Contribution of Hee-Yeon Cho to the WSF Debate

Article written by Hee-Yeon Cho and published at http://openfsm.net/projects/esf-strategy-discussion/blog/2010/08/06/contribution-of-hee-yeon-cho-in-the-wsf-debate/

Considering the current situation of the movements involved in WSF, it is very difficult to make unified new political action strategies and new projects concretizing the “otherworldism”. However, in my view, the current WSF doesn’t work well as a open spaces of giving birth to such strategies and projects. The real problem is that new “brave” efforts and experiments in such open spaces of WSF are not tried widely, and, furthermore, more active participants feel that this open space-character of WSF suffocates a new birth of higher level of political actions, organizations and more comprehensive alternative projects. In this regards, WSF should imagine some more positive role in this direction, taking advantage of its open space-character, although we keep it dearly.

As we know, there are different kinds of organizations with the civil society. The civil society itself is characterized by the heterogeneity. The point is whether we can make higher level of common-ness of movement in such current heterogeneous situation, in response to neoliberal homogenization of the world by the market. In my opinion, such common-news should be expressed in higher level of organizational solidarity in every specified area of civil society movement. I think that one of the most important task is to promote higher level of organized form of solidarity to emerge in every specified area of civil society movement, beyond such heterogeneity and national differences. Such organized solidarity should be different from the past, in that participating organizations share the anti-neoliberalism and pursuing a broader sense of otherworldism, but with higher level of local popular bases.

Until now, WSF has done well its role in providing open spaces for getting different national and local movements meet together in one space. However, we can say that such role is approaching its final end. It is a positive development in the world movement. However, WSF should do some more role in incubating the next-step task. If WSF could promote this kinds of role, it would have a different picture when WSF would be held in 10 years,

I wonder whether I am entitled to join this discussion. However, Because I think that sometimes absurd comments facilitates the discussion itself, I would add an idea passing by, although I am not deeply involved in the discussion process.

Considering the current situation of the movements involved in WSF, it is very difficult to make unified new political action strategies and new projects concretizing the “otherworldism”. However, in my view, the current WSF doesn’t work well as a open spaces of giving birth to such strategies and projects. The real problem is that new “brave” efforts and experiments in such open spaces of WSF are not tried widely, and, furthermore, more active participants feel that this open space-character of WSF suffocates a new birth of higher level of political actions, organizations and more comprehensive alternative projects. In this regards, WSF should imagine some more positive role in this direction, taking advantage of its open space-character, although we keep it dearly.

As we know, there are different kinds of organizations with the civil society. The civil society itself is characterized by the heterogeneity. The point is whether we can make higher level of common-ness of movement in such current heterogeneous situation, in response to neoliberal homogenization of the world by the market. In my opinion, such common-news should be expressed in higher level of organizational solidarity in every specified area of civil society movement. I think that one of the most important task is to promote higher level of organized form of solidarity to emerge in every specified area of civil society movement, beyond such heterogeneity and national differences. Such organized solidarity should be different from the past, in that participating organizations share the anti-neoliberalism and pursuing a broader sense of otherworldism, but with higher level of local popular bases.

Until now, WSF has done well its role in providing open spaces for getting different national and local movements meet together in one space. However, we can say that such role is approaching its final end. It is a positive development in the world movement. However, WSF should do some more role in incubating the next-step task. If WSF could promote this kinds of role, it would have a different picture when WSF would be held in 10 years.