Workers Weekly? Sounds like yet another trotskyist paper to me. I think if anyone's trying to undermine the ESF then quite frankly it's Workers Weekly.

Shooting the messenger is a cheap shot, which is revealing.

Politicallty, the ESF looks like a dud, and organisationally looks like a disaster.

Dont risk wasting your money and time in Ally Pally, go to Beyond ESF.

Yes, go to the alternative spaces, and meet up with other people exactly the same as you. Instead of communicating and debating with thousands of europeans, you will simply detach yourself from the movement. Good idea.

Ulyanov is a literalist sheep - baaa, baaa.

To ‘sigh’ and to use the description “ detach yourself from the movement” about those who don't flock together into the same big room, and who don’t listen to the same boring hackneyed speeches - is pretentious nonsense.



And the previous comment:

“Workers Weekly? Sounds like yet another trotskyist paper to me. I think if anyone's trying to undermine the ESF then quite frankly it's Workers Weekly”,

was, quite frankly, made by a disingenuous member of the SWP, who wants to, quite frankly, slag off Workers Weekly, and who learned the phase ‘quite frankly’ from SWP top nob, Alex, quite frankly, Calincos.

dont you "beyond esf" people feel cheap? this is how it looks like from the outside:

"ESF has been going for 3 years. tens of thousands of people attend it every year. a bunch of spitful and malicious people decided to hold an alternative european social forum, in the *same* country, in the *same* city and EVEN ON THE SAME FUCKING DAYS!!".

now. . . think about that. thats how cheap you look, thats how people percieve you. you could have had your own "esf" a few months along the line or in another country. you had the choice of thousands of european cities and the whole fucking gregorian calendar to choose from! but NAAHHH! why not just hijack all the hardwork/publicity that someone else has done? why not just wretch someone elses event? why be social and communal, but instead lets be sectarian and dogmatic! lets try to prevent people from attending both the esf and the "beyond esf" by holding them on the same days! lets make people choose, and thus prevent some of them from hearing the voices of people who have travelled from across the globe to speak about their plight! no, why work together?! lets all be like 2 year old BRATS! Hell that *clearly* the sort of world we'd all love to be living in, would we? a world full of sectarian brats. what the fuck is wrong with you people!! why do you have to deliberatly ruin other peoples events!!

if the ESF *didn't* happen, would you dickheads still be holding your "alternative" events?

"non sectarian grown up". You are just too huge an idiot to bother with.

Tell me these are your first ever political thoughts, and, I would believe you. Spare us all, please, and dont have any more.

They exist to wind you up, and burn up as much of your time as possible. They can't be convinced of anything.

This one is apparently a fan of this right-wing group:
 http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/uploaded_files/news_files/42_04-07-20%20European%20Social%20Forum.doc

Do yourself a favour.

cheers

The admission price alone is a barrier to many people who want to attend the official events. So a diversity of unofficial events is not only healthy and beautiful, but necessary too.

Why not give people more choice of events to attend?

thats right h, dont even try to formulate a response. dont bother even *trying* to answer one of the questions.

"." partially valid point, people should *definitely* be given access to the full spectrum of information. except i think the "beyond esf" could have been done a few months down the line. if it was, i could have easily attended the seminars. most people could have. there are so many events at the esf already that its impossible to attend them all (they have overlapping seminars which i think is a bit unfair).

but this "beyond esf" business of the same day, the same city and even using a similar name?! that shit just goes down with the words: jealously, low-life, sectarian scum! how can *anyone* possibly deny that?!

its *exactly* this sort of behaviour which keeps us divided and the capitalists laughing their heads off, safe in the knowledge that theres more than enough "wretchers" on the left to spoil any concept of class unity. there's nothing wrong with disagreeing and informing people of new ideas, thats a *brilliant* thing to do! exchange thoughts not bullets. but there *is* something wrong with being spiteful and maliciously trying to wretch other peoples events, man thats just sick, its a really sick thing to do!!

