Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam

Forum for Dialogues on Comprehensive Democracy

Home

For Hindi click here

Political Democracy

Publications

Notes and Articles

Dialogue Reports

Forthcoming

Report-1

The Quest for Participatory Democracy

World Social Forum, Mumbai; January 20, 2004

• Political democracy

• Cultural democracy

• Ecological democracy

• Economic democracy

• Gender Democracy

• Ideologies & Democracy

• Knowledge Democracy

• Social democracy

• Spiritual Democracy

• World-order Democracy

• Events

• Profiles

• Useful Links

• Feedback

• Contact us

Khurshid Imam: O.K. My name is Khursheed Imam and I came from Delhi. Working with an association, which works mostly on civil societies and democracy, called Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam. Quite concerned about the situation. So attending seminars that have to do directly or indirectly with democracy and civil societies.

Kai Varra: My name is Kai Varra. I from Finland. I am quite active in most environmental groups and movements and with eco-quality movements now a days. And also I have been working with some kind of participatory methods; so called future workshops. And also combining them with some kind of future situations.

Angeno Lokoyomen: My name is Angeno Lokoyomen. I come from Sudan. I work for Sudan Council of Judges as a communication officer in the unit of advocacy and communication”.

Next speaker: I am coming from Paris. I am a member of an N.G.O. called radically democratized democracy in Paris. I worked on participatory system in Brazil and Europe. So that is why I am interested.

Biraj from Orissa: I am Biraj. I come from Orissa, India. I work in CARE-INDIA. So basically my project is in integrated nutrition and heath project. But I am more interested in how it relates i.e. how a civil society can actually contribute in democratic movements and all that.

Mark Joseph: My name is Mark Joseph. I am from Chicago, U.S.A. I am a youth organizer. So I am interested in that. I have not heard too much about this issue. I am here to expand my knowledge. I am only 18 years old. I am going to contribute a lot. So let us have a good seminar.

Mukesh from Kerala: I am Mukesh from Kerala. I am working with an organization called KSSP. My organisation and our aim is Science for Social revolution. And the last twenty years my organisation is studying how democracy can be applied and how to deepen the democracy.

Sister Maria: My name is Sister Maria working in Tamil Nadu. working with both Dalits and Tribes. So I would like to participate how we can bring out the civil societies to get their own rights and democracy. So I am very much interested. So I came to participate in this seminar.

Next speaker: “I am .............?................ from Tamil Nadu from a movement normally Life Right movement. I am working amoung the dalit people. I am interested in participatory democracy”.

Next speaker: My name is ...?............ I am from the institute of development education of Bihar. I am deeply associated with Panchayati Raj Movement in Bihar and Child’s Rights movement.

Thomas Wallgren: My name is Thomas Wallgren. I come from Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam in Finland. I am co-chair there. Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam is a collision of comprehensive democracy, that has grown out of cooperation between activists, part workers, movement workers, academics in South Asia and Nordic countries, during the past fifteen years. It is the reflection of the cultural differences between two regions i.e. Nordic and South Asia. We are a registered association in Finland but movement network is South-East Asia as Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam. It is a Sanskrit word which means World is one family. So unit is together. We are all together. So this initiative have been one of the streams of many contributions to World Social Forum. And my particular contribution has been to integrate Brazil and Indian government in 2001.

So should have a? Can you chair the session? O.K. I think I can give little inputs and then we can continue. The first point I would like to make is the context. Which is the context of our works at the grassroot and our context of the World Social Forum. Which is the context of the increasing relevance of the global economy, technology and quality on our lives. So have this globalisation thing. There is a increasing gap between mechanism for democracy and the existing mechanism of power. Now that creates an urge among many people especially in places where you are more centrally placed in politics in each country. To create structures for what they call often a democratic global governance or global democratization or such else.

Now I want to make a very simple but fundamental point of relation to this interest in global democratization or democratizing globally. And that is the following. I think that they are two very severe limits to what you can achieve through an agenda, which focus on democratization of global relations. So I think there are limits to what you can do at that level. I am not against working on global democratization. But there are limits to what you can do if you focus too narrowly on that. And the limits are due to two things. One is the practical obstacle. You if think the order and citizens in my country, in your country or any other country. There is that practical difficulty of making an effective contribution, to a communication, which reaches beyond the local, is quite difficult. Just think of how this World Social Forum, which negotiates between social workers, party movements, trade unionists, academics etc. negotiating our vision of democracy and a more just world. It is so expensive to travel here. We just can’t effort or we can just, can’t even produce even though we have the best organizations you can imagine over the planet. We can’t have an effective communication between the vernacular and the English. I am not saying there is not there. There is the translation. But it is not very effective. So think of how every expensive it is to be here. Think of how very few years. Think of how contribution is for the globalisation of the society. Even though this is the best thing we have to offer. So there are tremendous practical difficulties. We think of real participation of the ordinary, citizen in any process of global information. ‘willful’ information is my academic slang. By ‘willful’ information, I mean that people reflect, discuss and learn from each other, and form their political opinion on tha4 basis. So this kind of rational information. But when we talk together, we learn from each other, and we develop our political views on that basis. So that is the way we can be the informed citizens and contribute. Now it is very difficult to achieve between? These are practical obstacles to making the participation of the ordinary individual. He is not a political worker to this global democratisation process adjective. So that is why it is very difficult to make global institutions answerable to more local practices of democracy. I don’t say it is impossible. I am just say there are practical difficulties of communication, of travel, of afford bills of organisations which are phenomenon. That is one point.

Second point, I wish to mention in this relation..It is a radical obstacle. In order to contribute to your democracy. Be the nation or the larger region or the globe. in order to contribute with your desires. Your wisdom. You have to be able to form a meaningful comprehensive picture of the society, of the economy, the quality, the culture about which we are speaking. Now it is true that for the best intellectuals and the best activists to follow meaningful analysis of the global situation. So for most ordinary citizens my impression is that you are not under pressure in Tamil Nadu, in Maharashtra or in Mumbai.

