Bamako Appeal spikes controversy

Peter Waterman

7 February, 2006

My first, fast, and possibly superficial, reaction (if anyone's interested): I would sign this appeal, I consider it radical, rather comprehensive, and an excellent basis for extensive discussion and amendment (e.g. specific critique of fundamentalisms, the right to sexual options, a lengthening and specification of the section on labour...).

I find within the labour section many of the concerns I have addressed over many years, I would be interested to engage specifically with this.

I was opposed to the so-called Manifesto of Porto Alegre because of its authorship (a group of overwhelmingly male, middle-aged, white intellectuals, some of whom rapidly backed away from it when they saw it and the reaction to it), its site of issue (a luxury hotel), f its pretensions (confusing it with the WSF taking place at that time), and because of its banality.

This one, to me, seems on first impression, to have surpassed most of these shortcomings, though one would like to know the nature of the conference that gave it birth. And, again, it will create the impression of being the position of the WSF that is taking place at that time.

As for its implications on the WSF more generally, I see no necessary obligation for the WSF 'as such' to endorse and promote the document. The project can continue in parallel with/in the WSF - just as the ineffective Call of Social Movements, or in the place of such.

PS. Actually, this appeal has little or nothing to do with the inter-state alliance of authoritarian and populist Third World states at Bandung. And this is to its great advantage.