Mario Lubetkin, IPS Director General

By Mario Lubetkin (*)

Rome, Mar (IPS TerraViva) Paradoxically, just as history is proving the World Social Forum right in many of its predictions and analyses, the major media, those “shapers of public opinion”, are not increasing but in fact sharply decreasing their coverage of it. This silent treatment is a clear obstacle to the expansion of the WSF and a cause of real concern for many of its innumerable organisers and participants.

This situation was recognised in the final February 10 declaration by the Social Movements of the WSF, which concluded that the forum must undertake “a battle of ideas, in which we cannot move forward unless there is a democratisation of communication.”

It is curious that ten years ago journalists from around the world flocked to Porto Alegre to cover the WSF debates, which were given broad coverage in print and on television.

It could be argued that this was simply a result of the novelty of the forum and its flood of activists proclaiming, “another world is possible” while the rest of the world careened blindly towards disaster.

The surprise was greater still when the following year, in 2002, certain members of the WSF, where attendance rose steadily, were elected presidents of their countries -like Luis Inacio Lula Da Silva in Brazil.

But these developments, it would seem, were moving contrary to the currents of history. In the same period, with the exception of certain slips -like the popping of the so-called dot.com bubble and the subsequent collapse of 4854 Internet companies between 2000-2003- capitalism, and especially financial capitalism, was charging full steam ahead. It outstripped the real economy, swelled the Gross World Product and international trade, and generated massive earnings for its businesses -insurance companies and banks, especially investment banks- giving the impression that the good times would never end.

From its first years the WSF denounced with tenacity and rigour the elements of the reigning neoliberal ideology that would lead to global disaster: the so-called Washington Consensus that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) was imposing on countries of the South, extreme liberalisation, blind faith in the market as the ideal arbiter of the economy, rejection of any regulation especially of the financial firms which were conducting massive levels of speculation. The ruin that resulted is plain to see all around us.

One might think that, since history proved the WSF right, the media might have grown curious about the prescient arguments and predictions of the Forum. But the opposite happened: in recent years, particularly since the global depression struck in 2008, the presence of media at the forum has dropped continuously.

What was more logical was the parallel decline in the media’s coverage of the World Economic Forum, which saw its fundamental postulates proved terribly wrong.

Of course, part of this contradiction has to do with the characteristics and errors of the WSF itself. The analysis of this matter is important given that the Forum constitutes the largest agglomeration of civil society in the world. Four aspects deserve close study:

-The structure of the forums consists of numerous simultaneous meetings on different themes. Thus the journalists must choose which they would like to attend and may find it difficult to make an assessment of the forum as a whole. This is accentuated by the organisational problems of the forum, which were particularly evident in the last meeting in Dakar. This dispersed nature of the event can thus distract attention from the ideas that it generates, including the best suggestions for solutions to the world’s problems.

-In general the journalists who cover the forum are inadequately prepared. Providing good coverage of specialised debates requires a high level of expertise on fields ranging from ecology, finance, minority rights, and philosophical, political, theological, sociological discussions.

-The WSF has thus far lacked a true communications strategy. Despite its extraordinary capacity to draw people from civil society, its management and organisational staff is limited and lacks resources. It could produce better results if it recognised the importance of having and implementing a communications strategy.

-The operation of the mass media has changed dramatically in this decade and requires a rethinking that factors in the new modes of exchange made possible by the Internet and electronic devices, social networks, and major alternative media like Al Jazeera and blogs like the Huffington Post, which have shown serious interest in this subject.

The coincidence of the Dakar Forum and the toppling of the regimes in North Africa has charged the debate and all groups linked to the WSF and challenged them to demonstrate the power and potential of those proposing to build “another world” using new forms of civil organisation and communication.

(*) Mario Lubetkin is Director-General of IPS news agency.

DAKAR, Feb 11 (TerraViva) – It started with a march through the streets of Dakar, grew with calls for a new global era and is ending with a challenge to activists to take the call for global change beyond the World Social Forum into the world.

Marching in the streets of Dakar. Credit: Abdullah Vawda/IPS

Addressing tens of thousands who marched through the Senegalese capital to mark the start of the Forum, Bolivian president Evo Morales called for a programme of social struggle to build a new world.

