[E-rundbrief] Info 503 - WSF 2007 reflections from an activist

[Matthias Reichl]

E-Rundbrief - Info 503 Lesley: WSF 2007 
reflections from a PGA (Peoples Global Action Network) cheerleader/ activist.

Bad Ischl, 3.2.2007

Begegnungszentrum für aktive Gewaltlosigkeit

www.begegnungszentrum.at

===========================================================

As a longtime PGA (Peoples Global Action Network) 
cheerleader/activist, I appreciate all the 
comments critiquing the WSF2007. They need to be 
said, but I also want to offer my reflections on 
this WSF - the first I have attended.

I approached the event with scepticism, convinced 
in advance about its co-optation. I came away 
feeling a bit inspired..  Just like a diversity 
of tactics, we might need a diversity of venues, no?

Lesley

WSF 2007 reflections

On the first day of the World Social Forum in 
Nairobi, I was sitting in a workshop on the 
trends for the next century. Pat Mooney (?) from 
the Dag Hammarskjold Foundation (in cooperation 
with ETC-Group, Canada  see Info 504. M.R. ) was 
talking about the threat of nanotechnology. He 
was speaking about how the ability to turn nickel 
into platinum, and cornmeal into fishmeal was 
going to radically alter the economics of the 
planet. I was taking notes when a roar erupted 
from the workshop to my right. I was intrigued, 
and slipped out to investigate. The workshop I’d 
been attending was made up mostly of Europeans 
and North Americans, listening to global left 
intellectuals like Vandana Shiva and Walden 
Bello.  This other workshop was packed entirely 
with African participants, earnestly watching a 
popular theatre performance about cattle rustling conflicts in Uganda.

Such juxtapositions became commonplace at my 
first social forum. I would stand in the area 
outside the stadium and soak it in. I would join 
a march against the occupation in Palestine, and 
we would meet and flow through a march of the 
Dalit or untouchable movement from India. 
Ethiopian dancers would gyrate, as clusters of 
nuns would walk by. Almost 50,000 people had come 
from all corners of the planet to meet, to 
strategize, to dance - united only by the theme 
«Another World is Possible» and the hallmarks of 
the World Social Forum. These hallmarks appear to 
be routinely ignored. They formally exclude 
political parties and armed movements, both of 
which continue to participate in various forms. 
One huge banner celebrating the Mau Mau rebellion 
flanked the main stage, while politicians from 
different socialist parties explained that they 
were there «as individuals.» The explicitly 
anti-imperialist hallmarks might also surprise 
some of the participating NGO and religious organizations.

         Most of the participants were from 
various countries in Africa - probably about 65% 
on the first day, and up to 75% on the final day. 
This underrepresentation was at least partly due 
to a lack of accessibility for local 
participants. On the first day, with the Kenyan 
military guarding the gates, Kenyans, many from 
nearby slums, were told that they would have to 
pay 500 Kenyan shillings to register and enter 
the forum space. 500 shillings is the equivalent 
of about 8.50 USD, and far beyond the means of 
the slum dwellers, whose monthly rent is about 
1000 shillings.   Protests ensued, the gates were 
rushed, and many entered. However, the gates were 
later reinforced, and the struggle continued. The 
following day, entrance fees were reduced to 50 
shillings for Kenyans, and the protests 
continued, many energized by the leadership of 
South African activists, who marched to the 
catchy tune; «my mother was a kitchen girl, my 
father was a garden boy. That’s why I’m a 
socialist, that’s why I’m a socialist.» 
Eventually, the fees were abolished for Kenyans, 
and the numbers of slum dwellers rapidly 
increased. I interviewed one fellow about his 
perception of the social forum. He hadn’t yet 
attended any workshops, was just walking around, 
but explained that what he most appreciated was 
seeing how the different struggles were connected.

         Once in, the mobilization around the 
forum continued to grow, as we turned our 
attention to the price of food and water at the 
forum. The issue was tied to critiques of 
nepotism or corruption. There were many food 
tents at the forum, located about five minutes 
walk away from the main area. They had plates of 
vegetarian food for 150 shillings. However, many 
people didn’t realize that these areas were even 
there, being distracted by the one big food tent, 
right by the main gate. It sold a plate of food 
for 400 shillings, about 7.50 USD. Why was it the 
only one in the main area? It turns out that it 
was owned by a politician known as a human rights 
abuser..... sketchy stuff. This led to the group 
of 50 or so slum dweller kids rushing the tent 
and grabbing the food. An entirely appropriate 
response given the (entirely avoidable) 
situation. Such a situation might have been 
avoided through more concerted action by the 
international committee, who may have been 
reluctant to step on the toes of the local host 
committee. Financially, there should have been a 
recognition that Kenyan social movements there 
simply do not have the finances of the movements 
in other places where the WSF has taken place. 
This may have contributed to the apparent financial difficulties of this WSF.

