|
|
Q&A: 'The WSF Should Privilege Alternative Media'
Alejandro Kirk interviews Boaventura de Sousa Santos *IPS/TerraViva
BELEM, Brazil, Jan 26, 2009 (IPS) - Portuguese sociologist Boaventura de Sousa Santos argues that community radio
and alternative media are the only platforms that can compete with corporate
media. In an interview with TerraViva’s Alejandro Kirk, de Sousa Santos stressed
that the current crisis requires that participants at the World Social Forum (WSF)
take a unified political stance.
Excerpts from the interview follow:
IPS: Do you stand by your ideas about the nature of the World Social Forum in
the context of the global crisis of capitalism that we are experiencing?
BOAVENTURA DE SOUSA SANTOS: That is a very important question at this
moment. I believe that the changes that have taken place over the past few
months have created a new situation. As you know, since its inception, there
has been a discussion at the WSF about whether it should be an open space
for all progressive tendencies that fight against neo-liberal globalisation - a
space for coming together and nothing more. Some have argued the
contrary: that it should have a stronger role and intervene, present proposals
and organise global political actions - intervention for change.
In some way, this requires that I modify my position. For a long time I have
defended the idea of an open space because I believe that it is important to
maintain a place in which people can come together without a specific
agenda. But over the past two years my view has changed somewhat. I
believe that the WSF should continue to be an open space but that we should
identify some topics about which there is consensus so that the Forum can
present political and thus programmatic positions.
IPS: What topics are you thinking about?
BSS: The WSF should have a proposal to reform the United Nations. It is a
process that has been discussed for a long time and one that we also have
discussed at the WSF, but there is no common position.
The second issue is the financial crisis, which has created a new situation
over the past few months because at the WSF we always criticised neo-liberal
globalisation - and especially the predominance of financial capital - which
has led so many countries to ruin.
The financial crisis that exploded in the United States and Europe is a crisis
that the countries of the so-called Third World have been suffering for 30
years. All of these countries have proposed solutions that are very similar to
the ones that the United States and Europe are implementing: nationalizing
banks and so on.
Now that the crisis is in the United States and Europe, in the heart of the
global capitalist system, the measures that those same central countries
strongly rejected - through the World Bank and the International Monetary
Fund (FMI) - for southern countries are being adopted. That is where the
crises of Asia, Argentina, Brazil and Russia came from. So I propose that the
WSF assume a visible international position on how to resolve the crisis.
The WSF should demand the elimination of the FMI and the World Bank or
their radical reform. These positions have been discussed ad nauseam and
there is consensus. Why don’t we transform that into a policy position?
IPS: And you can’t forget Palestine.
BSS: Yes, in the third place, the crisis in Palestine. This aggression is an Israeli
occupation that is more brutal than before. Right now war crimes and crimes
against humanity are taking place and are being perpetrated because there is
the certainty of total impunity. I think that the WSF has to take a very clear,
internationally visible position on Palestine.
Though we have not done so directly in the Forum, we have fought for peace.
The Assembly of Social Movements called for a world protest against the
invasion of Iraq and I do not believe that we should limit ourselves to protests
this time.
IPS: Do you believe that this attack was launched in an attempt to achieve
something before Barack Obama assumed the Presidency of the United
States?
BSS: Yes. This aggression was a premeditated provocation on the part of the
State of Israel. The international media never mention this. The first violation
of the cease-fire [between the government of Gaza and Israel] was at the
beginning of November, and it was an Israeli bombing. In response, Hamas
requested a renegotiation of the cease-fire, which Israel rejected. That’s how
it started.
Israel has three direct objectives. The first involves internal politics. The
central-right coalition that governs the country is at risk and wants to
recover its electoral leadership. Second, the Army wants to make people
forget their complete defeat by the Hezbollah organisation when it invaded
Lebanon in 2006. The third objective is to create a fait accompli before
Obama was sworn in.
These are the three factors that have led to a war of aggression that has
nothing to do with Gaza. It is extermination. Months ago, the Vice Minister of
Defence of Israel [Matan Vilnai] threatened the population of Gaza with the
word Sho’ha, which means ‘holocaust’ in Hebrew. That was announced
months ago. It is horrible, because they don’t realise that the Jewish people
were victims of a Sho’ha in Europe, and history shows that the ‘final
solutions’ always come back on those who have tried to implement them.
IPS: Is there a way out of this?
BSS: Very serious things are happening. People who have always defended
the existence of the State of Israel are now asking themselves if in these
conditions - I repeat, in these conditions - the State of Israel maintains that
right to exist.
It is notable that when you read the founding texts of Israel, like the writings
of Ben Gurion and Golda Meir, it is really clear that they understood that their
State was an occupation that would always come up against the resistance of
the occupied and that there would therefore never be peace. The two-State
solution was a hypocrisy negated by the facts - by so much Jewish presence
in the West Bank that made it impossible.
It would be a serious problem if the WSF met in this context of global crisis
and we did not emerge with a position from the International Council or WSF
Assembly. My fear is that people will come away with the impression that the
Forum didn’t do anything. That is why I have proposed voting.
IPS: But voting would be complicated at the Forum.
BSS: There could be an electronic voting process each night. It is very easy to
do. I have been told that we are not representative of the world. Of course we
aren’t - but there are 100,000 of us.
IPS: The Forum no longer receives as much attention from the traditional
media. Is this because of censorship, or a lack of professionalism, or has the
Forum simply lost validity?
BSS: This is an important issue given the power of the media in the
international context. The mainstream media is a great instrument of global
capitalism, of opposition to progressive politics. You can see that the media
are opposed to change in countries throughout Latin America right now.
The absence of the media at the Forum doesn’t have to do with weaknesses.
At one point the WSF was a novelty for the corporate media because we
started as an alternative to the Davos Economic Forum - an inverted mirror.
That created the curiosity that brought the media to the first two forums.
When they realised that the Forum had a counter-hegemonic bent, they lost
interest.
For our journey, the most important thing is the alternative media, the free
press. This time a world forum of free media will be held in Belem.
I work a lot in Bolivia and Ecuador, and I can tell you that the community
radios, the alternative press, are the media for bringing progressive
knowledge to the people.
The Forum’s Communications strategy has not always been a strong one, but
now I think that the WSF is aware that if we do not give all the weight to the
alternative media - the free press that fights to bring different information to
the people - we will not get far.
(*This report was published by TerraViva, an independent IPS daily, at the
World Social Forum in Belem, Brazil.)
(END)
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is RSS?
