Networking the Globe

New Technologies and the Postcolonial

Florian Stadtler, Ole Birk Laursen

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN: 9781138945890
• eBook ISBN: 9781317369189
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Literature
• Subtopic: Literary Criticism
• Index: Literature

Contemporary events which have catastrophic global ramifications such as the current economic crisis or on-going conflicts across the globe are not only mediated by super-fast digital communication and information networks, but also conditioned by the presence of rapidly advancing technologies. From social network sites like YouTube and Facebook to global satellite news channels like Al Jazeera or the BBC World Service, digital forms of culture have multiplied in recent years, creating global conduits and connections which shape our lives in many ways.

Bringing together an interdisciplinary group of scholars, this book addresses how new technologies have impacted discussions of identity, place and nation, and how they are shifting the parameters of postcolonial thought. Each chapter reflects on current research in its respective field, and presents new directions on the interconnection between new technologies and the postcolonial in a contemporary context. Offering a major intervention in debates around global networks, this thought-provoking collection highlights innovative research on new technologies, and its impact on a 'postcolonial' world. This book was originally published as a special issue of the Journal of Postcolonial Writing.

Connecting the peripheries: networks, place and scale in the World Social Forum process

Hilde C. Stephansen

The Open University, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom

Communication technologies occupy a central place in contemporary theorizations of transnational social movement networks. Not only does the internet provide the technical infrastructure through which activists communicate and share information, increasing their capacity to introduce oppositional messages into the public realm (Castells); its network architecture is also closely linked to the organizational logic of contemporary social justice movements (Juris). While recognizing the fundamental importance of communication technologies for such movements, this article cautions against overly disembodied conceptions of transnational activist networks and highlights the need to pay attention to issues of place and scale, as well as the importance of affect in the construction of alternative global imaginaries. Through a case study of a small social forum event held in February 2010 in a poor urban community in the south of Brazil as part of the World Social Forum process, the article examines activists’ use of communication technologies to construct transnational networks between different place-based actors. It shows that these practices are not simply concerned with establishing links between already existing places; the creation of networks is also inextricably bound up with particular constructions of place. By engaging in a politics that is simultaneously place-based and global in scope, these actors challenge traditional conceptions of scale as well as dominant epistemological paradigms.

Introduction: the World Social Forum

The World Social Forum (WSF) is widely recognized as one of the most important manifestations of what might be referred to as the “global Left” (Santos 2006). First organized in 2001 in Porto Alegre, Brazil, the WSF was originally conceived as a counterpoint to the World Economic Forum, which annually gathers the world’s political and economic elites in Davos, Switzerland. The WSF is currently held biennially in different locations around the world (thus far, always in the global South) and regularly brings together tens of thousands of activists from a wide range of social movements, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and activist groups, united in common opposition to neo-liberal globalization and all forms of discrimination by the slogan “Another world is possible!”. Intended by its founders as an “open meeting place for reflective thinking, democratic debate of ideas, formulation of proposals, free exchange of experiences and interlinking for effective action, by groups and movements of civil society” (World Social Forum 2001, article 1), the WSF has been regarded since its inception as a site for knowledge production. Founded at a historical conjuncture in which the Left was arguably in a state of crisis and fragmentation, but which also had seen the emergence of a multiplicity of movements against neo-liberal globalization, it was conceived as a space in which these diverse currents could come together, engage in dialogue, and begin to elaborate new analyses and alternatives.

One of the most novel – and controversial – features of the WSF has been its supposed status as an “open space”. Described by one of its founders as “only a place, basically a horizontal space” (Whitaker 2008, 113), the WSF does not seek to establish consensus around a common set of positions or speak in the name of all participants. It is in principle open to all civil society actors who subscribe to the fairly minimal requirement of opposition to neo-liberal globalization and who are not engaged in armed struggle, and based on the principle of self-organization: those who organize social forums are meant simply to provide a space for participants to organize their own activities (Sen 2010, 997). In this way, the WSF is meant to function as an “incubator” for new initiatives but without itself becoming a political actor (Whitaker 2008, 113).

Central to the notion of “open space” is the rejection of all pensamientos únicos (univocal modes of thought) and explicit embrace of plurality. According to Santos (2006, 13–29), the WSF is expressive of an “epistemology of the South”: an affirmation of epistemic plurality which seeks to replace the “monocultures” of neo-liberal globalization (and the modern epistemological frameworks that underpin it) with “ecologies” that allow for a multiplicity of knowledges and practices to coexist. On such a reading, the WSF expresses a different logic from the universalizing discourses and grand narratives of the “old Left”, and can be seen as a concrete manifestation of an epistemology founded on plurality and irreducible difference.

