March 2003

Views expressed are those of the authors, not necessarily of the AFSC.

World Social Forum -- Powerful Without Power?

Susan George is Associate Director of the Transnational Institute (Amsterdam). Economist and author of many books on international debt, GATS, and other economic subjects, she is an American who has lived for decades in France, where in 1998 she helped found ATTAC, the Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions for the Aid of Citizens.

The first Porto Alegre (PoA) gathering [called the World Social Forum (WSF), to distinguish it, as a popular forum, from the gathering of heads of state in Davos, Switzerland that bills itslf as the World Economic Forum] in 2001 dealt mainly with analyzing the world situation, the second in 2002 stressed proposals for changing that situation and the third, right now, is supposed to be about devising strategies to achieve those changes.

Democracy, not Empire, Back by Popular Demand. New York, Feb. 15 © Ellen Shub

Naturally, nothing is as clear-cut as that and elements of all three will be present. Furthermore, with so many movements here for the first time, we need to establish a common understanding of our common problems and common adversaries. Let's take as much time as we need to make everyone feel included, remembering that we've covered an unbelievable amount of ground in less than five years--historically speaking this is an eye-blink.

I would, however, like to encourage Porto Alegre delegates to concentrate as much as possible on strategies for changing the balance of forces. In some cases, as in Brazil, this may mean that people whose ideas are very close to those of the global justice movement actually take State power as Lula has done.

But I share ATTAC's view that the movement itself should not become a political party; this would be a disaster for our objectives.

How to be powerful if one does not or cannot take State power?

This question is today perhaps the most difficult and the most important we can confront. I have sometimes said to respected friends that I simply don't understand what they mean when they are still calling for "revolution." If they mean what French philosopher Paul Virilio calls the "global accident," it would create so much human misery and chaos (and probably end in fascism) that I hope it can be avoided. I guess I can describe myself as a "radical reformist."

What is individual State power worth today? Even in Brazil, despite Lula's stunning victory, we can see that his government is hemmed in on almost every side by international forces--financial speculators, the IMF, transnational corporations.

This should point us in the right strategic direction. In one sentence, our movement must accept the most difficult task ever undertaken in human history: we have to democratize the international system and force it to serve the needs of everyone. As we are all aware, that system and its major actors currently serve only the need and the greed of a tiny minority. Change means at the most basic level building up our numbers. The increasing success of the WSF is thus a healthy sign. Beyond high points like PoA, this means patiently constructing alliances between groups coming out of different cultures. Since last year, for example, I would say that the alliance between the new social movement and the trade unions has been greatly strengthened; we must continue to build trust with them.

We need also to reach out to the growing peace movement which, in many countries, is not made up of the same people as the global justice movement. They are, in reality, two sides of the same coin if only they can help each other to see that. Some religious faith communities are also beginning to think in far more political terms, recognizing that there will be no justice on earth under the reign of neo-liberalism.

What we have not done well so far is to include the truly dispossessed in our ranks. The Brazilian Movimento sim Terra-MST (landless movement) shows us the way, always remembering that when people have to concentrate every moment on mere survival, they have little time or energy left for politics of any kind. The numbers, however, are potentially there and we must concentrate on strengthening the bonds between all these disparate groups which have basically the same interests.

Strengthen ourselves to do what? Most people will remain focused on local or national struggles as this is where they feel the bite of neo-liberalism most painfully. Such struggles are vital, because they are creating the spaces where politics can take place, particularly for the most disadvantaged. More and more, these apparently "local" battles are in fact global--look at the ones in Bolivia against control over water by transnationals.

I'm impressed by the increasing realization, especially among young people, that we must work internationally to force international actors to change, or to get rid of them. Some people insist that international taxes on corporations or financial transactions are "reformist" and not worthy of their notice. I think that is profoundly wrong. Such taxes would be as revolutionary as the introduction of national income taxes a century ago--without which public services, public education and health care, and the (still highly imperfect) Welfare State could never have been financed.

Without such taxes and a democratic distribution of the proceeds (look to the budgeting system of PoA for a partial model), there will be no money forthcoming for the huge percentage of people now living in dire circumstances. The money is there, on international financial markets, in transnational banks and corporations, and we must go after it where it is--otherwise we will never have a just world system and the rich-poor gap will continue to widen.

To change the international system, we must still work partly through national governments because that is one level of power we can touch. For example, we should make it too costly for our governments to support the IMF, the debt-system, the WTO, the impending war against Iraq. We will have a space in PoA to work on strategies and on merging national struggles into the broader global one.

Just a word of caution stemming from my own experience in PoA last year: I suggest you go to the last leg of this meeting where everyone and everything is interesting, where you are tempted to be in at least three places at once, with one goal in mind - whatever goal seems to you most urgent and that you can move towards. Otherwise, you're going to be pulled in 100 different directions and come home frustrated.

My own target is the General Agreement on Trade in Services, the GATS, and more generally the WTO; yours is doubtless different. Whatever it is, use this unique opportunity with self-discipline to network and strategize with your fellow activists worldwide.

Previous Article    Next Article