A coalition of Brazilian unions claimed that the Porto Alegre
forum was merely concerned with "putting a human face
on globalization" and not tackling the root causes of
environmental destruction, inequity and cultural colonization.

Melanie Gillbank

The second coming of the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, in Southern Brasil, has drawn 60,000 delegates from all over the world, a six-fold increase from its inauguration last year. Under the banner of "Another World is Possible" the forum opened on January 31 with a march attended by more than 60,000 people.

The WSF includes participants from a wide spectrum of political views within the left: from the reform agenda (all the world needs is more regulation and another global governance body), to abolitionists (nothing less than a process of "deglobalization" will do), and everything in between.

Renowned professor of linguistics, philosopher and social commentator, Noam Chomsky received star billing on the first day of seminars, urging the audience to challenge the commentators who dismiss the movements around the world as "anti-globalization". Instead he said there was a need to define the movements as in favor of just, equitable and ecologically sustainable form of globalization.

Bernard Cassen, who with Susan George was a founder of ATTAC (Association pour la Taxation des Transactions Financières pour l'Aide aux Citoyens— Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions for the Aid of Citizens), an international network of organizations campaigning for the introduction of the Tobin Tax, (of 1 percent on all international financial transactions), called for "the globalization of peace."

On the same panel as Cassen, Martin Khor, director of the Third World Network, claimed that neoliberal policies and the institutions that enforce them are in fact responsible for the "deindustrialization" of the poor countries, and was a direct form of colonization. "The World Trade Organization and the World Bank are the two greatest mechanisms generating poverty in the world," declared Khor.

Despite the WSF claim that "Another World Is Possible," the majority of the presentations revolved around the identification of the problems and relatively little time was devoted to the discussion of alternatives and concrete strategies. Some participants had come specifically to showcase alternative communities and ways of living. Indigenous participants, principally from the Americas, emphasized that their traditional lifestyles and relationships allowed them to live self sufficiently and sustainably.

José Pereira, a tribal leader from central Colombia, said he had come to Porto Alegre to teach people "the way." Author of "When Corporations Rule the World," David Korten, stated simply that we need to "walk away from the suicide economy and to support many of these local initiatives and weave into being webs of relationships that emerge to become a new kind of economy."

North American academic, Genevieve Vaughan, suggests one such alternative. She advocates a paradigmatic shift to a "gift economy" in which transactions between people will develop into circles of giving which focus on providing directly for human needs.

Famous Indian scientist, ecofeminist and academic, Vandana Shiva, denounced the form of globalization that is based on "the principle of organized greed." Instead, these "unstable pyramids of power need to be transformed into concentric circles of compassion," and that "the world we build in the future needs to be built on women's ways." Illustrating the distance that needs to be walked to realize this vision, Shiva was one of the few women who made it into the ranks of graying men on the plenary panels and seminar sections of the WSF.

A statement issued by a coalition of Brazilian unions claimed that the WSF was merely concerned with "putting a human face on globalization" and not tackling the root causes of environmental destruction, inequity and cultural colonization around the world. Many claim that this is a fair critique of the forum. Its sheer enormity and the bureaucratization of its organizational structure have limited the forum to traditional modes of organization and presentation.

Two of the principal supporters of the WSF are the local and state level governments of Rio Grande do Sul. In the lead up to the Brazilian national elections in November this year, conference venues, materials and merchandise provided constant reminders of their support. The Brazilian independent media web site claims that this has resulted in the cooption and watering down of the forum's agenda.

On the flipside however, such a forum would not be possible without the massive levels of financial and infrastructural support which have been provided by the local and state governments. For this reason, no other countries are prepared enough to embark on this task for next year and the forum looks set to remain in Porto Alegre for 2003.

Declaration:

A Sustainable World Is Possible!

03/02/2002

"Another World Is Possible, This Is The Only Planet We Have."

We, representatives from 40 countries gathered at the Rio+10 Preparatory Forum, state to all participants the importance of incorporating environmental sustainability in the discussions of the II World Social Forum. The world that excludes is the same that destroys the foundations of Life and Nature. In 2002, it will be 10 years since the first parallel manifestation to a governmental meeting—the ECO 92—and the transformation of society and its relation with Nature continue to be a fundamental political task.

In September, there will be the United Nations Summit for Sustainable Development—Rio+10—in Johannesburg, with the double task of evaluating the agreements made in 92 and take positions on emergent themes (such as foreign trade, production and consumption of transgenic foods, and the ethical limits of Science), establishing a new agenda for future commitments.

Despite some advances, there are still difficulties for the effective incorporation of environmental issues in the development policies agendas around the world. The growing process of globalization under the neo-liberal hegemony and the non-implementation of the Climatic Changes Convention commitments are symbols of this context.

We defend the recovery of ethical values that affirm a culture of peace, dialogue and tolerance, and that restore fraternity, solidarity, and diversity as central elements in the social and environmental relations. The re-establishment of these values should be articulated with the political fight for democracy and new spaces and concrete mechanisms of inclusion and participation. The environmental strategies cannot be dissociated from the fight against the enormous inequalities and injustices in the relations between countries, human beings, and regions of the planet.

We defend the idea that the globalization process requires mechanisms of participation, transparency, and social control in order to build a planetary citizenship that may result in the improvement of the humanity's life conditions , the reduction of social and regional inequalities, and the protection of the environment.

We defend the recognition of the ecological, social, and cultural debts. We reject the globalization that has at its center the search for profit. Nature is a fundamental value in itself and life and its protection should be above the international commercial agreements.

We defend the sovereignty of peoples and nations over their genetic patrimony and the creation of sustainable strategies that may enable the livelihood of populations and the preservation of bio-diversity. We reject the patenting and private appropriation of life, Nature, and people's knowledge.

The genetically modified foods the large corporations attempt to impose on us, put at risk the food safety of millions of people and threaten bio-diversity and human health. The current models of urbanization and industrialization concentrate wealth and distribute poverty and environmental degradation. We defend the democratization of the access to water and land, in urban and rural areas, a renewable energy model and social control over its use.

We defend a radical change in the production and consumption patterns and in the use of natural resources, and the implementation of Agenda 21 and all the other international agreements related to Rio 92 at all levels (local, regional, national, and international).

We reject the position of the United States government of not signing the Kyoto Protocol, putting its economic interests above the collective interests of all Humanity. We defend the application of the precaution principle and the reduction of carbon emissions and other pollutant substances that threaten people's life and health.

We call the participants of the II World Social Forum to move toward a collective action in order to guarantee that the commitments agenda of Rio+10 will be an agenda of all people and not only of governments. Our project for the future should have at its core the search of a fair humanity in a sustainable world.

Porto Alegre, January 31, 2002

Rio+10 Preparatory Forum—Challenges for a Planetary Sustainability. Event organized by: Rio Grande do Sul State Government, Brazilian Forums for NGOs, and Social Movements for the Environment and Development, Permanent Assembly of the Entities in Defense of the Environment in Rio Grande do Sul (Apedema), and Porto Alegre City Hall.

Article supplied by SEJUP (Serviço Brasileiro de Justiça e Paz—Brazilian Service of Justice and Peace) http://www.oneworld.org/sejup

Send your
comments to
Brazzil