Possibly, thanks to the efforts of several activists the newly formed London Social Forum might evolve to become an interesting, permanent political space/instrument for all of us (individual activists, groups, unions, campaigners etc...) to "use".
At this stage the activists in London Social Forum are battling to avoid monopolisation by party-like structures of the next European Social Forum in case this will take place in the UK.
The political line of the LSF on this matter is that: if a European Social Forum is to be held in the UK, there will be no steering committee and all decision making will be based on consensus rather than votes.
Providing that they abide to the above formula - all left wing political structures will be welcomed to participate in the organization process, which should be as inclusive and plural as possible.
On Sunday October 19, there will be a meeting in London (3:00pm at London School of Economics -Holborn tube station), to discuss the position of the LSF in regard to the possibility of hosting the next European Social Forum here in the UK.
I think that this is an interesting experiment and it is important that activists and grass-root groups participate to the meeting(s) and evaluate the situation.
-follows communique by LSF-
keep the faith
tzigari
To all Social Movements
ESF IN LONDON 2004?
Written by members of the London Social Forum, following discussions and meetings from the 3rd to 6th October.
The first London Social Forum (LSF) was held in London on the 4th and 5th of October 2003, and participants discussed a proposal to hold the next ESF in London in 2004 and the following ESF in Athens.
Holding the ESF in London would help energise UK activists who fight against neoliberal globalisation and the Bush administration’s policy of permanent war, supported by Tony Blair.
Many activists are concerned that the existing organisational process in the UK may marginalise the diversity of movements and debates here, as has happened in the UK role of the planning of the ESF 2003 through uneven representation of organisations and majority voting.
The 2004 UK bid should only be supported if the organisational process of the ESF is to be plural, open and transparent, with a commitment to the inclusion of political diversity. There must be also a Europe-wide accountability for decision making over political content and budgets.
We are very concerned that the planning for this bid has so far been closed. The London Social Forum will therefore host a public, open and transparent meeting on the 19th October at 3pm at the London School of Economics to discuss the bid. Social movements, European delegations, UK social forums, NGO’s, Trade Unions, organisations and all of the parties included in the bid, including the Mayor of London, are invited.
The London Social Forum will send a delegation to the meeting in Paris on November 10th when a decision will be made at European level.
Comments
Hide the following 6 comments
interesting link
15.10.2003 09:58
yossarian
Another interesting link
15.10.2003 14:30
And what is all this claptrap about not voting? Consensus "my arse" (as a certain well known celebrity would put it). Nothing would ever get decided or done. There is nothing sinister about voting--it is the heart of democracy. Anyone who wants to do away with it should be treated with extreme suspicion.
The elected, and instantly recallable, shop steward is a good organisational model which the social fora should emulate.
There is also the problem of the "tyranny of structurelessness". Have a look at this document written in the 1970s by a member of the women's movement about the problem of informal dominant cliques in so-called horizontal organisations.
James
better achive goals than abstractionism!
15.10.2003 15:24
Volker
In reply to Yossarian
15.10.2003 15:28
"...But now, let us think it in another way. Let us assume that one firmly believes that the possibility of another world begins not after a mythical revolution, but that the revolution to free ourselves from the chains of ignorance and oppression, exploitation and indignity, environmental pollution and torture, starts here and now with the building of new social relations..."
Isn't this is the hoary old red herring that the Utopian socialists like Robert Owen used to peddle a century and half ago? That is, that it is possible to build islands of socialism within capitalism without first overthrowing the capitalist state?
Read Marx's respinse to this nonesense:
James
re: James/ Marx
15.10.2003 18:05
kid
to james
22.10.2003 13:44
>Isn't this is the hoary old red herring that the Utopian socialists like Robert Owen used
>to peddle a century and half ago? That is, that it is possible to build islands of
>socialism within capitalism without first overthrowing the capitalist state?
>Read Marx's respinse to this nonesense:
You're not seriously suggesting that I should read Marx's 125-year-old response to some people he didn't like in order to counteract "hoary old red herrings", are you?
I'm not religious at all about Marx. He was a pretty smart guy in many respects, but I don't really understand the weird impulse that many Marxists have to cite verse and chapter from Capital to justify whatever they happen to be doing today.
As far as building as much of a new society as we can within the shell of the old, I think that building counter-institutions is a good strategy for change, sure. That's why I spend a lot of time working on this site you are posting on :).
yossarian