The “open space” of the WSF undoubtedly has facilitated the convergence of an unprecedented diversity of actors, “creating conditions of possibility for communicative relations across previously unbridged, indeed largely unrecognised differences” (Conway 2011, 219). However, it also has been criticized on a number of grounds. Within the so-called “space versus movement” debate, critics of the open space model have emphasized its inability to foster unified political action and argued for the WSF to become more of a political actor in its own right.¹ Another strand of criticism, meanwhile, has focused on the WSF’s failure to live up to its own ideal of openness. Key issues raised in this respect include structural barriers to participation, such as travel costs and visa restrictions (Ylä-Anttila 2005; Doerr 2007; Andretta and Doerr 2007; Vinthagen 2009); the relatively privileged background of the majority of forum participants (IBASE 2006; Santos 2006; Smith et al. 2008); the domination of the WSF by cosmopolitan intellectual elites (Pleyers 2008; Worth and Buckley 2009); exclusions arising from cultural norms that favour conventional modes of political expression (Wright 2005; Ylä-Anttila 2005; Doerr 2007); and the persistence of “global hierarchies of knowledge and power that privilege the modern West” (Conway 2011, 217). Though a self-proclaimed “world process” (World Social Forum 2001, article 3), the WSF is clearly far from global in reach, whether in absolute or qualitative terms.

Cognizant of such exclusions and asymmetries, forum organizers have sought in various ways to “globalize” the WSF in order to bring it closer to grassroots movements around the world. This impulse was behind the decision of the WSF International Council to move the forum from its birthplace in Porto Alegre after 2003, and is also discernible in the multiplicity of social forums that the WSF has spawned on different scales: from continental gatherings in Europe, Africa, Asia and the Americas to neighbourhood-level social forums in cities around the world. A concern to globalize the WSF also has been evident in efforts by activists and organizers to expand or decentralize the world event itself by using new communication technologies to connect actors in different geographical locations. It is this use of communication technologies to construct networks within the WSF process that this article explores.

In what follows, I begin by briefly outlining two attempts at what may be described as “grassrooting” the WSF by bringing it closer to localized actors: the WSF 2008, which in place of a single world event took the form of a Global Day of Action with local activities taking place around the world; and Belém Expanded – an initiative that involved connecting groups in different locations to the WSF 2009 in Belém, Brazil, using videoconference technology. In both cases, it was media and communication that gave these decentralized activities a coherent framework. I then move on to explore in detail an event that provides a different vantage point on the notion of expanding the WSF: the Expanded Social Forum of the Peripheries (Fórum Social Expandido das Periferias), a small social forum held in February 2010 in a poor urban neighbourhood in the southern Brazilian city of Pelotas, which also used videoconference technology to connect activist groups in different places. Through the analytical lens provided by recent scholarship that emphasizes the political and epistemological significance of place in a globalized world, I read efforts by the organizers of this forum to construct a “network of peripheries” through the use of new communication technologies as the expression of a complex politics of place that is simultaneously local and global in scope and which challenges traditional conceptions of scale as well as dominant epistemological paradigms.

“Grassrooting” the WSF: the Global Day of Action 2008 and Belém Expanded

The idea of a completely decentralized WSF was first realized in 2008, when instead of one world event there was a week of mobilization culminating in a Global Day of Action (GDA) on 26 January, with over 1000 activities taking place in 80 countries. Media and communication were integral to the design of the GDA. In order to bring together and give visibility to the numerous activities taking place around the world, a website was created where activists could register and provide information about their actions in designated “spaces” which could be “visited” by others – an initiative which might be described as an attempt to recreate, in virtual form, the physical space usually provided by centralized WSF events. In addition to the website, members of the WSF Communication Commission also coordinated efforts to promote the GDA to international mainstream media, arranged alternative media coverage of the various issues being raised, and organized a set of live connections via Skype, coordinated from France and Catalonia, with activist groups around the world.

The GDA gave rise to the idea that the WSF 2009 also could have a decentralized component in the form of activities taking place simultaneously in other parts of the world, connected in real time to the Belém forum through videoconference technology. During the event, members of the Communication Commission coordinated a programme of activities – brought together under the moniker “Belém Expanded” – which incorporated live interconnections between participants at the forum site and activist groups in other places. Many of these groups had organized their own events in connection with the WSF, including meetings, rallies and performances; these decentralized activities were conceived as part of an “expanded” social forum event encompassing a virtual as well as a physical “territory”. During the forum, 30 videoconferences were held with activist groups in different parts of the world, including Europe, North and South America, Africa and the Middle East.

The GDA and Belém Expanded provide interesting examples of efforts to “grassroot” the WSF by bringing it closer to localized actors through innovative use of new communication technologies. Clearly informed by a democratizing impulse, these initiatives provided ways to extend the “forum experience” beyond the world event itself to those who do not have the resources or inclination to travel. In this respect, they might be understood as attempts to realize the WSF’s ideals of openness and globality through communication technologies. However, the GDA and Belém Expanded still might be regarded as efforts to decentralize and expand the WSF “from the centre”, in the sense that they were initiated and coordinated by actors who occupy relatively central positions within the WSF and took the world event as their spatial and conceptual reference point. The Expanded Social Forum of the Peripheries, by contrast, might be understood as an attempt by actors who occupy a more marginal position within the social forum process to expand the WSF “from the periphery”.

Connecting the peripheries: the Expanded Social Forum of the Peripheries

The Expanded Social Forum of the Peripheries was held in February 2010 in Dunas, a poor urban neighbourhood on the outskirts of the city of Pelotas in the southern Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul. The event was conceptualized as part of the WSF 2010, which – in accordance with the principle of decentralization – took the form of a series of local, regional and thematic social forums taking place around the world throughout the year. Like Belém Expanded, the Expanded Social Forum of the Peripheries made use of videoconference technology to enable real-time audiovisual interconnections with groups in other geographical locations. Yet, as a social forum that differed both in qualitative and quantitative terms from the biennial world event, it provides a very different perspective on the idea of expanding the WSF.

Situated three hours by bus from the WSF’s birthplace in Porto Alegre, Dunas is home to a predominantly Afro-Brazilian population of around 30,000. The neighbourhood suffers from problems that are common to Brazilian favelas: lack of basic infrastructure, low education levels, drug and alcohol addiction, and – not least – stigmatization in mainstream public opinion as a place of violence and lawlessness. However, Dunas also has had some infrastructure put in place in recent years, thanks in most part to the efforts of a well-organized community sector. The local community association, the Dunas Development Committee (Comité de Desenvolvimento Dunas, or CDD), which brings together a number of organizations operating in the neighbourhood, received financial support from a federal government project that enabled the construction of a community centre in 2006. This is home to a small library, a cluster of computers for internet access, multimedia facilities and meeting rooms. Adjacent are a sports stadium and a row of shops for local businesses, all of which are managed by CDD.

The Expanded Social Forum of the Peripheries was held in and around the community centre and incorporated a range of activities, including a solidarity economy fair, cultural and sports activities, and a children’s forum – as well as seminars and debates on a range of issues. An initiative of the University of the Periphery (Universidade da Periferia), a grassroots education network that incorporates CDD and various other organizations working in Dunas and nearby areas, it was the latest in a series of social forums held in the neighbourhood over the previous decade.² Conceiving the event as part of a global social forum process, organizers adopted the concept of an expanded social forum from the WSF 2009 and made similar use of communication technologies. The majority of activities that formed part of the Expanded Social Forum of the Peripheries were filmed and streamed live online, and many of the seminars incorporated live dialogues with activists in other parts of the world – including France, Spain, Colombia, Mexico and the Amazon – using Skype video call and chat.

As its name suggests, the Expanded Social Forum of the Peripheries had as a key objective to connect different “peripheries”, the notion of the periphery being used to refer not only to geographical location, but also to the condition of being marginalized and excluded.³ Identifying Dunas as being on the periphery, the organizers aimed to establish and strengthen connections with other actors in analogous positions: from similar neighbourhoods in Pelotas to indigenous communities in the Amazon and housing rights activists from the banlieus of Paris. The rationale behind this was outlined by one organizer, a man in his fifties from the University of the Periphery, in the following terms:

We understand that it is necessary to act locally. But it’s no use acting locally without a universal vision, without a vision of everything. And you cannot have a vision of everything without seeking articulations with other places, and exchanging experiences between different places. (Interview with the author)⁴

Communication technologies are central to such forms of exchange. The use of video-conference technology to facilitate live audiovisual interactions between activists in different places was conceived explicitly by the same person as a means to facilitate bottom-up processes of convergence between different place-based knowledges:

When using technologies for sharing of information, for sharing of knowledges that are developed in different places but which in many cases arise from very similar necessities, these knowledges can be shared and transferred and reappropriated by communities in various parts of the world. And this communication makes possible a synthesis of knowledges which are worked out and developed in different regions, within different cultures. (Interview with the author)

Emphasizing the importance of networking with other localities, these excerpts echo Castells’s contention that the ability of social movements to create or influence global communication networks is crucial to their success. Observing that in the network society, networks of power are usually global while resistance is usually local, Castells asserts that “[h]ow to reach the global from the local, through networking with other localities – how to ‘grassroot’ the space of flows – becomes the key strategic question for the social movements of our age” (2009, 52). Like networks of power, alternative projects must als...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Citation Information
• Notes on Contributors
• Introduction – Networking the globe: culture, technologies, globalization
• 1. Connecting the peripheries: networks, place and scale in the World Social Forum process
• 2. Arguing about religion: BBC World Service Internet forums as sites of postcolonial encounter
• 3. Panopticons within panopticons: surveillance inversions in Willie Doherty’s video installations
• 4. The borders of virtual space: new information technologies and European Islamic youth culture
• 5. New media beyond neo-imperialism: Betty Boop and Sita Sings the Blues
• 6. Pluralism and cultural imperialism in the network films Babel and Lantana
• 7. The global and the postcolonial in post-migratory literature
• 8. The cartography of the local in Arun Kolatkar’s poetry
• Index