“There must be awareness and a mobilisation to put an end to capitalism and clear away invaders, neocolonialists and imperialists [...] I support the popular uprisings in Tunisia and in Egypt. These are signs of change,” said Morales.

It was a fitting coincidence that after thirty years in power in Egypt, Hosni Mubarak finally bowed to more than two weeks of mass protest and stepped down on the same day as the Forum drew to a conclusion.

The struggle in Egypt encapsulates many of the issues that were prominent in Dakar: deepening poverty made worse by the global financial crisis; religious conflict threatening a minority; issues of gender inequality bolstered by both culture and the law; and a people alienated from their democratic curtailment of individual rights and freedoms. All this in large measure thanks to billions of dollars of United States support for an oppressive security apparatus.

Former Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva told delegates liberal doctrines imposed on the world’s poorest countries no longer have a place in modern societies.

“In South America, but above all in the streets of Tunis and Cairo and many other African cities, a new hope is being born. Millions of people are rising up against the poverty to which they are subjected, against the domination of tyrants, against the submission of their countries to the policies of the big powers,” said Lula.

In its eleventh year, the Forum remains a space for open and honest debate. Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade did not hesitate to declare himself a supporter of the market economy which most here reject, and threw down a challenge to participants regarding their engagement with established global institutions such as the United Nations.

“If you who are here, if you had supported the idea, then Africa would already be on the Security Council. Since 2000, I have followed your movement and I still – excuse my frankness – ask myself this question: have you succeeded in changing the world at the global level?”

It’s a challenge that participants in the WSF take very seriously. Kenyan social justice activist Onyango Oloo was a key organiser of the 2007 edition of the Forum in Nairobi; he was unable to attend this year, but he suggested that the building of another world is already begun, away from the fleeting attention of the media.

The WSF is a place where those builders can meet each other directly. Organisers said 75,000 people from 132 countries attended, to share their experiences of injustice and resistance, to test each others’ analyses and return home newly-inspired.

For activist Beverley Keene, from Buenos Aires, holding the forum in Africa was important. “It’s our time to learn from each other and assess the impact that the financial crisis and the looting of the people’s minerals have on livelihoods.”

Lebanese participant Ounsi Daif said he had inspiring exchanges with people from Tunisia and Palestine as well as with students at the university that hosted the WSF. “I discovered the realities of West Africa, which I did not know. I discovered the inequalities, I discovered also the neo-liberal policies, I discovered a lot of things.”

Anietie Ewang, from the Niger Delta, said it had been an eye-opening experience for her. “An opportunity to re-strategise, to take the strategies of all the other participants that you’ve come to know about from their testimonies and go in and continue the fight with all the enthusiasm in the world.”

“The first and most important thing that one can learn from Tunisia is that when the people say no to oppression, then everything is possible,” said Tunisian Azza Chamkhi.

The wide-open optimism of Chamkhi’s statement captures both the broad appeal of the World Social Forum and what is frustrating about it.

“The WSF has a tendency to spin its own wheels, so to speak, because of the inherent limits of its slogan and motto,” says U.S. scholar Joel Kovel, a co-author of the Eco-socialist Manifesto. “’Another World is Possible’, repeated over and over, becomes discouraging because the shape of that other world is never really spelled out.”

Yet the people of Tunisia and Egypt – perhaps like South Africans, Iranians, Chileans, or African-Americans before them – find themselves on the threshold of a new world.

“The dictator is gone, but the dictatorship is still there,” said Chamkhi.

Thousands of activists are departing Dakar to pull it up, root and branch.

(END/2011)

DAKAR, Feb 11 (TerraViva) – Delegates attending the WSF in Dakar have affirmed their support and active solidarity with the people of Tunisia, Egypt and the Arab world.

Protesters in Cairo's Tahrir Square. Credit: Mohamed Omer/IPS

The social movement assembly of the World Social Forum adopted a declaration that said “the Arab world has risen up to the demand a true democracy and build the people’s power.

“Their struggles are lighting the path to another world, free from oppression and exploitation,” the statement reads.