Most ordinary citizens in my country do not have a meaningful analysis of the contemporary political situation. Because it is overwhelmingly difficult. If you want to look at the details of the world trade organisation agreement in agriculture it is a hard work to understand the details. And most people, that is one of these things that need to be done. So there is theoretical obstacle. Democracy requires that each citizen can have an effective understanding based on his/her own experience without full time work and that is difficult.I am not saying it is impossible.I am saying it is difficult. So for this reason my proposition is that when address the real need for global democratisation, we should realistically agree that any real success in making the global institutions accountable is dependent on democratic accountability from below. That’s again, I think requires economic political and cultural changes in direction of local self-reliance. So I am propagating localisation. Not only localisation of the polity. But in order for the polity to be democratically effective to protect itself from Trans National Organisations. My Gandhian Socialist conviction is that only if we combine the fight political democracy with the fight for an economic democracy, which is based on more. I know it is too quantum in one day. But the vision should be clear that we need more self-reliance. On the local level. If we want to run the world in a more democratic and more just fashion then it is run today. That is one point I wanted to share with you.

Interruption............... Zindabad! Zindabad! I think it is Long Live! Long Live!

Any effort to have- radical as integral- to have global localisation as integral- to politics for local globalisation. As life-blood of effective politics for global democracy. And please understand, I am working with proposals for global democratic institutional reform. So it is not only an alternative to something i.e. integral to one. That was number one. I shift to number two and then we discuss.

Number two is this whole thing about participation. Why do we think we speak so much about participation these days. Now I think because there has been a cultural change in many parts of the world, which is basically a change in the direction of more democracy. And the cultural change, I speak about it is more individual in all qualities, in all societies.

I think I will be with drums! for a while.

So political work is not only about intellectual work. Now that is very important, especially when I come from the universities like I do. I spend my days in this office with one or two people in same room. What kind of collective action is that. But now let us take a second point. A cultural change is a political change, which I understand is follows. There is an increase in urge and desire by individuals to make their perspective. And their experience felt in the political community.

We have a kind of diversification and increase in plurality. A plurality which consists of each citizen. More citizens then before come to the Public sphere for common discussions, in the political arena, and make their own proposals. Look! I am a activist. I am an anti-recessionist. I am a guy fighting for gay rights. I am an Adivasi fighting for travel rights. I am a university guy fighting against privatisation of knowledge system. I am a Socialist worker. I fight for the autonomy of this region. The basic phenomenon is that there is more diversity in the political interest of definitions of Science, which come to the public attention. But it also creates in comparison with the mechanism with the mechanism of political organsations that we have in the developed 19^th & 20^th century. We I mean speak of the other left. Centre-left or green left or anything from Trotsky to farmers organizations. The people are here for World Social Forum. So what we have developed as instruments, or tools, a mechanism to organize politically. Have not been developed; it has not evolved in a situation where a phenomenal diversity of aspirations was there. And that creates at present moment this phenomenon it I am right in the diagnosis of this phenomenon. It has created a political situation  which I would describe as follows: That on one hand, we have a kind of split. I dramatize in order to make the point. The reality is more complex. But if I am dramatic about the split i.e. there is a split in the left between just to say! the movement is now the new promising from of organisations and we do not need more formal organisations like parties and Trade unions; who are struggling to get or influence more state powers primarily. What we need New-left is these movements. Which articulate new designs, which give alliances, issue specific rhythm which is not of long term. Is one of cooperation on issues and strategies. Today Iraq, tomorrow Mac Donald’s boycott. The other day Narmada Dam. So the moment people say that this is the creative post-modern; We bridge this new diversity or plurality of initiatives and alliances and this will be the effective force for changing the world. So that is one. So this is the primary form of political participation. This is participatory because each initiative is small. There is a local fight here. A local fight there. In each local fights a great possibility of participation by ordinary citizens. And form these collisions and things happen unpredictably but a Social change is there. And political change will follow. And everyone will receive peace and justice. So there is the fundamentalist position of the movement optimist. Then there is Party fundamentalism. Which is there in centrist party, Communist Party. Which say No! No! how can we win over an enemy, which controls the economy and through the economy it controls the political parties and the states in our countries. As long as the state and U.N. organisation are controlled by the enemy, they will be able to crush all open initiatives. Look! What they have done in Palestine. Look! What they have done in Narmada Look! what they have done to indigenous people in Finland. Look what they have done to farmers in Finland. Look what they do everywhere in the world. They use State power, economic power and military power, to destroy us.

So when we talk about the movement to change the world not as Romantic Movement. Then we need organisation, we need to control State power to need to control economy by State power we need one man one vote, as the most effective mechanism of democracy. For one-man one vote to be effective we must win elections. We cannot win elections without parties. So parties with programmes and ideological bases remain. The key to change and the Social movement romanticism is depoliticizing.It is allowing people to contribute. But the contribution is destructive. Because it is not bringing change but only a dream of change. But it brings no real change. So this is the party fundamentalism. So this is the second point I already made.

So I think what are the best forms of democratic participation, need to be discussed. The parties are in crisis. They are not effected by the mobilisation and kind of varieties that are there in movements and the movements are not effected by the kind of participation in the control and the direction of state power and economy which can only happen through electorate systems and the institutional system, which are answerable to the electrolate system. So this may do. First was the localization point. Second point was that these two models of participation must learn from each other and somehow we must create forms of organisations in which these two are not disagreeing but agreeing, on coming together. But I don’t know but I think this is the challenge, as I understand it. I don’t see World Social Forum, not only a fantastic tour or the best tour we had so far to take this challenge and do something with it. Thank you!

Chairperson (Lady): “We if have any questions, we take or if there is any other speaker of this session, I don’t know. Do you know if there are more speakers?”

Thomas: I do know one or two other speakers, but I don’t think, they are here. Well then, do you like to start. Do you have any questions. No! Questions, contributions, perspectives, experiences. Yes! Please.

Speaker: I just want to start with the point of localisation. You know in a traumatised society, when a politician is send out his office, he goes underground and in most of the cases he will begin to use local people to promote his agenda. And you know how can we help in this situation. Because here people somehow they are traumatised or sometimes they do not understand what they are taking about. Simply because someone from their community has come up with an idea and they simply began to sing a song. But in actual sense that is not in benefit of the community. In this case how do we go about it.

