Essay #4 Claire de Lespinois- WSF: Space or Movement?

      The theology of the World Social Forum is predominantly based on the statement, ?Another world is Possible.? (WSF, 2007). Even though this strives to move away from the idea of a set school of ideals, and a typical train of thought, the WSF does face very typical problems within the forum. One end of the spectrum demands the space of the forum in order to maximize diversity and individual freedom of thought. The other end however insists that the organization must stabilize in order to address the growing needs of the community as a whole.

     According to Giorel Curran, Chico Whitaker, one of the ideologists of the open space model, defines a space as ?having no leaders? and being ?horizontal?(2007, p. 10). Those who argue for the space model promote WSF as a forum for ideological diversity, self-governing in a civil society. This means that it has no set power or strict rule. While some feel this autonomy is the best way where multiple voices can be heard equally, critics complain that in order for something to survive and be successful it needs a governing power to protect and guide it (Curran, 2007, p. 10). The idea of the WSF as a space directly contradicts the thoughts of Silvia Waisbord and Nancy Morris. These two authors believe that ? The rise of transnational organizations, the unprecedented worldwide expansion of corporations and market economies?..render obsolete the basis of stateness, the existence and protection of sovereign territory? (2001, paragraph 1). They believe in the importance of the state, while the space model for the WSF remains without a state.

     On the opposing side is the idea of the WSF as not an open space, but instead a movement. This idea of political movement demands some sense of hierarchical power and a collective conscious towards certain objectives. Those who would argue for political movement believe that the WSF should cease being a ?talking shop and start taking power.? (Curran, 2007, p. 10). Such would include delegating political power towards an institutional reform. Followers of this method believe reform would organize and better enable the WSF to more effectively take action towards political and social change.

     While these are the two main views under dispute, not all arguments fall under these two distinct categories. Some people have a different idea of what the term space actually means. Going back to the WSF?s slogan of ?Another world is possible?, some people argue that the WSF is just that. Followers of this model would agree with the concept of ?imagined worlds? as presented by Arjun Appadurai. This concept implies, ?there are multiple worlds which are constituted by historically situated imaginations of persons and groups spread around the globe? (Appadurai, 1990, p. 297). Within this imagined new world, change and progression can occur. This is just one of the multiple views that can be applied to the WSF, thus further emphasizing its broadness.

     To encompass the ideas and resolutions of the entire globe, while protecting the identity and voice of the individual is a task that involves a great deal of balance. While the WSF faces much criticism, the majority comes from the sheer size of the forum. Hammond states that, ?A global movement has to be big, but the Social Forum bursts at the seams (2005, paragraph 61). This large size challenges the forums ability to set up meeting spaces to accommodate people. It also leaves little time for everyone to express their items of concern. Also, followers of the WSF constantly battle of whether it is a political space or an actual movement. While not everyone can agree on the exact definition of the WSF, they can all agree with one thing: the world needs our help.

References:

Appadurai, Arjun. (1990). Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Economy. Public Culture 2 (2): p. 296-308.

Curran, Giorel. (2007). Making Anither World Possible? The Politics of the World Social Forum. Social Alternatives. First Quarter, Vol. 26 Issue 1, p. 7-12.

Hammond, John. L. The World Social Forum and the Emergence of Global Grassroots politics. Retrieved 13 June 2007, from http://www.wpunj.edu/newpol/issue42/
Hammond42.htm.

Waisbord, Silvio, and Morris, Nancy (2001). Introduction: Rethinking media globalization and state power. In Silvio Waisbord and Nancy Morris (editors),
Media and Globalization: Why the State Matters. Lanham, MD; Boulder, CO;
New York, NY; and Oxford, UK: Rowman and Littlefield. Pp. vii-xvi.

WSF. Retrieved 13 June 2007, from www.wsf 2007.org

Posted at 11:16AM Jun 15, 2007 by DELESPINOIS, CATHERINE in General  |  Comments[2]