“Inspired by the struggles of the peoples of Tunisia and Egypt, we call for March 20th to be made a day of international solidarity with the uprisings of the Arab and African people, whose advance supports the struggles of all peoples.”

Thousands of delegates attended the assembly at the main venue at Cheikh Anta Diop University. Loud applause broke out as the statement was read out.

Some delegates had expressed concerned that the events in North Africa were not granted enough time for discussion time at the Forum. Others said the assembly’s statement goes a long way in showing solidarity to the people of Tunisia and Egypt.

Following the reading out of the statement, Mamdouh Habashi, an Egyptian activist who had spent several days at the focal point of the Egyptian protests in Cairo’s Tahrir Square just before coming to Dakar, addressed the assembly.

“The revolution is not yet over. Mubarak is still in power,” he said.

Habashi said the “people of Egypt are at war with the imperialists and need the support of the African people and the world”. Change in Egypt, he said, is an earthquake taking place that will change the world. He underlined that pressure must be put on countries that still supported Mubarak.

Picking up the theme, Habashi’s fellow Egyptian and activist, the public intellectual Samir Amin, echoed these sentiments but urged activists to find ways to offer effective solidarity.

“It is not enough to show solidarity with the people of Egypt, we have to also change the U.S. and other powers. It is only through doing this that we can truly help the people of Egypt.”

When she took the floor, feminist and activist Pumi Mtetwa said the social movements of South Africa and Southern Africa also support the people of Egypt and Tunisia.

“Unity in struggle and struggle in unity,” she declared. “We pledge our solidarity to the people and support the assembly’s declaration”.

Habiya Sheg from Algeria said, “The people of Egypt have taken the decision [to resist] and will not go back and this is about political sovereignty.”

Thousands of delegates have been urged to support a march on the Egyptian embassy in Dakar at the end of the WSF’s final proceedings.

(END/2011)

Cortesía del entrevistado. Crédito: Joel Kovel

Kanya D’Almeida entrevista al académico estadounidense JOEL KOVEL

NUEVA YORK, 10 feb (IPS) – Joel Kovel, quien desempeñó un papel destacado en varias ediciones del Foro Social Mundial, realizado esta semana en Dakar, sostiene que el movimiento debe cimentarse en una práctica y lógica anticapitalista.

Considerado el padre del movimiento Ecosocialista, Kovel analiza la historia, la trayectoria y el futuro del movimiento.

También es uno de los autores del manifiesto Ecosocialista, que detalla una ruta alternativa al actual camino de destrucción ambiental.

Kovel dijo a IPS que hay que nombrar a ese “otro mundo” y posicionarlo firmemente contra la amenaza del capital global.

IPS: ¿Cuál fue su papel en los anteriores FSM?

JOEL KOVEL: Ecosocialismo es un concepto inherentemente global, no internacional, por lo que el FSM es un lugar ideal para discutir sus principales ideas. Presentamos el manifiesto en Nairobi en 2007 y lo revisamos con un grupo de varios cientos de personas.

El Ecosocialismo crece magníficamente en el tercer mundo, pero es el cuarto mundo, el de los indígenas y los pueblos sin Estado, el que está realmente al frente de este asunto.

La gente del cuarto mundo vive en relaciones comunitarias y es víctima directa de las corporaciones mineras y petroleras depredadoras que se meten en el corazón de la tierra y destruye las comunidades que son parte del suelo. Por eso hemos dependido del espacio único del FSM para difundir las ideas del Ecosocialismo.

IPS: ¿Es suficiente lo que se discute en el FSM sobre la crisis ecológica?

JK: El FSM tiende a concentrarse en áreas específicas dentro del asunto más amplio del ecocidio o ecodestrucción, como las semillas genéticamente modificadas o la acidificación de los océanos y la deforestación. Es necesario atender esos asuntos, pero no es suficiente para lidiar con la magnitud de la crisis, que requiere de un diagnóstico mucho más amplio que sólo las causas subyacentes del problema.

Hay muy poco rigor teórico o agudo sobre la crisis ecológica en general en el FSM por muchas razones, la gente está tan aterrada, hay tantas causas válidas para luchar, los problemas son difusos, con diferentes asuntos arraigados en localidades dispersas y nadie puede decidir cuáles son los límites entre una crisis y otra.