Chair: Actually, I also would like to say a few words in relation to that. Suppose we say democracy. Democracy goes with rights also. It is the question of rights and duties also. When we talk about democracy. When he says some people come and others start singing a song. Like that in context of democracy when we talk about rights, we also have some kinds of duties. And when you talk about some kind of minorities coming up with ideas. How this can be co-related with global democracy and how this can effect others, people want to know. And how many people are aware about these whole things. About their own rights and about their own duties and what will be the specific role of civil societies to take up all such things. Because as such if you look at India or if you look at other countries also. The higher economic class people higher educated people are not going to vote. So whom are they actually electing? Only the lower level people or grass root people who are only casting their votes. So what kind of democracy are we talking about in this context actually?

Speaker: My question today is what is there which is stopping them from voting.

Speaker: The basic answer is that they feel there is no alternative. Whoever is coming to power is exercising their power. There is no point if you go and caste. You may not elect the right person. And actually there is no choice for then to choose a right person. Very, very few people who actually are learned and educated are coming to cast a vote because of this. Actually who are not voting if you look at 60% or 70% of the voting actually in the name of democracy. Those people are actually been motivated by a group of people, or they have been bribed by a group of people to vote for them. Who do not understand the bigger realities. Who do not understand what is globalisation. Who don’t understand the democracy. They only see the limited kind of benefits and or immediate benefits. How actually civil society has a role in it?

One Speaker: Do you have the same problem?

Next Speaker: People are not aware. They have to be educated. So lack of awareness. And also economically they are weak. They are depending upon the leaders, or rich people. So they find it very difficult to practice the democratically activities. At village we found them. We educate them on their rights and their duties. There they are aware of this. They select them willingly who they give their voice for their right. That’s what I am doing in village level at district level of 120 villages.

Question: Are people eager about local self governance?

Speaker: O.K. before talking of democracy. Democracy system is different in every different countries. When you talk about western European countries, countries like India or South Africa. Here lots of people are poor and suppressed for years together. So it is very hard to find a solution. It is like you are a big family, and gross expectations from you is 100 dollars or 100 bucks and you have nothing in your pocket. So how to satisfy them all. If you satisfy one of them then other nine will cry and shout that you have satisfied only one section of the society. So what happens in Indian democracy or in underdeveloped countries. Like that the politicians. The democracy works only make people fight among each other in name of religion, caste or economic issues. So it is really hard to find solutions in short term. And other things are happening in globalisation. That we are running out time changes are knocking at our doors. So when we think about educating people and doing long term things. How we are going to achieve our targets. So I guess in India, if you consider a smallest constituency say of about 1000 people. Local people. So it might be in European countries whole the constituency must be of 1000 people. Actually there is no full solution to this. But I think we can come together on minimum things. If not democracy then the problem of cleanliness. People are not aware about their social problem. They are not concerned. Everybody is thinking about himself. About what I need in life and he is trying to achieve that. Educated people, middle class and upper middle class. So on few common things if we can come together. Like keeping our city clean. Planting trees around or donating blood. Being concerned about the Social issues. Then the things can move slowly. It is not easy to say that these things can solve the problem. But at least it can bring people to one step further to solve the problem. This is what I think.

Speaker: Is there an age, you know in which you can vote. O.K. so the age is 18. In 18 years you can vote here.

Chair: In India it 18years but basically we are talking about who are voting. And what kinds of people are actually getting elected. When we say about smaller pockets where we have movements about a group of people. What changes it brings to the entire community. May be some kind of local governance or Panchayat. When we talk about India and its three-tier system, lots of importance is given to Panchayat. Lot of power, information and focus is given to Panchayats now a days. But actually again Panchayat is been politicised by the senior level bureaucrats. Then is Panchayat elections, if bombs are there. Then what it is. It is not a Panchayat election. Again we are running a different kind of elections. Again it is not a democratic kind of situation. In that case, actually do you think, one small movement or one small village or three thousand village or one thousand village, do you think that affects one particular system. If you are not addressing the system only, if we have small-small movements also it does not bring actually change. You may be satisfied with your own movement system. Movement that has brought some changes in one particular area. You may be thinking that people are not aware. But I believe that people are aware but they are fighting among them selves for a kind of survival. What he says is actually right. If we have less amount of resource, each one tries to grab like we say in competition, initially with civil societies they say that funding agencies were not supporting. I am sorry to say all this about funding agencies and all that. It is a survival again. If they do not fund. They do not survive. If we do not get funds we do not survive. Then it is a competition between survival. And in the country also there is always a fight for the survival. Who is surviving. There are lots of agencies namely working for poor. They use crores of money, which is duped, into the country for the development of poor and people. But what is happing. How many people actually are developing. If you say development. Is it only the economic indicator? Is it the only social indicator? Who is actually monitoring these indicators. And everyday the government is changing. Everyday the politicians are changing. The numbers of ministers are changing. Whom should we rely on? And I think public is taking advantage of the situation. If I go and give money then you vote for me. The next day somebody else will go and give them Rs. 10/-. Next day somebody else will give Rs. 15/-. And they should actually enjoy these benefits. Because we are actually trying to confuse them they take advantage of whole thing. And it actually effects others. Because that is the part of the whole system. Unless we address the whole system, I don’t think we are bringing any change.

New Speaker: There are so many N.G.Os. More than six hundred N.G.Os. are here. Whether while we need to realise the democracy of participation do we need N.G.O. or a movement. Because among N.G.O. as you said when you get money, you are able to survive and we are able to bring in people in people and do anybody else, if it is really a movement people themselves will come and contribute. Therefore we need N.G.Os., are not only in this country in other countries also where we are depressed. Where we are not having a participatory democracy. Whether we need the N.G.Os. or the real movements. Now NGOs say, you one hundred people you come, we are going to have a drama like this. We are going to spend ten or eleven in Mumbai and we are going to see the place and other things. So they brought and dumped the people here. Now this group really they are going to work back in their own villages. They are just getting fund and they will be giving their report. Like we went there and we did all these kind of things there. If it is a movement then it is different. Their contributions, their feelings, their sufferings have come over here and they will get the things what they had? And they will be able to typically see things whether it is a need of having such a Social Forum for our participatory democracy or our survival or whatever it is. Here you can explain to us what exactly this movement means. If it is better you can explain to us. Please.

