Asbjørn Wahl

The processes which started with the first World Social Forum in Porto Alegre in Brazil in January 2001 injected new energy into the broad left. After twenty years of neo-liberal globalisation, set-backs, pessimism and demobilisation on the left in many countries and areas, the social forums created new enthusiasm, new working methods, new mobilisations and new inspiration for hundreds of thousands of people.

Ten years later, the situation is much more unclear. The most ambitious aspirations and ambitions which were developed after the “battle of Seattle” and the development of social forums have not been met. The social forum movement(s) has not raised to become the “other superpower” (which this movement was characterised by the New York Times after the impressive mobilisation against the Iraq war in 2003). Even though a lot of important work and mobilisations are still going on under the umbrella of social forums in many parts of the world, the question of decline and crisis are being discussed more and more within these movements.

Also the European Social Forum (ESF) has experienced increasing problems over the years and we should be honest enough to admit that it has been on a down-ward course ever since the first and most successful one was organised in Florence in 2002. In this regard we can say that the ESF is in a crisis. The more we understand of the reasons for this development, the easier it is to avoid a situation in which this backlash turns into disillusion and pessimism. It is therefore necessary to analyse and discuss the current situation and possible future of the ESF/WSF.

The context

If we really want to get to grips with the crisis of the ESF, we will have to put it in a broader context. The ESF does not operate in a vacuum. On the contrary, the problems we experience in the ESF do in many regards reflect the current economic, social and political situation in Europe – and in the World. At least the following five points are important:

1) The ‘golden age’ of the post World War II era, with more or less stable economic growth and progressively improved welfare states in most part of Western Europe, came to a halt in the 1970s, when the Keynesian accumulation model run into crises and capitalist interests went on the offensive to restore profitability. The subsequent deregulation and reorganisation of the economy and restructuring of production patterns at the global level have resulted in an enormous shift in the balance of power in society, from labour and popular movements to capital, as well as to a comprehensive re-composition of the working class.

2) The labour movement and the political left have not been able to come out of its deep ideological and political crisis which they have more or less been in since the neo-liberal offensive (‘globalisation’) from about 1980 and the break-down of the Soviet model of Eastern Europe as well as the social democratic partnership model of great parts of Western Europe. The breakdown of the alleged socialist model has created particular problems in developing new real left forces and movements in Central and Eastern Europe.

3) For the political left in many countries in Western Europe the situation has rather developed to the worse. Attempts at joining centre-left governments without sufficient direction and strategic clarification have proved disastrous. Thus, the parliamentary left both in Italy and France has experienced enormous defeats. The situation with a centre-left government in Norway is currently not very encouraging. In spite of these experiences, the parliamentary left in countries like Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden is heading in the same direction without adjusting the course on the basis of the negative experiences in the countries mentioned above.

4) In addition to this, there is also a crisis in the trade union movement, which has been pushed enormously on the defensive. The traditionally strongest part of the trade union movement, workers in the mines and in the metal and manufacturing industry, has been strongly diminished. A lot of members have left the trade union movement in most countries. Great parts of the trade union movement are still deeply influenced by the social partnership ideology of the ‘golden age’, which increasingly acts as a barrier against a more action-oriented practice. There has also been a backlash of other social movements in most parts of Europe. At the same time we have seen a growth of a number of right wing populist parties (and neo-fascism particularly in many Central and Eastern European countries).

5) Thus, neither the political left nor the trade union or other social movements have been able to develop a strong response or real alternatives to the neo-liberal offensive or to the current financial and economic crises, which increasingly also develop into social and political crises. The same goes for the increasingly important environmental and climate crisis.

The ESF itself

This lack of response and alternatives is also valid for the ESF. Even though the social forums themselves and many of the movements, organisations and networks which work within the social forum processes, were developed partly as a response to the crisis of the traditional left, they have not been able to compensate much for those weaknesses. The general set-back of social and political struggles does of course influence the ESF strongly, and the heterogeneity which has been a strength and an important part of the identity of these movements, does also represent a weakness when it comes to the current lack of theoretical, strategic and political clarification and unity.