Not to say that there are not vibrant Kenyan 
movements engaged in struggles around the 
constitution, education, HIV/AIDS, land, housing 
and water. I was frustrated that I didn’t learn 
more about these movements inside the forum, 
although with the number of workshops, I'm sure I 
missed key sessions. While I’m sure much of this 
had to do with the entrance fees and feeling that 
the forum wasn’t necessarily «for them,» it may 
also have to do with the way that local activists 
always have to make a decision about events like 
this - either they redirect tons of their energy 
towards it, or they ignore it in order to keep 
going with their local campaigns. One local 
activist who worked on the logistics for the 
forum had to take the second day of the forum off 
to go to court on charges of inciting a riot in 
the struggle around the constitution. It was 
disappointing that we couldn’t have organized 
more effectively within the forum to support such local activists.

Another important critique of this year’s forum 
was the ongoing one of NGO domination. I 
understand where this is coming from, but found 
it somewhat irrelevant.  They had the majority of 
stalls with literature to be sure, but the 
workshops that I attended were much more likely 
to be dominated by academics or activists than 
NGO activists. I simply chose non-NGO workshops. 
One thing that was striking in its absence 
however, was any discussion of direct action, 
even in most of the social movement sessions. It 
wasn’t until I had gone downtown to the local and 
free «People’s Parliament» and heard an mill 
worker activist from Mumbai talk that I realized 
what was missing. He told a gripping story about 
an action by mill workers who had been locked out 
without backpay.  Facing the police, 1500 workers 
doused themselves in what appeared to be petrol, 
and held up matchbooks. The police panicked, got 
a local governor to negotiate and received their 
wages (and I believe their jobs). It turns out 
that what appeared to be petrol, was only water. 
When I compared the response of the audience to 
this story to the gloomy faces watching a «Save 
the Children» video, I definitely knew I wanted 
to stick to the social movement sessions.

So with all these problems, should it just be 
dismissed as corrupt, co-opted and 
commercialized, or did the WSF 2007 serve any 
useful function? When I had first arrived, I had 
asked a local activist Mbugua whether he thought 
having the WSF in Nairobi would benefit the local 
movements in any way. «No» he responded. «After 
it goes, it will be just the same.» By the end of 
the week, it seemed that there were some reasons 
for hope. On my way out of town, I asked a local 
taxi driver whether he saw it the same as the 
recent Climate Change summit meetings. No,» he 
argued. «This was different. It shows that we are 
equal. That everyone struggles. It may give the 
local movements some confidence. The government 
is watching and listening now.» A local slum 
dweller explained «This forum is for the poor of 
the world.» Indeed, as the days had passed, 
coverage has increased in the local papers, and the mood had shifted.

One of the reasons the forum got some local 
attention was the Q-Spot. Initially I hadn’t 
realized that male homosexuality is illegal in 
Kenya, so I had been curious why so many local 
Kenyan activists I talked with mentioned visiting 
the large tent dedicated to struggles around what 
was referred to as «sexual diversity.» Local 
radio stations discussed the issue in shocked 
tones. One dj on KISS100 said «why would you EVER 
tell ANYONE you were gay!» She then interviewed 
gay activists about their campaigns and lives. A 
small space had been opened. If such discussions 
continue, the forum may have provided some needed 
support to local queer activists. As well, the 
activists from the slum dweller movements, while 
often supported by moderate NGOs and church 
groups got a huge amount of international 
attention. I suspect they may gain some leverage.