Next speaker: I think throughout the discussion, democracy is only in elections. We elect some person and they govern us. Democracy is like something only on election basis. Participatory democracy as I understand means that it should come from the power of the people to influence the politicians and government to do our idea. I think people have a power to take decisions about what they want. In my experience, Kerala is the first state to in the world I think, it is a miracle. Kerala government gives to its people power to do what they want. And the economics and 40% of their annual income comes from village and people decide what they want and they influence the people at Panchayat. That likes of democracy. I think localisation means that. In moral system, all the people vote to some politician and they do not get chance to question people on democracy locally. We have to change to people at grassroot level. People should have freedom to discuss their problems not only to discuss but take decisions. Here people take decisions not politicians.”

Next speaker: Actually all are educated in Kerala.

Intervention: “No education is not a problem because in democracy all the people are there. Some are not educated. Some have more experience but no education. Experience is the better way. People to go into the village. They ask problems. I think some of the people had no chance to read, to write but they have good experience. They have a clear idea. What they want. What we have to do. They have good experience. Education is also by local bodies made accusable”.

Speaker: I work for gender and education. I feel we need to look at this paradigm of education, we are talking about, and how it influences participation in democracy. I need think we need to look at democracy, sexuality and people’s participation, rather than looking at the issue in isolation. We need to talk about the nature of education and how it enables participation & democracy. In Kerala, we have a case and I just like to take off from there where participation & democracy is possible through decentratised processes that took place. But in my experience while working through Mahila Sanakheya Program now disbanded, in which Kerala participated for a while. It is education for women equality program of the government of India in which Kerala participated for a while. Women had literacy. But that opportunity for literacy had enabled them to expand the boundaries of their limited participation because the kind of education that is there is not really empowering in the formal system. I really need to look at those boundaries can be pushed to enable participation and make education much more empowering for participation and governance.

Speaker: Educated people will not necessarily participate in a democratic situation. Because the education we are getting is the competitive education for survival. If I have a daughter and I am educating her. I expect her to be doctor or a lawyer but at what cost and what she has given to the community and what she is getting back from the community, we never analyze that. Education I don’t agree that is the only means where people can be actually empowered to participate. I have a social analysis of whole things and what exactly we were contributing to the society is something different………..

…..make you more selfish, makes you more self content and other self activities rather than contributing to the society. Now actually the education system in our country is like that. We do not actually discuss as to what is happening. What is the impact. What we are heading at. I think it is very confined to a particular area. You read this line, it will be like that. So it never talks about the society and its impact and how it can contribute to the democratic situations and the conflict is that from the very childhood from the core social human process we are been actually groomed in such a way that we become very individualistic. We never thought about the entire community or the country. No parents want their children to be a farmer. Everybody wants either a white-collar jobs or something great. So who talks about green revolution. Who talks about a farmer’s life? What for? I am educating my daughter in a very high profile school then my neighbour wants to send and copy. Even if primary school is not nearby. So what kind of education they are talking about. Education not always gives you wisdom. Not always will give you impact the entire facts and figures of the society.

Speaker: I think we are away from the main subject. We are just touching the wing of education only. Education does not mean participatory democracy. I will narrate three incidences about what we are doing. Because I am not talking in air but I am talking on ground realities. Our first experience is that we established a Lajpat Bhawan Family to help the poor. Initially it was Re1/ month. Now gradually it is changing and now it is Rs.10/month and we get more than one lakh rupee per month to help the poor. We are giving scholarships to slum areas, medical areas and many facilities to the poor sections and then we invite whosoever has some waste material in their houses. Our system of the people will go and collects and distribute in slum area because everybody should feel that I am participating in the empowerment. Then when we distribute some relief, we create awareness that you are responsible citizens. You have to participate. This is one example. And I am just giving a short. And then in Punjab area we have started movement to construct a school for students. Now government has no funds. Because government has corruption but then they will release the fund. So we said that every farmer, in the rural area should contribute Re 1/Quintal. So we sell goods for Rs. 600 or Rs. 500 or Rs. 1000, so Re 1/Quintal. Very insignificant. But with this method we have collected lakhs of rupees and constructed school in more than hundred villages. Better education, text books for the poor students, good furniture, good equipments, even computers. Because every year we are collecting the funds and modernising the schools. New stadiums, hospitals, dispensaries, employment of teachers, employment of doctors with Re1 per quintal out of the produce. So we are generating funds then government comes and says you are doing good work, so we also want to contribute something. This is another aspect of rural reconstructions.

At national level we are advocating and upto the chief election office we have succeeded. Now chief election commissioner has taken up this call. M.S. Gill and now Lindo also. Our aim is that for participatory democracy people should have the right to reject. Because we see that people do not say that “Sab Chor Hae”. All are thieves. Why should we vote for them. They sit at home. But if everybody is made compulsory to vote either to elect or reject a person. So they say that this is constitutional amendment. We say no! in the people’s representation act it is a small minor clause which says the people have a right to elect. We say insert the word oblique REJECT.

So when this right will be granted every ballot paper will have column, which says, “I reject all”. In i.e. NOTA. “None of the above all”. We started this movement in 1987 and gradually it has picked up and now the chief election commissioner is advocating the case. Now when we have the right to reject. Then the people of all political parties will field such candidates who have no criminal records. Because they will fear that there candidate will be rejected by majority of people. Because their time is short. So from grassroot level we made the movement and now Chief Election Commission has agreed and because of pressure from intellectuals side, college side, from school, from advocate side. So we build the movement and took about 7 to 8 years and now Chief Election Commissioner says; i.e. M.S. Gill then Lindo that in record meetings of all political parties to please  accept this. But they are afraid, because they are not genuine people. They are fielding that candidates by hook or crook. Second thing should that candidates should be elected by plus 50% votes. If they do not get 50% votes, they should not be elected. We have provided satisfactory figures that according to people’s representative Act if they do not get votes they should not be elected. We have provided more figures that according People’s Representative Act if they do not get even 10% votes, then their securities should be fortified. And we have these figures in Lok Sabha and lost their deposits but had been declared elected and became ministers. It is just contrary to democracy.