What you have written "non sectarian grown up", is the mad bollocks of a reverse inverter. You cant see it, we can. It's too stupid to respond to, honest; it's obvious you really dont know shit from chocolate about the ESF or left politics.

Your cack reminds me how interesting, intelligent, fun and politically swtched on and progressive members of the SWP can be, and how fantastic it is that genuine lefts of all angles: horizontals, incliners, reversers, side-swingers, circlers and verticals are drawn to activities in, of, under, around and even inside the ESF tent.

The outside ESF events are just as much a part of the ESF as the famous names speaking at Alexandra Palace.

It's not one or the other, it's all together, at the same time.

The main esf has hundreds of events clashing, so does the autonomous esf - the more events there are the more choice there is, the richer the whole convergence.

And it's not a case of the autonomous events being fully seperate in some ghetto. People and groups are participating in both, inside and outside. The division lines are blurred. Except one will cost you £30 and is supported by the GLA to the tune of around £480,000, the other is free and self financed.

If anyone's being divisive or a "splitter", it's the people who make out it's either one or the other. The autonomous events websites and a lot of the leaflets carry several web addresses including the official ESF one where people can register for the official event.

One important point, the autonomous ESF also has several events discussing the ESF itself, its processes and the methodologies as well as that of the World Social Forum (doesnt that tell you something?).

Have a great time folks...

Latest update

At the September 30 programme group meeting, not one single important amendment to the list of chairs was accepted. The meeting - this time packed with members of the SWP and Socialist Action - again took to voting in order to make sure that no minority or dissenting voices would be heard in the plenary sessions (despite the fact that the list of plenary speakers was once thrown out precicsely because it was voted on).

The democratic opposition (basically everybody who is not a member of either SWP or SA) proposed only seven changes to the list of 27 chairs. But only Jo Hamilton from the anti-cimate change group Rising Tide was accepted (and it is unclear if she will actually accept the position after the stitch up of the rest of the list).

So there will be not one single rank and file trade union militant - but nine fulltimers of the top of the union bureaucracy. No Mike Marqusee - only 'trusted' people from the SWP's Stop the War Coalition. And no representative from any anti-racist organisation that is not linked to London's mayor Ken Livingstone.

Instead, there will fourteen people on the plenary platforms linked to either Socialist Action or the SWP.

--------------------------------

Last week’s meeting of the programme group discussed which chairs “residing in Britain” should be put forward for the 27 plenary sessions to be held during the ESF, which takes place in London from October 15-17. These sessions are the only ones which are the property of the whole ESF - the majority of meetings (seminars and workshops) are organised by groups from across Europe themselves. Having pushed through an unimaginative list of rightwing speakers for these sessions against considerable opposition (see Weekly Worker September 16), the organisations in control of the ESF have unsurprisingly not changed their undemocratic ways when it comes to the selection of chairs (though, apparently, that is what they promised some disgruntled ESF activists).


Chairs at plenary sessions do not simply choose contributors from the floor - they have also been given a five-minute slot do a bit of intervening themselves. In fact, they are the most powerful people on the platform. No wonder then that we have seen fierce arguments when it comes to who should be chosen. The ruling clique of Socialist Action and the Socialist Workers Party once more put together a slate, which was - as usual - not circulated in advance. Heaven forbid that anybody should actually look at it beforehand, let alone make suggestions for potentially better choices.

Apparently, according to programme group chair Rahul Patel (SWP), this list was “put together after broad consultation with the different movements”. This process of “consultation” basically consists of SA- and SWP-sponsored organisations phoning each other up and haggling over lists between themselves. Only the NGOs are actually able to put forward their own suggestions - because neither the SWP, Socialist Action nor the mayor have any foothold in them.


The meeting did not actually come to any final decisions - on the insistence of Redmond O’Neill. Livingstone’s adviser on transport (and a leading member of Socialist Action) insisted right from the start of the meeting that the whole list should “only be discussed as a whole” and argued against going through it one by one. He also proposed (successfully) that a further meeting should be called for September 30 to discuss the list again. In the meantime, some more mysterious “consultation” would be going on.


