An exchange of ideas that took place in the context of the preparations for the WSF-related meetings in Durban, South Africa, and in reaction to the article of Roberto Savio (IPS) "World Social forum : the cradle of global civil society".

Heikki Patomäki (NIGD), 23 July 2006, social forum lists and to others

Dear Susan,

thanks for your reply. I agree with many of your points.

It seems that I was somewhat unclear in my first message, so please let me clarify a bit. On the one hand, I think these two historical lessons (from the 20th century experiences of Leninism and social-democracy, respectively) are genuine and we should not haste to do anything in ignorance of them.

On the other hand, I also think that the collective principles of the WSF implicitly reflect an excessive emphasis on the negative lessons of the past experiences. These principles might thus be counterproductive in a number of ways. Most importantly, the concept of open space and related ideas of pluralism and diversity seem to prevent any collective learning or agency from emerging out of global civil society.

Thus, I would like propose that we should try to move on and develop new ways of organizing our activities, including the possibility of forming a global political party. This takes a lot of rethinking, of course, since any organization of this kind should be democratic and transcultural (and avoid, of course, Eurocentrism). It would also need to develop dialectically with a new global framework of institutions.

Some Leftist people and organizations in the WSF remain committed to the Leninist model of politics. Others are closely connected to various social- democratic parties (including the corruption-ridden PT in Brazil). Still many other activists, both young and old, including anarchists and "postmodernists", revere the notion of open space to such an extent that they see any attempt at organizing collective action as a menace. Under these circumstances, it is very difficult to get an idea of any joint action accepted.

The 'we' in my proposal should be read as an open invitation to those who are not content with mere occasional global gatherings among the diverse critics of neoliberalism, violence and imperialism, but would like (i) to experiment with new forms of democratic agency and (ii) transform the prevailing global framework of institutions into something less violent and ecologically destructive, in order to create a more democratic, just and sustainable world.

We would need to develop both some abstract ideals for the long-run and concrete reform proposals for the short-run (we already have many of the latter).

My impression is that it would be possible to move forward swiftly.

Best wishes,

yours as ever,

Heikki

PS. To Peter: the führerprinzip was adopted in the NSDAP already in the early 1920s, at the time when Lenin was still alive. In that sense we may talk of Stalin following Hitler's model of leadership whether that was ever conscious or not (bearing also in mind that the Soviet economy was modeled on the German war economy of WWI, admired by Lenin). It goes without saying that neither of these sources of ideas and practical models was ever stressed in the official rhetorics of the CPSU.