Secondly now elections are held on religion and caste basis on sectarian basis and if everybody has to plus 50% votes then they will not divide the people on caste basis or religion people. Because in each constituency they will have to get 60% to 70% votes. And then it will not be a fight among the voters but harmony campaign will be there. And so many problems created by political parties will be over. Now these amendments now revised by the election commissioner and we are going. And even Supreme Court partly agreed by saying that candidates should have clean record. They did not accept the negatives, because for negatives that said candidates with clean records should be there. But they said that even cannot pass the legislation for negative vote but they have passed their ruling that candidate should have a clean record and should declare their past record. So this way at National level, at rural reconstruction level and at community level we are trying to bring people in the fold of participatory democracy. Thank you very much.

Next speaker: I think democracy has two legs. One is election and the other is the process. Election is not a problem in a participatory democracy or in deepening democracy. Because all the political issues are affecting the people. And so people have a power to take decisions through elections. It is not a solution because there is no chance for people to be involved. We give power to people, and people decide the process of democracy. In that process all the parties, all the community can evolve. Because this is our village. In here all the people of different communities, different language can evolve this process of democracy. This process is the main part. Through election there is no solution for democracy. Here process builds up the confidence of the people. We can change the solution.

First speaker: As sister asked to work for people’s movement. Sister will it help? Personally as in my previous question sometimes you may find out that community is traumatised, terrorized and cannot have a chance to help. Now if you have a neighbour who can help you out, you are in trouble. It is like you are sick is your room, you need somebody; A good neighbour. Not anybody, a good neighbour, to come and help you. And when we say a good neighbour, it means you as suffering should gain out your desires. And in the process you can discover who is the person who can help you. And think this is necessary. This gives a better gain to what I have. My intention of asking that question was, I was trying to say that for us a peoples movement we need to go beyond slogans. Because sometimes you see a colourful slogan but people behind the slogan are actually devil. They have satanic intentions and unless it gets out of the way then definitely it we will be ending up supporting a wrong revolution. This is what I wanted to present”.

Next Speaker: Women for instance in parts of Uttaranchal which is the northern Himalayan State decided that they will not vote for anybody who does not take up issues of violence against women. So in the whole district of Tehri there is a campaign. Tehri is the mountainous district. But in that area women group themselves from village to village said that we will do a campaign. Where we will not vote. The devil was within the home. The devil was within the village. Many of the people who have won elections who have campaigned for parties were actually the people who had either victimised women in their own homes, or there were people who had civil cases against them or they were actually people who were perpetuators of violence in different ways. Caste violence as well genders violence. The Women of Tehri campaigned that we will not allow these people to stand and we will expose them publicly. And we need more of tat kind of accountability network at community level where issues not only of transparency level like whether you are corrupt, whether you are paying your income tax. But actually looking at fundamental issues of justice. If these people are voices of justice, we support them and hold them accountable. And if these are not voices of justice, gender justices, class justices, caste justice, then how do we build movement, actually and as the friend here said that process involved is as important. How do we inform about choices we make for an informed democratic process that engages with community interest, that engages with gender interest, that engages with class interest? Thank you”.

New speaker: By involving a section of people as voters, it makes process easy for the politicians. As seen in Punjab, about one hundred to one hundred fifty people go and vote. People are well active. In J&K and Assam over three hundred people go and vote. They said that all right you have made over process easy. About 90% have boycotted the election and we will vote to go to only 10% who will vote and we will get elected. Unless the negative votes and unless they increase the number of meaningful votes, they should not be elected. That is must:”

New speaker: How we can change. Only two parties are there for election. If one party wins but why the other people i.e. 90% people came through election process.

Thomas: I just want to help. I don’t know if I can. But we have this phenomenon of Indian experience and probably very deep experience. Also Sudans present. Let me just note that I think one thing that is self-evident for you in India but which all of us from aboard know. It is the rise of Fascism in India. They do not call it as Fascism. They call it as communalism. They call it Hindutva, I don’t know if you are aware. But the one liner is that if the villages in India is not only left to our people who are trying to win the votes. The devil is there as well in this country is a very big way. Since 1990, they had been winning the elections basically. So after 1992. They are there in the villages. These Hindutva who are trying to create a ‘Hindu’ State. They want to get rid of this Secular State. So they are killing Muslims and Christians. So they are in power. So they are creating violence and are in power. They have come to power because they had been able to present themselves with good promises. Now, I don’t know and wonder whether you have a similar problem i.e. in our villages? in my parts. It is very similar, but I am not geeing into that. The big difference is that we are a rich country and not a poor country. So our farmers are not killed or are not left to die. They just have to leave their farms. So it plays dramatic problems. But a some kind of problems are there. So the people come and tell good things and they were for those who are now running the world, through politics, through World Trade Organisation, and even raises cards of caste, Hindutva and also terror orgnisations or military organisations. But I could not understand the mechanism as to how you identify a good neighbour. Can distinguish separately these mechanism.

Chair: Yes! I agree we should know how do we identify the Devil!” Because that is important.

Previous Speaker: What I was trying to say is that it is an issue of you knowing your own desires. Then you share these desires with who has things & experience. But as you know all NGOs, partners and donors they have their own interest. But if your interest does not go with their interest they will never accept your program. What I am saying personally is that it is wrong to deal with someone in terms of interest. Once you have two people definitely they have an interest. Even when a husband and wife when they decide to together they have an interest. You try to fish out what is that interest that what is your, so that you can promote your agenda and solve you problems, without I am saying is that as he says in every community there are definitely people who are good. Those good people should come out and project their desires of the community. So that they can find out who out here will be of help.

Next speaker: My query is that I work for community in Gujarat. Now everyone knows there has been a carnage. These have been people displaced from there because there has been a communal violence and that has been instigated externally through the majoritism of those who live in that village and we know that people who have moved out of the villages in situation of desperation because they do not have the support of the good neighbour. Even where they did get some support, the community was not fractured around the communal lines. But today there are forces that are influencing local power. The Panchayat; you understand is a local third tier of the self-governance system and is aligned with majoritism. Is aligned with building of a Hindutva identity. And for those who have had to leave their homes in situations where they have been oppressed by the majority community. Wherever Panchayats did not people did not have to leave. They did take a stand, people can’t go back now. Because those communities are saying these are the people those complain against our husbands for violating the land. Tell them to take back their cases from the court and then we will accept them. And if you sending them back send them with a police escort, because we do not take charge of their security. That is the reality. That is the reality of fascism in Gujarat. We need to understand that there are ways in which even local people will link up with plural identity. Then there is the neighbourhood identity. There is the community identity. Then there is the religious, the gender and the race identity. Which are playing. So what is this identity that we hold supreme and then build that bridge of neighbourhood.