The real reason for comrade O’Neill’s suggestion was quite obviously the make-up of the meeting: for some reason, the SWP only managed to bring a handful of their members to the 50-strong gathering. Socialist Action and GLA-sponsored groups brought another 15 or so - and the rest was made up of members of the ‘democratic opposition’ (basically anybody who is not in the orbit of either SA or the SWP). The SWP’s Chris Nineham - always far more blatant than comrade O’Neill - suggested that “at the next meeting, we should come to decisions with indicative voting”.

Undoubtedly, he will be making sure that enough of his comrades show up on that occasion.

Incidentally, as of the evening of September 28, the September 30 meeting has still not been advertised on the ESF website or by mailshot: quite obviously, the “consultation” is only supposed to involve groups and individuals who are ‘on message’. No doubt, the list of potential chairs that will be presented to this meeting will be pretty identical to the first one.


The proposed list for the ‘Peace’ section is filled with friends of Ken Livingstone in and outside the Labour Party: Jeremy Corbyn MP, Alice Mahon MP, Bruce Kent from the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and the SWP’s Chris Nineham.

After having elected only general secretaries to speak in the plenary sessions, “the trade unions” have apparently again chosen exclusively high-ranking members of their own bureaucracy to become chairs: Diana Holland OBE (TGWU women’s officer) sits on the Labour Party national executive, where she has played a rather unimpressive role. On crunch issues, she often chooses to abstain - like when it came to decide if George Galloway should be re-admitted into the Labour Party, for example. Gloria Mills MBE (Unison’s organiser for equality) was appointed by the then home secretary, Jack Straw, to serve on the Commission for Racial Equality and she also sits on the Labour Party national policy forum. Lucy Kelly (deputy general secretary of Amicus) is the only suggested trade union chair without any awards from the queen.

Jeremy Dewar from Workers Power suggested that the CPGB’s Lee Rock (London regional organiser of the civil services union, PCSU) should be considered for chairing one session, “so that we have at least one rank and file union activist on the platform”. However, Rahul Patel refused to take this on board: “We have been told by the PCS that they do not want to be part of the ESF, as they are too busy preparing their forthcoming strike.”

As this was news to Lee Rock, he asked comrade Patel after the meeting who exactly in the PCSU told him that. Unfortunately, comrade Patel could not remember. Strangely, he also could not recall how he might have come by this information. Needless to say, comrade Rock will again be put forward as a chair at the next programme meeting - in the meantime he will be seeking official support from his union. The SWP-SA had previously refused to allow the PCSU’s leftwing general secretary, Mark Serwotka, to be a speaker from an ESF platform (although he is one of dozens of speakers at the final demonstration) - and that despite the fact that the union is engaged in defending tens of thousands of jobs that are about to be wiped out by chancellor Gordon Brown.

The ‘Anti-racist, black, Asian and minority ethnic’ section has supposedly chosen almost exclusively people from organisations closely associated with Livingstone or SA: the National Assembly Against Racism, Jewish Council for Racial Equality, Society of Black Lawyers, Unite Against Fascism, etc. The most important plenary in this section is of course the one in which Livingstone himself will be speaking. It is suggested that the plenary entitled ‘Stop fascism and the far right’ should be chaired by the SWP’s Weyman Bennett. Weyman used to be the chair of the SWP’s Anti-Nazi-League (ANL), before it closed down shop in favour of Unite Against Fascism. He is now co-secretary of UAF - Livingstone himself holds the position of chair. No doubt comrade Weyman will be asked to make sure no troublemakers get to speak - those who might criticise Livingstone’s controlling role in the ESF or his disgusting call for RMT tubeworkers to break their union’s strike.

All in all, there are three straight members of Socialist Action on the list (Redmond O’Neill, Anne Kane and Milena Buyum), along with four from the SWP. Two members of the Morning Star’s Communist Party of Britain are being put forward to speak in plenary sessions on ‘Political parties and the social movements’ (the only plenaries where the speakers are not yet finalised). While Andrew Murray is supposed to speak as a representative of the ‘social movements’, his general secretary, Rob Griffiths, has been suggested on behalf of “the communist family” (and their comrade Kate Hudson has been confirmed as a speaker in an anti-war plenary).