Son tantas interrogantes, como cuándo la crisis de los océanos pasó a la atmósfera. Es comprensible que la gente se repliegue a cuestiones simples como la proliferación de las botellas de plástico.

IPS: ¿Qué puede aportar de nuevo el FSM para avanzar hacia una solución?

JK: Actualmente existe un problema de definición en el FSM. Surgen distintas cuestiones que son trastornos ecosistémicos como la interrogante de cuándo se destruye el bosque por el monocultivo, por ejemplo.

Cada crisis ecosistémica tiene su propia realidad concreta y ubicación específica, como el desastre de Bhopal en India. La verdadera crisis ecológica es el conjunto de todas ellas, que se agravan con rapidez, se propagan por el mundo y aumentan de forma exponencial.

Si queremos encontrar la causa de las diferentes crisis sistémicas, tenemos que mirarlas a todas en conjunto y encontrar lo que tienen en común. Cada problema tiene su propia causa, pero virtualmente cada una de ellas está vinculada a la expansión capitalista y se le puede seguir el rastro hasta la puerta de un banco o una potencia imperial.

Si el FSM pretende atender el problema, debe identificar y articular la cuestión del capital global, que puede pensarse de forma metafórica como un cáncer que hace metástasis. Sin importar la forma que se elija para tratar la enfermedad, debe reconocerse que es una realidad.

IPS: ¿En qué ha cambiado el FSM desde su primera participación en 2003?

JK: Por desgracia, el FSM tiene tendencia a girar en falso debido a los límites inherentes a su eslogan y lema de “otro mundo es posible”, que es repetido hasta el cansancio y termina siendo desalentador porque nunca se llega a diseñar realmente.

Pero el hecho es que FSM es el único lugar en el que se puede articular una nueva realidad, no sólo pensar en la posibilidad de uno.

Lógicamente, deberíamos poder decir que ese “otro mundo” es el del Ecosocioalismo. Pero dada la naturaleza de las organizaciones no gubernamentales y su especialización en ciertas crisis, el FSM no se ha referido lo suficiente a la causa de la crisis del capitalismo. El foro debe identificar al enemigo y darle respuesta.

IPS: ¿Le parece que Dakar ofrece una oportunidad para lograrlo?

JK: Totalmente. África es uno de los lugares más vulnerables de la Tierra, lo que es tremendamente irónico pues es el menos industrializado del planeta.

El continente es saqueado por la despiadada extracción de recursos como ningún otro lugar del mundo, en primer lugar porque es rico. Y en segundo lugar, por la falta de protección para detener la llegada de las corporaciones. Hay más incentivo en África para comenzar a pensar de forma sistémica.

Dakar también es un centro mundial de investigación en ecología, mucho más que Nairobi, e incluso que Mumbai.

El calibre general de los intelectuales de izquierda presentes es extremadamente alto en Senegal.

IPS: ¿Qué puede hacer el FSM para lidiar con los desafíos que presenta el Foro Económico Mundial que se desarrolla casi simultáneamente?

JK: Tiene que cimentarse firmemente en una práctica y lógica anticapitalista. Es difícil, pero ciertamente posible. Creo que por encima de todo el FSM es un lugar donde una gran variedad de tendencias se encuentran, conscientes de que sus distintos problemas no son porque sí, sino que son sistemáticos y tienen que ver con la penetración del imperio y del capital global en cada rincón de la Tierra.

Para seguir con la analogía médica, si usted tiene un paciente con un tumor en el páncreas, sólo puede tratarlo una vez que los médicos concuerden en que se trata de cáncer. Recién en ese momento pueden reunirse a pensar en el remedio, y hay muchísimas formas de curar esto.

(FIN/2011)

DAKAR, Feb 10 (TerraViva) – The road to the large green tent is dusty and rather confusing, but once you get there you are immersed in a babel of women’s voices. The tent, hidden away in the wind and dust, some distance from the main World Social Forum events, has become the unofficial women’s tent at the WSF.It took a few days to establish itself, but it has become the place to go to hear women’s voices. Physical space has been a contentious issue following the cancellation of many of the venues, and gender activists led by the World March of Women felt the need to claim a site where women could speak freely without having to negotiate discursive space.