One of the internal effects of these developments is that the vacuum which has been created by the lack of real movements and struggles to a certain degree has been filled by a number of small NGOs and full-time activists who play a disproportionate role in the ESF planning processes. Some of them also lack roots in and sufficient understanding of class relations, social struggle and social power. There has therefore been an increasing tendency towards sign-on statements, lobbying perspectives and proclamation of European days of action which have had very little basis in existing power relations and real on-going struggles.

It seems also as if there has been established some informal power-structures inside the ESF processes which some participants, particularly from Central and Eastern Europe, experience as being excluding. This has particularly been the case in the programme developing process. The lack of democratic structures and the practise of basing activities on voluntary participation of interested parties seem to produce not only activism, but also new internal power structures and tendencies to the monopolisation of power – where among other things availability of resources and time is important.

In Europe, we have also faced the particular problem with a lack of representation from Central and Eastern Europe in the ESF processes. So far this problem to a certain degree has been dealt with as a question of financial support for CEE representatives to preparatory meetings and to the forums themselves. However, the problem is much deeper and more complicated than that. First and foremost, it reflects social and political problems within these countries – a lack of strong and well organised social movements and popular organisations back home. Maybe time is ripe now to move from a narrow financial-support-approach and to deal with these problems as the very political challenges they represent?

The arguments above also raise the question whether or not the ESF at all will be seen as an important tool if and when the development of real movements and the level of mobilisation and social struggle increase in Europe. This is far from obvious today. One example is that in a situation in which more and more people in Europe face multiply crises, which are strongly interrelated, the ESF programme process is fragmented into a number of different areas of struggle (called “axis” in the internal language). It is probably time now to ask whether this is the best way to meet the current challenges.

The future of the ESF

To the degree that the ESF faces a crisis, it thus reflects an objective reality in the world in which it works. This crisis therefore cannot be solved by any kind of voluntarism or moralism. We have to understand the causes as well as to identify possibilities and opportunities – and then come up with political and organisational proposals for change.

None of us do have the solutions of these problems today. That is the reason why we will have to join our collective intellectual forces in order better to understand the situation and hopefully improve the way the ESF is working. To do that, we must analyse external as well as internal factors at the same time as we are able to question all aspects of the way we are working today.

Here are some questions which could guide us in the discussion on the future of the ESF:

- How do we see the economic, social and political crises, and the subsequent power-relations, in Europe develop in the near future?

- Which possibilities are there for interventions and mobilisations from alternative left and social forces against the effects of these crises, including the environmental and climate crisis?

- Which are the most important arenas in which we can expect social struggles to break out, and how do we relate to these struggles?

- How can we organise an inclusive and non-dogmatic process in order to further develop our analyses, strategies and policies in the current situation – linked to existing struggles and movements?

- What do we have to do with the ESF structure and process if we want to see the ESF as a tool to unify struggles across countries and across different sectors of society?

- How can we renew the ESF and make it more attractive to new and other groups and movements? Included in this is also the aim of increasing Central and Eastern European participation in the ESF process.

Finally, there is broad agreement among social forum activists and participants that resistance against neo-liberal globalisation and fight for social and democratic alternatives in the current situation have to be co-ordinated at the regional and global level. However, without strong social movements at local and national level, there is nothing to co-ordinate at the international level. The primary task for everybody who wants to build and strengthen cross-border social movements and forums should therefore be to build movements in their own societies. A new layer of European activists without roots in social movements and struggles back home will therefore have little to contribute also at the European and the global level. What we need is a real movement of movements – not a new group of individual activists focussing on lobbying and petition-writing. Let the discussion go!

(This a slightly adapted version of a note which originally was written as part of the discussion in a working group in the ESF to prepare for a debate of the crisis and the future of the ESF at the European Social Forum in Istanbul in July 2010. Will be published in Transform! No 6/2010.)