect, optimism of the will
By Jai Sen
During the third world meeting of the WSF in Porto Alegre in January 2003, a new initiative named ‘WSFItself’ organised a workshop on power relations within the World Social Forum. An exercise during the workshop required participants to imagine the kinds of policies that could be adopted that would kill —or certainly, cripple— the Forum. In its words, the ‘toxics.’
The idea was to reveal, through this exercise in intense negativism, what needed to not be done. But as a participant, I gradually became aware that the exercise gave me an insight into some of what is, in fact, already taking place but is not being ‘read’ given the positivist lenses through which we normally tend to see the world around us, including the Forum.
In some senses, this essay is a continuation of that exercise, of trying to read the Forum. I have written this essay because even as I celebrate the fact of the Forum and what it is doing and might be capable of, I also believe that there are several tendencies taking shape within it that are deeply negative and contradictory to its very spirit. Most centrally, they include the Forum becoming a commodity and a brand name and its motto a logo and the beginning of a kind of worldwide franchising; and an increasing struggle for control of the Forum. In large part this is happening because the very success of the WSF as an enterprise has, as Roberto Bissio put it, “created a power (and a value) around the logo, whether we like it or not. And this has to be recognised and acknowledged, since denial of reality would become manipulative.”
But the list goes deeper. Even if, in principle, it should be possible to address (and arrest) these trends, they are accompanied by other more structural factors. These include the related fact that the actually existing Forum is not the ‘open space’ that it is said to be, but is instead highly structured and, in several dimensions, exclusive. Among other features, the Forum — though declaring itself ‘open’— is in reality ‘open’ only to particular sections: to those who already agree with certain policy formulations, which largely limits it to those who can broadly be said to be on ‘the left’, and beyond this, increasingly, to those who are willing to declare in writing their adherence to the given policy formulations. The Forum also discriminates against individuals, as I explain subsequently. All this adds up to a rising dogmatism and an organisational fundamentalism that is a hallmark of old politics.
In short, we are already witnessing the crystallisation and rise not only of corporatism but also of orthodoxy and dogma, which I suggest constitutes a fundamental challenge to the future of the WSF. The WSF is showing distinct signs of behaving like a tightly controlled corporation, a movement, or an organised religion — not an open space. This is reflected by, among other things, a growing discourse of ‘we’ and ‘they’ in the WSF International Council and its counterpart bodies at national levels, such as the WSF India Organising Committee. The leadership of the Forum at both these levels is also becoming increasingly strict, drawing increasingly sharp boundaries, and along with this, denying the existence of grey areas in issues. It is, therefore, in effect, closing entry to and exchange with the vast majority of people who have not yet fully made up their minds about all issues. The Forum is therefore gradually becoming a place only for gatherings of the committed and converted. See the full text, pdf format..