Both young and older activists checked in frequently here at this sometimes chaotic spot, with some women shouting passionately or playing drums, while others listened intently to the issues being discussed.

Marching at the opening of the World Social Forum. Credit: Abdullah Vawda/IPS

Under its green fabric, a colorful and vibrant debate has been bubbling, covering the plight of women in the conflict-struck region of Casamance in the south of Senegal,  gender-based violence, the difficulties in organising young women around issues of sexuality, HIV/AIDS and other challenges they face in patriarchal societies – and the perceived marginalisation of women’s issues at the World Social Forum itself.

Whilst some applauded the tent’s spirit, others worried that it stood as a symbol of women’s issues being marginalised in the wider context of the Forum.

The assembly where declaration is read has already come under fire that it might not  fully represent the voice of all women. perhaps at an event of this magnitude you will never get everyoen to agree on binding way forward

Fatima Aloo, a veteran Tanzanian activist and feminist, said the WSF has been a great platform for women who want to raise specific issues. “I have been impressed by the type of debates. For the first time, Africa is debating imperialism and the crisis of capitalism [and its effects] on the people.”

She said African women and their feminism have always been rooted on the continent. “I think the state of feminism is very much on the rise because African women have set their own agenda. It’s not been on anyone else’s terms.”

Not everyone agrees with Aloo’s assessment, however.

Amina Mama said most of the debates here about building Third World solidarity have “almost completely ignored what is happening with feminism and the women’s movement.

“We had people from Egypt interesting with very interesting presentations,” said the Nigerian feminist scholar and activist, “and they would list all the social forces that need to be mobilised – except the women’s movement.”

Mama, who chairs the board of the Global Fund for Women, contrasted the WSF experience with that of the African Feminist Forum held in Dakar in October 2010. “As a feminist – 30 years I’ve been involved with this – it concerns me that there’s still a parallelism going on. At time I felt as if i was in a time warp. I think that social movements have to take this up more seriously.”

This view is shared by Zimbabwean Tendai Makanza from the organisation ANSA (Alternatives to Neo-liberalism in Southern Africa ). “I think if you look at the number of events taking place at the WSF, I do not get the sense that gender or women’s issues are part of the discussion. It is very disappointing.”

The World March of Women was instrumental in establishing the green tent. The organisation is an international feminist action movement connecting grassroots groups working to eliminate the root causes of poverty and violence against women.

Brazilian Julia Di Giovanni, a WMW activist, admits that it has been difficult to organise events that focus on the women’s movement.

“We have had to work very hard to ensure grassroots voices are heard. We brought women from Colombia and the Democratic Republic of Congo to talk about gender-based violence and impact of the military on women.

“This has been a main focus for WMW and the Forum provided a safe space for women the talk about the impact of violence.”

Italian activist Francesca Rossi told IPS that she found the the testimonies about gender-based violence and listening to African women’s voices rewarding.

“It is important to hear from grassroots groups what is happening on the ground. I found it informative and I want to salute the women of Africa. They are brave and should be supported in their different causes.”

Sara Longwe, a feminist activist from Zambia said that “Gender-based violence is still seen as a health and welfare issue. We have to talk about it from a power point of view. It is about power relations. Women are speaking about it and the laws in different countries cannot deal with the violence.”

Young women at the WSF said they felt excluded and marginalised.

Cristina Calvo Alamillo from the Mujeres Fundacion (Women’s Foundation) based in Madrid, Spain said, “Young women are not being heard at the WSF. But they too are fighting to ensure young women are heard or at least given the space to raise their concerns.”

Her organisation is hard at work to “ensure African and Spanish organisations work together to empower young women in order to strengthen their capacity”.

“Young women have plenty of ideas but its difficult because of societal pressure to either get married or to have children.”

“We want to help organisations to create space for young women to empower themselves.”

A young American student, Colleen Brewster, told IPS that she found the WSF interesting and the varied of debates taking place.

Despite the gains women have made towards gender equality, it seems women have had to fight hard to be heard at this year’s WSF.

Mama summed it up like this: “Coming to the WSF is a way of replenishing, and to challenge the brothers, remind them of what is happening to women and try to bring them along.

