A Fiesta of Protest at Porto Alegre

PORTO ALEGRE: It was founded as the Un-Davos, the Anti-Davos, which would meet simultaneously with the events in Switzerland. And indeed the differences between the settings of the World Economic Forum and the World Social Forum could hardly be more striking: an exclusive ski resort on the one side, and a sun-baked Brazilian industrial town on the other. And whereas Davos hosts about 2200 of the global rich and famous in a cordoned-off village, about 150,000 to 200,000 people assembled in an open tent city near the center of Porto Alegre. However, the open space and diversity that make the anti-Davos gathering attractive may also prevent it from rising above the cacophony as an effective voice of a global civil society.

According to its charter of principles, the World Social Forum is designed to provide an "open meeting space for … groups that are opposed to neo-liberalism and the domination of the world by … any form of imperialism." Furthermore, it aims to contribute to building a "planetary society," which should lead to just and well-balanced forms of globalization. In that manner, the gathering is not opposed to globalization as such, but only to particular incarnations thereof. Generally, the attending groups shared the idea that reducing the public sector and liberalizing trade will not ultimately benefit poor countries and disadvantaged people. Against neo-liberal globalization they advocate alternative globalizations or the new slogan of "alter-globalization."

The Forum indeed offered plenty of opportunity to hear about the alternative globalization from prominent intellectuals such as Immanuel Wallerstein, Leonardo Boff, and Antonio Negri. Other events were characterized by the sharp rhetoric of large international activist groups, such as the Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions for the Aid of Citizens (ATTAC). One could attend information sessions by international trade unions from Latin America, East Asia, Europe, and other parts of the world. Or one could talk to smaller NGOs and projects, ranging from Third World Foundations to groups such as the Coalition for a World Parliament.

A large number of events, in one way or another, related to Latin American Socialist parties. Some – usually smaller gatherings – bore the remnants of ultra-Marixist rhetoric lashing out against the "capitalist pigs" and calling for a revolution by the world's working classes. But most events were more conciliatory in their approaches, calling for reforms over revolution. For example, the Italian NGOs ROBA dell' Autro Mundo and Mani Tese organized a panel discussion on developing international legal frameworks, which would enforce the multinational corporations' social responsibilities. In fact, a public discussion with IMF and World Bank representatives, which drew some protests, in the end amounted to a fruitful exchange of opinions. Responding to his critics from international NGOs, the World Bank representative, John Garrison, maintained that free trade was the key to achieving dignity and justice at a global level. But he also welcomed pressure from civil society to make governments and corporations deliver on their promises.

During the past four years, this idea of a global civil society mobilizing against "McWorld" has proved to be quite successful in getting public attention. In 2001, the first World Social Forum was organized by grassroots movements such as the French ATTAC and partly sponsored by the Brazilian Workers' Party (PT). Whereas the first event drew a modest number of 12,000 activists, the fourth Forum (in Mumbai, 2004) attracted 80,000 people. This year, the number of participants rose to a staggering 150,000 to 200,000, and featured 2500 events organized by more than 5700 organizations from more than 100 countries. This year, more than 5400 journalists went to Porto Alegre to cover an event that in many countries received more public attention than the parallel meeting in Davos.

Yet in the midst of this firework of activities and initiatives, one must ask a crucial question: Can the World Social Forum truly amount to a global voice for the people and by the people? Except for presenters and panelists, almost all participants were high school and university students from Brazil. Since the translation equipment hardly ever functioned, communication between international visitors and the bulk of the audience proved difficult. As one panelist from Africa pointed out, a striking feature of the crowds was their racial homogeneity. Except for a few visitors from East Asia, India, and Africa, the World Social Forum was almost exclusively attended by people of European origin. This general trend was certainly aggravated by choosing one Brazil's "whitest" cities as a venue. In fact, beer and food vendors "of color" may have outnumbered the participants of African or Asian descent.

In order to ensure more regional representation, next year's World Social Forum will most probably be spread among several simultaneous meetings in different world regions. The disadvantage of this regional diversification is that the Forum may lose its character as a meeting place for all kinds of internationally operating NGOs. Still, the question of how to balance regional representation with the need for a unique discussion forum is not the only challenge to be tackled in the future. How can the Forum combine its character as an open space with the quest of forming one voice?

So far, the groups in Porto Alegre may share certain doubts about neo-liberalism and US foreign policy, but they are far from embodying a coherent – or at least compatible – set of political opinions. Except for the difference between radical anti-capitalist groups and more conservative organizations, a seriously contested issue was the question of culture. Many participants echoed the criticism that socialism is yet another Western agenda with a strong disregard for different cultural traditions. In that context, culturalist critics of left-wing groups argued that the world public opinion has increasingly turned to religions and cultural traditions in its disillusionment with Westernization. According to them, the global left remains oblivious to the widespread, rapid growth of religions and cultural identities. Indeed, religious groups with political aspirations – such as the Orthodox church in Russia, certain Hindu movements, and a wide variety of Islamic groups – were hardly represented in Porto Alegre.

In the future, it may be possible to add religious representatives to the World Social Forum. But in that case, a defined set of global objectives and values may be even more elusive. There is a certain danger of the World Social Forum turning into an amorphous carnival of initiatives and projects. To counter this trend, a group of 19 high-profile activists, including Immanuel Wallerstein, Tariq Ali, and Eduardo Galeano, tried to hammer out a consensus document for the 2005 conference. Its 12 points include proposals ranging from debt cancellation to the adoption of a Tobin tax on international money transfers. Yet this "G19-group" drew criticism for trying to monopolize the Forum's agenda.

However, if the World Social Forum wants to become a global pressure group, it must narrow down its agenda. Only with a clearly defined program will a much needed dialog between Porto Alegre and Davos be possible. However, formulating such an agenda means excluding a range of alternative options and viewpoints. If the World Social Forum wants to deepen its international impact, it will no longer be able to claim to represent global civil society in toto.