Not bad for an organisation which has had so little input into the ESF process … The important thing here is the quality, no doubt: over the years, the CPB has proven itself to be very loyal to Livingstone indeed. CND chair Kate Hudson has only recently changed her official membership from Socialist Action to CPB - though her links to her former comrades are quite evidently still going strong.
Needless to say, the CPGB has not been approached by the rest of the “family” to choose our representative for this particular plenary session. But, come on, who really wants to listen to the young cousin when they can have boring old uncle telling the same story over and over again instead? Anyway, it’s best to ignore that rude upstart who keeps wanting to talk about those embarrassing family secrets …

Whose demo is it?

As in previous years, this year’s ESF is to end with a demonstration. However, ever since the SWP’s Chris Nineham announced that he would be forming a ‘working group’ to prepare for it, he has not been able to report much to the various ESF committees (nothing apart from the route of the march, in fact). And now it turns out that this ESF demonstration has been miraculously changed into a demo “called by the Stop the War Coalition, Campaign against Nuclear Disarmament and the Muslim Association of Britain” (Stop the War website and leaflets). Neither the ESF website nor any of the ESF publicity material has even mentioned it.

Not only that. The main theme agreed for the demo at the last ESF preparatory assembly in Brussels was “For another Europe in another world”, with additional, but lesser emphasis, on the war and the US elections. A wide range of representatives from Europe were very outspoken in their criticism of the SWP’s attempt to focus the demonstration mainly on the forthcoming US elections. “We are all against Bush - that is surely not the question,” said Annick Coupé from the French delegation, for example. “However, we can only really fight his neoliberal agenda if we take up all the struggles that are currently going on in Europe. This is where we live.” A remark that was greeted with loud and extended applause from about three quarters of the audience.

Unfortunately, the Stop the War Coalition (run by the SWP) has not only decided to take the demo off the ESF’s hands - it has also changed the theme. The only leaflets and posters advertising the demo carry the huge slogans, ‘Time to go: Bush out! Troops out!’ Not even on the back of the leaflet has space been found to reproduce the ESF slogan agreed in Brussels. In short, there is not a word about Europe in any of the propaganda.

Daily assemblies

Leading comrades from across Europe have now taken up the call for daily meetings at the ESF to plan for the Assembly of Social Movements, which takes place on the last day of the ESF. The ASM is a way around the ridiculous rule that bans social forums from taking any actions or deciding on any statements, a rule imposed by the self-appointed elite running the World Social Forum.

On the international email list, comrades Sophie Zafari (for the French delegation) and Franco Russo (for the Italians) have in the last few days repeatedly insisted that these meetings should go ahead to ensure a more democratic and inclusive set-up of the ASM. They have been backed up by a number of organisations from Britain and delegations from other countries.

However, when CPGB comrades brought up this issue at a number of ESF meetings in London, both the SWP and Socialist Action were less than keen on it. Chris Nineham, for example, announced that there would be no need to reserve any rooms for such daily ASM meetings (see Weekly Worker September 23). No wonder, really. Socialist Action’s main interest in the ESF is to make sure it will be a tame and fully controlled Livingstone jamboree. October 17 will not only be the last day of the ESF - no doubt it will also mark the end of SA’s involvement in this forum for European left unity.

The story is a little more complicated with the SWP. It had hoped that by staging the ESF in London it could become another ‘big player’ in Europe, alongside Rifondazione Comunista, the Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire, etc. Unfortunately, though, with only around 1,200 active members and next to no weight in the trade unions or local communities, the SWP does not really match up. Its cloned sects in the International Socialist Tendency have even less impact.

However, the SWP’s biggest problem is not so much its reduced size. The reason why the comrades will not even come close to Rifondazione’s or even the LCR’s influence over the working class is their deep-rooted economism and total dismissal of important political questions. In the undying words of Chris Nineham, to talk about Europe and its new constitution is “boring”. Questions of democracy and how we are ruled are seen as a diversion from the ‘real issues’: trade unions, the NHS, public services, etc (important as these are). The state, and how our rulers rule - either in individual countries or on the level of Europe - is a “non-issue”.