“It is the younger generation that I think has a grasp of the issues and we must help them run with it.”

The final days of the World Social Forum are devoted to “convergence workshops” which will try to produce common positions and pave the way forward on the thematic issues.

(END/2011)

NEW YORK, Feb 10 (IPS/TerraViva) – Nyuma ya vichwa vya habari vya makongamano ya kijamii na maandamano ya kutumia nguvu, kupambana na ukandamizaji na kubadili dunia kunahitaji hatua endelevu zinazojikita katika jamii ya chini, kulingana na mwanaharakati wa haki ya kijamii wa Kenya.

Wakati Kongamano la Kijamii la Dunia mwaka huu likifanyika kikamilifu, IPS ilizungumza na Oloo, mwandishi, mfungwa wa kisiasa wa zamani na mratibu wa taifa wa WSF wa mwaka 2007, kuhusu nchi yake ya Kenya, maandamano yanayoendelea Kaskazini mwa Afrika na vuguvugu la kijamii duniani kote. Sehemu ya mahojiano inafuata.

Courtesy of Onyango Oloo.

Swali: Umepata nini katika maandamano yanayojitokeza katika eneo zima la Afrika Kaskazini? Ni kwa nini yanajitokeza sasa na unaamini kuwa yanaweza kusambaa katika kanda nyingine katika bara?

Jibu: Ninahamasishwa na kuvutiwa na kile kinachojitokeza nchini Misri na Tunisia. Mapinduzi yanaongezeka, kinyume na matangazo ya vyombo vikuu vya habari, yanatofautiana mno na birika la chai linalochemka ghafla.

Kinachojitokeza leo hii katika Afrika Kaskazini ni ushahidi wa harakati, ushindi na kurejea nyuma ambako kumejitokeza kwa miongo mingi na ni chanzo cha migogoro mingi mno ya kijamii – bila kujali kukosekana kwa muunganiko kati ya uundwaji wa ubeberu wa uliberali wa kisasa na mahitaji makubwa ya demokrasia, haki ya kijamii, amani na jamii bora.

Mapinduzi kwa asili yake siyo bidhaa zinazozalishwa kutoka kiwandani ambazo zinaweza kusafirishwa katika mfumo wa “shinda nishinde” katika nchi nyingine. Hata hivyo, nguvu ya mfano inapaswa kuwa kichocheo kwa ajili ya harakati nyingine za ukombozi wa kitaifa katika Afrika nzima na Mashariki ya Kati.

Swali: Kwa maoni yako, ni vuguvugu gani za kijamii zinazojitokeza nchini Kenya wakati huu?

Jibu: Hili ni swali gumu, kama siyo vigumu kulijibu. Kwanza, mtu hawezi kuweka vuguvugu za kijamii katika aina yoyote ile ya ukiritimba wa “umuhimu” nchini Kenya. Jambo la pili, na kuwa muwazi zaidi,  vuguvugu la kijamii nchini Kenya bado kwa kiasi kikubwa, ni dhaifu mno na wanaharakati wengi wako katika hatua ya uchanga.

Baadhi yao wamekamatwa na NGOs zinazopata ufadhili kutoka Magharibi ili ajenda zao zitekeleze vipaumbele vya wafadhili wa Amerika Kaskazini na mashirika ya wafadhili ya Ulaya.

Hata hivyo, naweza kutaja Bunge la Mwananchi kama shirika lililofanya kazi nzuri katika kusumbua hali ya ukoloni mamboleo.

Swali: Ni aina gani ya mafanikio au mifumo mbadala ya maendeleo nchini mwako, au katika Afrika kwa ujumla, ambayo yanaweza kuhamishiwa katika maeneo mengine ya dunia?

Jibu: Kuna maarifa mengi mno ya jadi ambayo mara nyingi “yanadhoofishwa” na vyombo vya habari vya Magharibi. Nazungumza kuhusu hifadhi ya maarifa ya jadi katika eneo la miti shamba na madawa ya jadi. Katika miaka michache iliyopita hata makampuni makubwa ya madawa yanakubali kuwa aina mbadala za afya ya jadi imeleta mifumo ya afya katika kushughulikia maladhi na magonjwa kama kisukari, magonjwa ya moyo, kansa ya kibofu, kifua kikuu na VVU/UKIMWI.