Speaker: Even the person who is actually behind. Suppose you talk about a slogan. You talk about those behind the slogan. The people, who are actually motivating those who are behind these slogans, sometimes we doubt gender integrity. Suppose when we talk about gender and they go back and do some nonsense at home. And who is actually leading these movements. Sometimes people get confused whom to actually relate.

Speaker: We were just talking about democratising society. Half our society has women voters. Now when we talk about educating women voters on these issues. We have a response that women’s education on these issues is not important. So where do we go with these process? Unless you understand the links of the race, gender, class identities that are claiming to influence or control the political processes at the grass root level or which are appointed to. So we are really looking at these. You said that similar patterns are there in your areas also around the issues of race and class.

Thomas: Yes! That also in some areas of Finland. But in Western Europe the situation is bad. But in Western Europe, the situation is very bad. The whole Western European political system is learning towards the right not because the Fascist are in power. They are in power in Italy. But because almost whole Western European countries now and it is rising now in Eastern Europe, what used to be Eastern Europe. Have significant parties, parties with usually 50% of votes, which are running on racial platform. So they are building on same identity in societies. It is very close to what is happening in India. But you have an appeal to the French people or British or Swedish. That this multiculturalism is dangerous that we need to protect our identities. Stop immigrations. We do not want to give rights to refugees. We do not want to give rights to the immigrants. And this problem is talking the entire identity politics, which is destroying so that has to be mobilised from below. So they can mobilise the people who have not much indications. They have people who are unemployed. So it is the same.

Speaker: Rights of religious and national identity and the economic processes. Actually neo-liberalism is creating or is inter connecting with the rights of fascism that is based on majority religion or majority race also. Because it serves their interest to protect there rather close their own economics and establish their identity more firmly. So evidence of that is becoming more and more evident and explicit in our country.

Speaker from abroad: So how do draw and implement the winning strategy in India?

Speaker: I think for me what has been a beginning process in WSF is the bridging of alliances between the movement. We cannot have fractures in the movement O.K. like you raise a Dalit issue and I am from a Women organisation so I don’t take your issue. For me a dalit woman is one who is oppressed and it is she who needs a larger struggle of the oppressed. Fighting against a unilateral closed attitude. Fighting against the causes of injustice rather than only my cause. All these cause than become my cause. And it is really bridging those barriers which do not allow us to see each other oppressions which we limit ourselves to only one identity and building those bridges across our movements think India is definitely going to be where we should be heading. As also in this platform about kind of Fundamentalism which is very important.

Maracile Dastila: My name is Maracile Dastila. I live in USA. I work with immigrants. With rights of immigrants. I think what you say is the key in Social movements. Because one of the problems we see in United States is how powerful they are in dividing us in taking away from us any opportunity for exercising our civil rights and human rights. They mostly divide us against Africa and America. On racial lines more than anything. Also on class lines. They are all oppressed. People of color. They had same inadequate housing health care, how wages, higher percentage of kids in jail instead of school. How can we build class-consciousness that these kids are ours. People who divide, I think through that division they which to continue to control us.

Khursid Imam: I was very keenly listening to all participants. I don’t think I have anything to add to it except that very few issues left that participation is all about different people coming from different backgrounds and contribute to expand a harmonies and healthy society, where each one has something to contribute and a role to play. At least in influential vote making process, which is very important.

New speaker: When people talk about education, the key point is somehow but in relation to what is local. Then there is there is this wealth sharing process where local identification of resources is important. Some tea-shirts here say. How to overcome? Old slogan of Adivasis. But it is all very important. So many groups who know much about earth but can’t write then their knowledge of working with hands all tools and all about working with respect to individual qualification instead of quality or resource this society can give as you were pointing out. Then hegemony of education so far is something like text and just can’t go through like education as such. If we talk of education in theory it should be combined practically with a clear project work and clear campaigning in Social movements. So this is the real question that how education can be combined with real progress of people. Then we also have tools and keys. If we can combine people with their cooperation to reach some practical small goals. We can also use traditions. We can also community to reach something also in a social process. So we can reach something together. So it will be more meaningful for people instead of more and more commercial things.

New speaker: I am just trying to follow the same line. She said something very good, commended there also. Secondly we need actually to work in a way to benefit all of us, because all of us belong together. And this if we connect it with this issue of indication it brings out the need for a human centre of dedication. Because sometimes there is a education of system that does not help at all. Education of system that instigates other against other, I think this does not help. I think it is high time for us to promote a people’s movement, to promote a system of education to campaign an education that can be of human centred. Otherwise we will be producing educated people but they are not enlightened, they are not well informed. As a result they will make decisions that are informed decisions.”

New speaker: Yesterday at the panel of dialogues between movements. One thing, which I found very important, is that why is it that movements move on and comprise on basic issues. And for instance they say that we would not move on. We would not form alliances with other movement that compromise on anyone of our community. So if people are getting compromised with our movement, no don’t allow then to speak against our interests. And they were talking of Women movement. Women movement does not take up issues of Trans gender people. Similarly I say that if there are people in cross movements, there is a basis of agreement. There are spaces of agreement. If within our own community and within our spaces wherever we are working. And each of us have this multiple identity. Working with women, with grassroots issues, with class issues, with environment issues. Looking at poor. We look at what is that common ground where we can work together. Identity that then we can build on human society. Whatever material we build is an education material. For instance if I am working for an environments program, I see that sustainable development related to environment is related to people’s livelihood issues. And women are a major part of the economy at the survival level. So these are the cross cutting issues we can all work out. And lastly women movement does not move ahead without the other movements and the class movement then takes up the women issues and the class issue. For those that are specific to class and composite issues. So we looking to those common non negotiable, and start building on then up in our programmes in our relationship. I also invite you to look at the materials developed and that we are trying to develop. We are at the exhibition hall A-74.

