Advertisement

The World Social Forum: Arena or Actor?

  • Teivo Teivainen

Abstract

The concentration of power in transnational and global institutions was one of the most significant social processes of the twentieth century. Nevertheless, democratic theory and practice have remained very nation-state-centered. Although there were some examples of cosmopolitan democratic thinking and transnational democratic practice throughout the century, most analysts and politicians simply ignored them. An example of a reasonably moderate attempt to democratize global power relations, especially as regards the North—South dimension, was the 1970s project of the New International Economic Order (NIEO). It did not, however, lead to any significant redistribution of power and was considered a failure by most commentators of the 1980s and 1990s.

Keywords

Civil Society Worker Party Civil Society Organization Organize Committee World Economic Forum 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Abers, Rebecca. n.d. “Overcoming the Dilemmas of Participatory Democracy: The Participatory Budget Policy in Porto Alegre, Brazil.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  2. Albert, Michael. 2003. “WSF: Where To Now?” accessed February 17, 2003 <www.forumsocialmundial.org.br>.Google Scholar
  3. Amin, Samin and B. Founou-Tchuigoua. 2002. Integrated Programmes of Third World Forum For Calendar Years2002, 2003 and 2004. Document of Third World Forum: Dakar.Google Scholar
  4. Cassen, Bernard. 2002. “Comment est né le Forum social mondial.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  5. Falk, Richard and Andrew Strauss. 2001. “Toward Global Parliament.” Foreign Affairs 80, no. 1: 212–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grzybowski, Cândido. 2003. “Fórum Social Mundial: a construção de uma utopia,” Terraviva (January 24): 5.Google Scholar
  7. —. 1998. “Lógica econômica vs. lógica democrática.” Pp. 6–34 in Neoliberalismo: Alternativas? ed. Cândido Grzybowski, J. M. Gomez and Pablo Gentili. Rio de Janeiro: Publicações Novamerica.Google Scholar
  8. Hardt, Michael. 2002. “Porto Alegre: Today’s Bandung?” New Left Review 14 (March–April), accessed April 13, 2002 <http://www.newleftreview.net/NLR24806.shtml>.
  9. Klein, Naomi. 2001. “Farewell to ‘End of History’: Organization and Vision in Anti-Corporate Movements.” Pp. 1–14 in Socialist Register 2002: A World of Contradictions, ed. Leo Panitch and Colin Leys. London: The Merl in Press.Google Scholar
  10. Monbiot, George. 2002. “A Parliament for the Planet.” New Internationalist 342 (January/February) <www.newint.org/issue342/planet.htm>.
  11. Monereo, Manuel, Miguel Riera, and Pep Valenzuela eds. 2002. Hacia el Partido de Oposición: Foro Social Mundial/Porto Alegre 2002. Espafia: El Viejo Topo.Google Scholar
  12. Prestes, Paulo. 1999. 13 Leituras Petistas. Porto Alegre, pp. 72–76.Google Scholar
  13. Sader, Emir. 2003. “Porto Alegre, até logo,” Zero Hora (January 28): 19.Google Scholar
  14. —. 2001. “Antes e depois de Seattle.” Observatorio Social de América Latina (January): 5–8.Google Scholar
  15. Savio, Roberto. 2003. “Menor es mejor.” Terraviva (January 28): 6.Google Scholar
  16. de Souza Santos, B. 2001. “O principio do futuro,” accessed April 4, 2001 <http://www.worldsocialforum.org>.Google Scholar
  17. Teivainen, Teivo. Forthcoming. Dilemmas of Democratization in the World Social Forum. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. —. 2003. “Conference Synthesis of International Organizations and Architecture of World Power.” Pp. 290–95 in Another World Is Possible: Popular Alternatives to Globalization at the World Social Forum, ed. William F. Fisher and Thomas Ponniah. London and New York: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  19. Wainwright, Hillary. 2003. “Porto Alegre: Public Power beyond the State.” Pp. 103–33 in Politics Transformed: Lula and the Workers Party in Brazil, ed. Sue Bradford and Bernardo Kucinski. London: Latin America Bureau.Google Scholar
  20. Waterman, Peter. 2003. “From Comrades’ Agreements to the Reinvention of Social Emancipation.” Unpublished manuscript, February 2.Google Scholar
  21. Whitaker, Chico. 2003a. “Notes about the World Social Forum.” Accessed March 23, 2003 <www.worldsocialforum.org>.Google Scholar
  22. —. 2003b. “O FSM como método de ação política.” Pp. 237–44 in O Espírito de Porto Alegre, ed. Isabel Loureiro, Jose Correa and Maria Elisa Cevasco. São Paulo: Paz e Terra.Google Scholar
  23. —. 2003c. “O que o Fórum Social Mundial traz de novo como modo de atuação política?” Democracia Viva 14 (January): 20–24.Google Scholar
  24. Whitaker, Francisco. 2002. “Fórum Social Mundial: origens e objetivos.” Accessed April 13, 2002 <http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/por/qorigem.asp>.Google Scholar
  25. Zibechi, Raúl. 2003. “III Foro Social Mundial: La hora de estrategias.” ALAI-AMLATINA (February 3).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Janie Leatherman and Julie Webber 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Teivo Teivainen

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations