Major Controversies Surrounding the WSF 2004 process and Event
In my paper, I would like to highlight the major controversies surrounding both the WSF 2004 process in India as well as the events and extract from these controversies the criticisms that can be constructive for the continuation of the process.
In order to do so, I will first document in detail the WSF 04 process in India (and in the region in a less detailed way) and present a synthetic summary of the WSF 04 official and parallel events, in order to lay out the context in which the controversies developed and grew. In the second place, I will list the various controversies of the FSM 04 in India (opposition between open space and institutionalised space, opposition between action and dialogue, social structures that are criticised by the organisers of the forum but that are then part of the process itself, the issue of control by some individuals over the process, etc. ), as well as contextualise them against the broader WSF process around the world. Once the list is complete and the broader context set, I will choose some important and/or specific cntroversies of the FSM 04, which I will examine in depth. In a third part, I will take each of the issues chosen before and look at new trends and developments in that area in the subsequent WSF-related events (Indian Social Forum in Delhi, Nov 06; Global Day of Action, Jan 08; among others) in order to extract what can be learned from that controversy. In conclusion, I will summarise the teachings from part three as constructive criticism for the continuation of the WSF process.
1) Introduction: Why is it relevant to document and study the WSF process?
2) Context of the controversies
a) Process of the Forum organisation
b) WSF 04 events
a) Controversies of WSF 04
b) WSF 04 controversies in the context of the WSF process in the world
c) Important and/or specific controversies in the WSF 04 in depth
4) Development of the controversies
a) A specific controversy (from 2.c) in the light of new events and/or new processes and its teachings
b) A second controversy (from 2.c) in the light of new events and/or new processes and its teachings
c) A third controversy (from 2.c) in the light of new events and/or new processes and its teachings
d) A fourth controversy (from 2.c) in the light of new events and/or new processes and its teachings
5) Conclusion: What are the constructive criticisms that can be learned from these controversies?