New speaker: I hope it will not take us away from the local level, if I make one point on education. That the basic problem, I see with the education system, we have and I think we got to get familiar about Western Europe. I think our education system is model or can serve as a model for several countries. You learn to read and write. Then there are languages, arithmetic. You learn history, geography and all this. Now what is the purpose of this educational system. What is the fundamental purpose in my society and I believe in many countries. Well, in Finland, it is overwhelmingly nominated by the idea that as a result of going through this formal education, the individual will be empowered to make a contribution to the Economic productive system. So that is the goal. So how can a individual be empowered to contribute a person in the productive economy. It is not the productive citizen that they are looking forward to. It is an obedient, efficient producer who can contribute in capitalist economy. How can this happen. Now it happens if the person at the end of the education has a special talent in a economy based at a very, very deep layer in the division of labour. So the goal of the education is that everybody becomes a specialist. Because only specialist can be economically productive. So all should become specialist with some scheme that is economically effective. So this education is an absolute enemy to the idea of the situation in which the people become citizens who care for the society. Because then you are not a specialist but a generalist who act with wide awareness and who cares to encourage responsibility.

And our educational system does not promote that. Formally if there is one hour of citizenship education and there is thirty hours to become a specialist. So this is the relation we have. But we are so dependent on this international economy that we are; people are very afraid that if my son, my daughter does not become a specialist, they become unemployed or they will become poor, and they will not survive. In my country if they will loose there dignity even if they survive. In your country they may survive.

And I will give another example as to how it works. I have a friend who is studing rapid phenomenon in Arab countries than in U.S. or Europe. That domestic labour as when I grew up who almost come from the subvert class. There were doctors. There were engineers, professors all who came from middle class. But people like me in university I grew up with people who shared. Like sisters, fathers, mothers who all shared work as domestic labours. Now our university colleges have sweepers from Philippines, young Indian women or al women who come from the Eastern Europe or South. So the class comes this way. Now I have been the physiologist who studies the life experiences and expectations of these women in Paris and in Finland. And one of the sources of interviews with these women is strategy. It is not a political strategy. The strategy is that of a survival or what is the mechanism of survival. The main mechanism is that they bring one son. One son from India, from Guatemala, from Philippines. And if this one son gets education and manages from this neo-liberal capitalist economy, then that son can cater for the families of Philippines. So this is the. So what kind of education? This is all I wanted to share with you. You can interpret.”

New speaker, From U.S.A.: But I think it is more dangerous. In the United States the education of system also makes them while collared instead of been empowered. It makes them more, white conscious. This makes your Euro-centric. You hardly know any contributions of your know. Forget society or ethic groups. Any contributions to world or humanity. So in our kids self-esteem is very low. Because of no progressive education system. Because of this formal input of years in the education which is so important for developing a strong sense of identity. Then it is damaged to make us believe that humanity and identity is of no value because it is not reflected in the education system and curriculum. So then they accept hatred and gang violence. Because of hatred which is because of not finding any place in society because the powerful education system erases its sign to perpetrate the domination of a system. The ideology of U.S.A. is not helping our children. It is alienating our children. So the concept you are mentioning here is, I think the basis of education should be more human centred to make it meaningful. I think if we all evaluate the existing system of education in U.S.A. Example there is human right for everyone based on the idea that there is a superior race in human…………. 

New speaker, Kerala: …….. and the money it is somewhere brought from the agency or somewhere. It is their own. They owe the responsibility. They know how to spend one Paise. Give education to child. They have a right. That way if we bring everywhere in each village. This is what education. Then you go to village centres. Education centres that stood for life on basis of morality. Then other way is to develop themselves. To create good atmosphere in village itself. So that way they will not allow police to get in villages, That way they will not allow corrupt people inside the villages. And if they are given money also, they will throw back the money on the face and will not vote them in Kerala. Then you have only one food for the day but still they have the dignity. If the N.G.Os.bring so many people here in WSF they won`t fear.They won`t have any right to ask the NGO also. Please he brought the money, he i.e. N.G.O. gives them food. So again they are becoming slaves. So instead of N.G.O. if they are really form the movement from themselves to everything.From there they and we are going to be in a civil society movement and then we will have democratic participation. Otherwise there is a dissent.

Even yesterday about W.S.F. not me, people outside ask why they need a Social Forum. From where they get the money. They question where this money is really from movements or from the masters in U.S. who pool for the people here and they wanted people to come and cry here. This is what now they are against. And they are here against in Mumbai having a separate meeting. They are questioning as to why we are here. In India, you know this much people are poor and not having anything and let them cry. And we will have our own tower of W.S.F. We will sell. Like this they are saying. So the real society movement, civil society movements have to come from people. For that we have to give an education. This is where is education. An education that each one should need that one has to liberate oneself and to ten one of them, liberating them. And they will take those things. And ten will take the step for further mass liberation.

Chairperson: When you say that they have to know, then somebody has to actually facilitate the entire process. I also agree with you when you talk about the N.G.Os. But I cannot generalise that it happens with all N.G.Os. But it happens with some of them. Because we have experiences in Tribal remote areas, some people used to facilitate with these movements. When movements are in the peak of its then some people encroach upon the area and will destroy. Those people who are fighting for the rights, fighting for the penny then these do not get any money. But people who come from outside, they come for money, with money pumped they divide. Then people think why few people get money while majorities do not. So the whole movement in some cases is sabotaged. In that cases, what exactly what you do.

New speaker: Building movements of NGO’s or Civil Societies with accountability is required.

Previous speaker: People in such areas have disturbing life. They do not have roads. No schools etc. Their children are not able to go out of villages, to school. Here NGO’s and people they destroy whole villages. Man and Women are given money. Most do not accept money at all. They say they want rights. But some stood out and asked their own neighbors to contribute. The fought the case, Human Rights had come and they fought the case. They made C.M. Jayalalita to visit the place. When she visited, they said we don’t like your common session. We do not want untouchability to survive have. We want to get rid of discrimination. She wanted to give the money. She brought the cheque book and all. They refuse to get it. They said we will get it from court. Whether she hates then or whether they informed. Many got arrested at the station. Now these all were people not any N.G.O. or anybody else.