Rwanda imeonyesha njia ya kushughulikia amani na migogoro kupitia mahakama yake ya gacaca iliyoanzishwa baada ya mauaji makubwa ya kimbari katikati mwa miaka ya 1990.

Wakulima wa Afrika, kama ilivyo kwa wenzao wa Asia, wana njia bora zaidi za kuhifadhi mazingira na kuhifadhi maarifa ya mbegu tofauti na inavyofanya Monsantos ya dunia.

Kwa maoni yangu, wenzangu wa Kenya kutoka eneo linalozungumza lugha ya Maa wameonyesha ujasiri katika kushika utamaduni wao bila kuendeshwa na historia ya masalia yaliyohifadhiwa katika makumbusho.

Umoja Peace Village. Credit: Advocacy Project

Wanawake wa Afrika, kama wanawake wa Umoja Peace Village karibu na Nanyuki katikati mwa Kenya, wamekuja na mifumo ya kuwapatia uwezo wanaharakati wa kijinsia unaotokana na ukweli halisi kama watu wa kijijini, makabila ya ufugaji ya watu wachache – mshtuko kwa wale ambao wana imani kuwa harakati za kijinsia Afrika zinatumika mijini, kwa ajili ya wanawake wenye elimu ya chuo kikuu.

Swali: Ni njia gani bora ya wanaharakati wa kijamii kufanya sauti zao kusikika na kuhakikisha kuwa mawazo yanayojadiliwa katika makongamano kama ya WSF yanatafsiriwa katika ukweli wa mabadiliko ya kisera katika ngazi za kitaifa na kimataifa?

Njia bora ya kufanya sauti zao kusikika siyo kusubiri matukio ya mwaka na vipindi vya Kongamano la Kijamii la Dunia. Tunazungumza vizuri kwa kuwa na ufahamu, tukiwa tumeungana, wenye nguvu na kuwa na hatua endelevu ya kisiasa katika ngazi ya mitaa, kitaifa na ngazi ya bara.

Ninachokisema kwa maneno mengine ni kwamba wanaharakati wasijikusanye tu mbele ya sauti nzuri za taarifa za habari za CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera au hata naweza kusema IPS, lakini kusikiliza dada zao na kaka wanaozungumza nao majumbani, katika jumuiya za mitaa na katika nchi zao wakati wakichambua na kujipanga kukabiliana na aina maalum ya ukandamizaji wao na changamoto.

Kwa njia hiyo, wakati wanaelekea maeneo kama Dakar na Porto Alegre, wenzao kutoka maeneo mengine ya dunia watakachotaka kusikia ni sauti zenye nguvu kutokana na harakati zao wenyewe nyumbani kwao.

Kwa bahati mbaya, sikwenda Dakar mwaka huu kwasababu sikuwa na fedha zozote zile za kupanda ndege kwenda Senegal. Wanaharakati wengi katika Afrika walikabiliwa na changamoto hii. Ni kumbukumbu ya kusikitisha ya vikwazo vinavyotokana na tabaka vya kushiriki katika matukio kama Kongamano la Kijamii la Dunia – hata kama yanafanyika katika bara ambalo tunaliita nyumbani.

(END/2011)

Joel Kovel. Credit:Courtesy of Joel Kovel

Kanya D’Almeida interviews U.S. scholar and organiser JOEL KOVEL

NEW YORK, Feb 9, 2011 (IPS TerraViva) – As the powerful collective energy continues to surge through Dakar, veterans of the World Social Forum (WSF) are taking a moment to examine the history, trajectory and future of the alternative global movement.

Widely considered the father of the fast-growing Ecosocialist movement, Joel Kovel has played a leading role in the WSF since 2003, following the movement from Mumbai to Nairobi to Belem.

Co-author of the Ecosocialist manifesto, which details an alternative route to humanity’s current path of environmental destruction, Kovel told IPS that we have to name this “other world” and position it firmly against the threat of global capital. Excerpts from the interview follow.

Q: What has been your role in past WSFs?