So I’d argue that the forum might end up buoying 
local struggles in Nairobi, at least for a while. 
But what about the usefulness of the WSF for the 
rest of the world?  Did WSF 2007 move «us» in the 
direction of «another world?» Generally, I try to 
avoid being too product oriented in my evaluation 
of political work. How do we «know» that a 
meeting went well? Do we count the decisions 
made? But what if those decisions are the wrong 
ones, and half the people in the room went to 
sleep? Evaluating political transformative work 
is not strictly a quantitative act. And yet, 
because it costs so much money and time to bring 
so many people together, I find myself getting 
quite anxious about the «usefulness» of events 
such as the WSF. «Does it make any difference at 
all?» I ask. «Well,» in answer to my own 
question, «if 2% of the organizations there 
improved their campaigns, their strategies, their 
networks in ways that helped their struggle, then 
the WSF is worthwhile.» Perhaps the ramblings of 
a pollyanna, but something that seems achievable.

One way I tried to evaluate the forum was by 
asking people if they got what they came 
for.  When I asked people why they had come to 
the forum there were three main types of answers. 
NGO types tended to answer something like this 
«we came to give a workshop on our campaign, and 
we came to meet with others who were working on 
women’s issues, HIV/AIDS, etc.» Many activists 
from the large scale (often Marxist) movements 
tended to emphasize exposure of their struggles. 
They would say something like what this organizer 
from the Philippines said, «our objective is to 
get people to come to our workshop and learn 
about our struggle, and to join us.» She also 
argued that her organization’s participation in 
the Africa-Asia summit had been valuable, and 
that they were «here to find common ground.» 
Activists from smaller organizations, some from 
the north, prioritized networking with likeminded 
organizations and activists, and learning about 
other campaigns. One activist from Community 
Voices Heard, a New York City group explained 
that she had learned about the different 
struggles in ways that would affect her future 
work. Another US activist, from an immigrant 
rights organization in New York City explained 
that the workshops themselves hadn’t been that 
useful, but the opportunity to meet with 
grassroots activists in Kenya had made the trip worthwhile.

The desire to be productive had led to an 
innovation in this years’ program. On the fourth 
day of workshops, the morning was filled with 
«proposal» sessions. I attended the session on 
migrant rights and watched as different groups 
made proposals for events or strategies between 
long rambling speeches about their organizations 
and campaigns. This was a good idea, but because 
of the large size of the sessions, and limited 
time, it was impossible to do any discussion of 
the proposals. As a result, the proposals were 
taken as a list to the afternoon sessions, where 
all the proposals would be read. The format was a 
bit confusing, with many people ignoring the proposal process altogether.

In the end, I think that there are reasons not to 
dismiss the WSF process entirely. It's not 
democratic, and in Nairobi at least, there was 
some creepy commercialization, and corruption. 
Yes, the NGOs have too much power, and the social 
movements too little. Its not pure, despite some 
people’s best intentions. But its still an 
unusual space, one that keeps changing, its a 
space where people’s struggles come together and 
at least network, if not strategize. And it seems 
to be a space that can be molded by its participants.

The last big event that I went to at this year’s 
forum was the Social Movement Assembly - an 
innovation at this year’s forum. In order to 
create a space within the WSF that was not 
dominated by NGOs, the assembly had been 
launched. The goal of the meeting was to agree to 
a joint statement. The statement, which was read 
by one of the slum dweller organizers, expressed 
critiques of the commercialization, 
inaccessibility and corruption at the forum. It 
proposed common days of action in 2008, and it 
questioned the role of NGOs.  Once read, Kenyan 
activists had the first opportunity to respond 
and add their amendments. Speaker after speaker 
from movements locally and globally added their 
issues and struggles. It was uncertain what this 
melange of issues would lead to. A coherent 
strategy it was not. But it was something. In 
that final assembly, Wangari Maathi, an activist 
well known for her environmental and human rights 
work explained the WSF like this; «It represents 
the people who are too poor. I like that it 
brings the world to me, as a Kenyan poor person. 
It doesn’t just bring the world, it brings the 
best of the world. It brings people who believe 
what I believe.» It’s not enough, but it’s something.

===========================================================

Matthias Reichl, Pressesprecher/ press speaker,
     Begegnungszentrum fuer aktive Gewaltlosigkeit
     Center for Encounter and active Non-Violence
     Wolfgangerstr. 26, A-4820 Bad Ischl, Austria,
     fon: +43 6132 24590, Informationen/ informations,
     Impressum in: http://www.begegnungszentrum.at
Spenden-Konto Nr. 0600-970305 (Blz. 20314) 
Sparkasse Bad Ischl, Geschäftsstelle Pfandl
IBAN: AT922031400600970305    BIC: SKBIAT21XXX