Our comrades from across Europe, on the other hand, have made it very clear that their main interest in the ASM is precisely to launch a European-wide campaign against the EU constitution. However, it is the war or nothing for the SWP. Vital as it is to build up a movement against the occupation of Iraq, it is criminal to waste this opportunity to take steps towards closer left unity across the continent in opposition to the EU of the bankers.

dont even try to answer the questions "h". yup, just slag me off. make insulting remarks accusing me of being one of those wank swp supporters. but clearly, dont *even* try to engage me in a debate over "beyond esf" being held at the same place/time/city/country/similar-name with the intent of wretching an existing event.

ps: i know enough about leftwing politics to know that for most its not about helping people, its about pushing forward your fucking stupid sectarian ideas.

Though, with only around 16 members I now understand what upsets the Weekly Worker. The CPGB - the G stand for 'Great' - was until recently an organisation of 26 members. Yes 26. Then one was expelled, there was a split to form the Red Party and finally several of their leading members had enough and left.

I am sorry, it's my fault that every fucking freak show in town has been posting comments here.

quotes: "the more events there are the more choice there is, the richer the whole convergence".

a bit of a contradiction dont you think? there are 900 events/seminars at the esf in 4 days, say 12 hours a day of "uptime" makes 18 seminars happening at any given time. for me: THAT SUCKS! high prob that i'd want to go to more than one seminar at the same time. VERY HIGH PROBABILITY given its a leftwing event.

the beyond esf, *blatently* does *not* help reduce this ratio, if you disagree: then a degree in mathematics in not for you! i agree with the concept of giving people choices and debating ideas. *not* forcing people to choose as the beyond esf is clearly doing. what do they have to be "afraid" of? that people may find out that there is more to life then just anti-authoritarianism? that people in africa would rather have food/agriculture-tools given to them by NGOs/UN/governments then watch their children starve to death, but at least be happy knowing - "no ones the boss of me! i'm free to starve slowly or quickly!". people want to *learn* about the world. hold your beyond esf, *after* the esf and then you can put forward your case for why african people shouldn't accept farm tools from heiracical/authoritarian organisations like the United Nations.

(so easy) the esf costs money because people like babel want their flights paid for and free accommodation and food. the autonomous esf spaces are having problems with translators (as is clear from their last minute postings). its a european event, not an english one and translators dont come cheap.

Middlesex University is a dump. i have a friend who went there; its no IC/UCL/KCL. it doesn't have the number of lecture theatres to hold 30,000 people. you may have a mate called dave with a large backyard, but i dont think even he can accomodate that many people. especially for popular speakers like monbiot who *thousands* of people are going to want to see (me included!).

quote: "One important point, the autonomous ESF also has several events discussing the ESF itself, its processes and the methodologies as well as that of the World Social Forum (doesnt that tell you something?)".

yes. the *really* are conceitful sectarian wankers and i'm *not* a looney! i've never heard of any seminars in the esf about the beyond esf people, have you?

lets be under *no* illusion who started the "world social forum", a brazillian socialist party who's british sister org is called. . . yes, the FUCKING SWP. let us be under NO illusion about who owns and controls the esf, the SWP. they and their sister orgs around europe/world started it, they run it. and yes they are wankers and yes that logo is funny!!

i dont like the SWP. but i dislike sectarian wankers *even* more, and the beyond esf fall into that last category very well. last years esf was really good, and this year i suspect will also be good (despites certain people best efforts).

and "h", this is not all your fault. you dont have a monoply on being a bastard, i also work in that department.

"non-sectarian" bellowed:
"lets be under *no* illusion who started the "world social forum", a brazillian socialist party who's british sister org is called. . . yes, the FUCKING SWP. let us be under NO illusion about who owns and controls the esf, the SWP. they and their sister orgs around europe/world started it, they run it."