A: Ecosocialism is inherently a global – not international – concept, so the WSF is an ideal place in which to discuss its main ideas. We presented the Ecosocialist manifesto in Nairobi in 2007 and revised it with a group of several hundred people. While Ecosocialism is growing magnificently in the third word, it is the fourth world – the world of the indigenous, stateless people – that is really at the forefront of this global issue.

Fourth world peoples live in communal relationships and are directly victimised by predatory oil and mining corporations that bore into the heart of the earth and destroy communities that are part of the soil. So we have depended on the unique locations of the WSF to disseminate the ideas of Ecosocialism.

Q: Does the World Social Forum sufficiently address the current ecological crisis?

A: The WSF tends to focus on specific areas within the broader issue of ecocide or eco-destruction, such as genetically modified seeds or the acidification of the oceans or deforestation. While addressing these issues is certainly necessary, it is not sufficient to deal with the magnitude of the crisis, which requires a much broader diagnosis of the underlying cause of the problem.

There is very little theoretical rigor or sharpness about ecological crisis as a whole at the WSF for many reasons – people are so terrified of the crisis before us, there are so many worthwhile causes to be fought for, problems are diffuse, with different issues rooted in dispersed localities, no one can decide what the boundaries are between one crisis and another. And there are so many questions, such as when does the crisis about the oceans become a crisis about the atmosphere? Understandably, people retreat into single issues like the proliferation of plastic bottles.

Q: What can the WSF do differently to move forward in solving the crisis?

A: Well there currently exists a definitional problem at the WSF. Different issues crop up which are eco-systemic disruptions – when a forest is destroyed over monoculture for example. Each eco-systemic crisis has its own site- specific and concrete reality, such as the Bhopal disaster in India. It is the collection of all these different crises, which are worsening with great rapidity, spreading outward globally and increasing exponentially, that is the real ecological crises.

If we want to find the cause for all the different systemic crises, we have to look at them together and find what is common to them all. While each problem has its own cause, virtually every single one of them is linked to capitalist expansion and can be traced to the door of a bank or an imperial power. If the WSF is to deal with this problem, is has to identify and articulate the problem of global capital, which can be thought of metaphorically – as a cancer that is metastasising. And no matter how you chose to treat the disease, you must first acknowledge that it is a reality.

Q: How has the WSF progressed since you first participated in 2003?

A: Unfortunately, the WSF has a tendency to spin its own wheels, so to speak, because of the inherent limits of its slogan and motto – “Another World is Possible”, repeated over and over, becomes discouraging because the shape of that other world is never really spelled out.

However, the fact remains that the WSF is the only place in which to articulate a new reality, not just the possibility of one. Logically, we should be able to say that this “other world” is the world of Ecosocialism. But due to the nature of NGOs and their specialisation in certain crises, the WSF has not yet sufficiently named the cause of the crisis as capitalism – the forum must name the enemy and respond to it.

Q: Do you think Dakar offers the opportunity to do this?

A: Absolutely. Africa is one of the most vulnerable places on earth, which is bitterly ironic given that it is the least industrialised part of the planet. The continent itself is more ravaged by the ruthless extraction of resources than anywhere else – firstly because it has resources and secondly because it lacks the protection to stop the corporations from coming in. So there is more incentive in Africa to start thinking systemically.

Dakar is also a centre of worldwide research in ecology, much more so than Nairobi, Belam and even Mumbai. The general caliber of the left intellectual presence is wonderfully high in Senegal. Despite being such a huge place, there are wonderful lines of communication between the far-flung corners of the African continent – it is very different from Asia and Europe in this respect.

Q: How can the WSF meet the challenges of the World Economic Forum occurring almost simultaneously?

A: It just has to be firmly grounded in an anti-capitalist logic and practice. It is hard but it’s certainly possible. I think above all else the Social Forum provides a place where many, many tendencies can come and meet together under the realisation that their separate troubles are not random but systematic, and have to do with the penetration of empire and global capital into every corner of the earth.

To use a medical analogy, if you have a patient with a tumor in her pancreas, it can only be dealt with once the doctors can agree that it is a cancer. They can then put their heads together and come up with ways to cure it – and there are many, many ways to cure it.

(END)