Print

Building the Difficult Alternative

TPL_IN
TPL_ON
Hits: 609

The World Forum for Alternatives was established, as indicated by its name, with a view to contributing to the building of positive alternatives to the current dominant economic, social, political and cultural system.

This commitment calls for strict rigor, first towards ourselves, as actors of what should now be called “social movements” that constitute (at global, regional and national levels) social forums, or the “civil society”. The total number of claims made by victims of the dominant system, as legitimate as they may be, and even whenever they deserve to be given an active support, are not an “alternative”. In order to be efficient i.e. to be capable of effectively changing the world, such an alternative must be consistent at all levels, from the national to the global level and in all its dimensions (principles and strategies of economic management tied to the social and cultural visions of the society to be built), that is : taking a political dimension.

Our commitment was defined in the terms of “convergence in diversity” (cf. the heading of this site with this title). Obviously, this option is not shared by all movements that constitute social forums. Many of them do not wish to get out of the scope of their struggles and reject what they call a naturally harmful “politicization” as they see it. Such an option should certainly be respected by social forums. But it entails the risk of keeping the movement crumbled and powerless. Furthermore, the current system is already maintaining the movement in this framework, inviting to limit itself to “giving a human face” to the implementation of the principles of social management in agreement with the basic requirements of liberal capitalism and of the accompanying international management based on the unequal treatment of peoples.

· Presently, the dominant system is defined both by its extreme liberal option – the so called “neo liberal” option – and by the forms of a particular globalized management it entails.

The “liberal” option is of course, a wide ideological cover and, in practice, the major powers (the Triade states and especially, the United States, the dominant segments of transnationalized capital, particularly Finance capital) cheerfully free themselves of its principled requirements.

Moreover, the forms of the globalizing management accompanying this dominant option are generally accepted by ruling authorities, who, in this way, put themselves in a dependent situation in relation to the project of the United States’ dominant class, defined in terms of “global military control” under various pretexts such as “terrorist threats”. Routing this militarizing project of globalization and of the United States leadership is conditioning the possible successes of struggles for social progress democratic rooting and people’s affirmative autonomy within the framework of a negotiated globalization, as opposed to unilaterally imposed globalization in the name of a questionable technologistic determinism. This project of the United States’ ruling class and of their allies must be routed in all its dimensions: “cultural” prestige based on so-called scientific virtues that are, in fact discutable, economic management logics, principle – based legitimacy of the political authorities, geopolitical visions that command the international organization and diplomatic practice, (cf. TWF contribution at WSF-Mumbay 2004”. This document is to be found in this site).

“Building a genuine alternative globalization” is therefore more difficult than what a number of movements for current struggles can imagine. It implies going beyond the crumbling and generally inconsistent actions, going from “defensive” behaviours to offensive strategies, taking up common and specific gradual objectives.

· The previous heading in this site (titled “globalization of resistance”) is proposing analyses of current struggles, as shown in the Third World Forum biannual publication (Vol I-2002, Vol II-2004).

This heading offers to open in depth discussions on all issues resulting from analyses of the challenges confronting peoples. Wether it regards analyses of the actual operation of the economic system (our ambition being to contribute in formulating an alternative paradigme that can simultaneously produce efficiency and social justice), political management logics that is being implemented by ruling authorities (our ambition is to formulate concrete, political alternatives, for the coming stages and a long term prospect), geometries of the geopolitics that is being implemented by diplomatic apparatuses (our ambition is to suggest geopolitical reconciliations that can open new scopes for social and democratic progress of peoples).

November 2004