Wrong again, liar.

The WSF was started out by several groups, notably ATTAC, the MST, a few NGOs and unions, and a lorryload of independent activists.

Here's the real history from the WSF site itself:
 http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/main.asp?id_menu=2_1&cd_language=2

No mention whatsoever of the tiny Brazilian franchise of the SWP, "Revolutas":
 http://www.revolutas.org/

See, you can tell they're SWP, yes the FUCKING SWP, look at the placards and shitty papers the middle-class students are waving around in the graphic at the top.

Tell us some more lies, IN CAPITALS, we love it.

go to the ESF website, how many mentions of SWP? go to the STWC, do you get the impression that the SWP run the show? my mates have been talking about the brazillian socialists running the show for quite sometime, not to say they're right, but googling around indicates they no making it up:

"The first WSF was organized by the French Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions for the Aid of Citizens (ATTAC) and the Brazillian Workers Party (PT). It was held from January 25 to January 30, 2001 in Porto Alegre, Brazil, one of the PT's strongholds. 12,000 people attended from around the world.
 http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/World+Social+Forum

". . .The Israeli-Brazilian godfather of the WSF, Oded Grajev – the tycoon who bankrolled Brazil's socialist president's election campaign. . ."
 http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1075730352541&p=1006953079865

"The decision to move the WSF out of Brazil was a controversial one. The WSF is a fruit of a distinctly Brazilian political culture and social movement know-how. The Brazilian home of the WSF is the southern city of Porto Alegre, the site of the world's first participatory budget process under the leadership of the PT (Workers' Party). Porto Alegre was chosen as the site of the first WSF precisely because its experiment with participatory democracy represents an actually-existing alternative to neoliberal governance and the local PT administration could provide much-needed infrastructure and financial support to the WSF."
 http://www.radiofeminista.net/ene04/notas/india.htm

there are hundreds of articles, and yes i am just google fishing for sites (maybe that jpost one is a bad one, dont like them, but it mentions the name of a key funder for the WSF, gives it more clout). i conceed this is going to be a hard topic to finalise, but clearly:

I'M NOT RETRACTING MY CLAIM THAT THE WSF WAS STARTED/CO-ORDINATED BY A BRAZILLIAN SOCIALIST PARTY WITH TIES TO THE SWP!!

enough caps for you?

wish i didn't stop google fishing! Zmag is a pretty credible source

"The World Social Forum [2002] is taking place in Porto Alegre, capital of the State of Rio Grande do Sul (Brazil). The political process that made this encounter possible was the following: the Worker's Party (PT, Partido de los Trabajadores) won the elections in this City, and undertook some limited municipal reforms."

 http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=41&ItemID=1979

ps: i'm not going anywhere. like i said to "h", i work in the "being-a-bastard-and-ruining-your-utopian-plans" department.

That's Lula's party. They have no ties whatsover with the SWP. Here are the SWP's affiliate parties:
 http://www.swp.org.uk/INTER/INTER.HTM

So as you can see from your own site, the SWP's sister party in Brazil is Revolutas, not PT.

Your party the SWP has so far been pretty critical and dismissive of the PT in fact, since the two parties have no ties yet, so the PT (like Chavez) must not be really "revolutionary" in your view:
 http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.swp.org.uk+lula
 http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.swp.org.uk+PT

But now that the Social Forums are gaining momentum, your party is (late as usual) conducting its usual "co-opt and neutralize" tactics.

More background on the origins of the ESF:
 http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/esf.html
 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/jul2004/cal2-j06.shtml

So it doesn't matter if you "retract your claim" or not. Claim away. Anyone who reads Indymedia often will already know full well what's going on at the London ESF. Next ESF won't be in London though, so you'll go back to ignoring it again.

You really didn't need to even go as far as Google to find out the involvement of Political Parties in the WSF. What about the ESF page here on IMC UK  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/actions/2004/esf/ which includes this article with background:-

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/02/285062.html

There is lots more on the documentation too, try:-
 http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Local/UkImcEsfBackground
and  http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Local/UkImcEsf