New speaker: The point you are making is relevant. In place of money there should be unity and demand for rights for all of us looking for development priorities and also for justice. I just wanted to back. Since that was the point well taken. The means need to be addressed. And each of us is accountable about what each of us is doing. Whether we are mobilizing resources and enabling others to have an access to community. The point, which I wanted to make, was building hegemonies through education. Hegemony in the sense i.e. prioritizes education system, curriculum. As you said the entire neo-liberal education system is based on production and enabling people to participate in education. I just wanted to share one thing very quickly since I have to be with some other group. In India, the national circullum framework has been promoted by B.J.P. government. The national circullum framework has been in the guise of a framework, but actually is an educational policy for school education. And the way it is formulated is based on Hindutva ideology, very implicitly but is also based on the neo-liberal ideology of perpetrating a work force that can serve the elite. It is very implicit. Right in the beginning it talks about. In the beginning we had this great tradition. We had no books to go on. We had no religious tents to go around, except those which they go on rectifying themselves. But they not really come out of the month of religion. They keep talking about of this great vedic age where there is a pre-occupation of a gender roles. Cost system and subordination of women is validated in page 4 and page 9 of this document. Then it goes on to say that the class system enabled the people to traditionally accept the family occupation. So in our system, our education system we need to combat these kinds of bifurfications of people into the working class and the elite. And it says that 5% to 10% people will themselves go for higher education and rest for vocational trainings. So there is a whole transformation of vocationalisation and neo-liberalisation to produce a work force to serve neo-liberal elites. It is very interesting how religion is projected. There is no talk of leaders from the dalit movement. No talk of Muslims leaders. There is no talk even in our independence movement about people commons. People who are talked here in this movement are upper caste Brahmins and leadership, which B.J.P. itself has. And I do believe that this is a very fascist tendency. They quote the leaders, which have a fascist history also in the World. This has been amazingly has a movement throughout their petition says that this is an unjust document. And it does not keep up with constitution merely by saying it is not a policy but merely a framework for constitution. So it does exactly to lie out for a framework which will go into all open books. And children are going to learn about as to how they should be treating men and women as pre-audio? into a gender role. Children will know only that the religious majority has the right to be the majority within the constitution and this nation will have lesser rights as people of a lesser god. So these all things become very subversive and explicit at one level. Basic primary education will be the prescription of this through the textbooks through the ways that education is going to be structured. While the Supreme Court may have thrown it out let us look at the implications. We are right now with the Delhi government, which fortunately is the opposition government in creating alternate textbooks. So that this kind of fundamentalism, fascism, injustice and unconstitutional education does not get into the textbooks. And we would really placed with Kerala and KPSS, because there is a democratic process there in education and you have a say that how the democratic process there in education is defined and also in West Bengal. There is a hope that challenges the fundamental forces and the neo-liberal forces and say there is another world possible, there is another way of enabling human education.

New speaker: We have to redefine education. For what, for whom this education. Education is the holistic development of a personality. Whether he is a doctor or an Engineer, he can’t concern himself with the people. He don’t know how to live in the world. That means there is no point to get education. When the market forces, privatisation and education come into a system to an extent where values get lost. All are looking for technological edcuation, English education. The effect of this education on 80% or 90% tribals and subordinate people have lost their lives and hope. Then coming to the participation of the movements, my question is from where you have to concern. All education system one way or other is the politics. The politics play with the education system is very bad. In India we are facing this most situation. Then the participatory or the circullum. What kind of circullum we can make it In India, 80% of people are subordinates. The people working on circullum or formal education system are not even talking about the majority. 80% people are totally neglected and then forming a system. They want to bring back the system. Or that only over 90% people are Indian. In Kerala over 905 do not enter the primary school. How much donation they have to give. How English education and convents are spoiling the majority. For participation we have to look at the majority. We have to talk to them. What education they want? They, they expect. We should impose through a particular system. So this was what I wanted to comment.

Next speaker: I want to make one point. As he says the need of people’s movement. It is right that we have a people’s movement and that is the best way to bring together the democratic changes in the country. People movements take place within. I come from a place from where fundamentalist and politicians are paying money to get the people for getting meeting organised or rallies organised. So getting in people’s movement, people are just waiting to get something in their day to day life. Some of these who are too poor. For them to have people’s movement from people who are fabricating this kind of movements. There comes the role of N.G.Os. Genuine N.G.Os. if they are interested. And the money from foreign agencies goes within the country. Perspective of the sources that can be utilised for a proper purpose. It is easy to do it for a foreign agency and people Bash agencies and Bash-donors. It is easy. But for N.G.Os. to sustain itself and sustain its work properly we need to have fund and proper patience to work out the proper strategy to have a peoples movement in a proper manner. I think in India we have seen so many N.G.Os. doing a commendable job.

Interruption: What she meant that it is not the responsibility of one N.G.O. it is the responsibility of each person to educate another to bring all together. There is no need for any N.G.O., no need for any movement to be externally generated. At least one person whose responsibility is to educate that person of neighbourhood. “ You N.G.Os. try to intervene and educate but general public is interested in self movements.This is very important.

Speaker: Why can’t there be a facilitator.

New speaker: My name is Jessey Wanning. I think we have to be very careful, as I had been listening. I have been hearing people talking about majority, majority and majority. And this again is in my view is a kind of dictatorship. When you  talk about participatory, we mean system that represented. Even if you are a minority, I think you need to be seen reflected in your system of education. So where there is majority and the educational system look like this, I think it cannot help images outside this topic.

Another thing is blanket statements here for us. For e.g. I am coming from Sudan where there is a war, between A and B. I believe that all those in B are all labours. They are good people. Even in A there are good people. So we should not try and give blanket statement. For e.g. when you say all the donors all the partners and all N.G.Os. are bad, I cannot believe that. Because definitely there must be good people, there must be good N.G.Os. and that is why the bottom line is people. You have to see people. Out of these million N.G.Os., which are those who are in line with our thinking and this is where education comes in. Critical analysis of thinking comes in. you see. Imagine doing that. You will have a wrong choice.

Chairperson: I think we should conclude or anybody, wants……….

Old speaker: What I wanted to speak about majority was that participatory means we have to find out people who are more represented. We are not getting in with people who are more participatory.

Chairperson: See basically we have discussed about the education system and how it is effecting the movements. She has already narrated the movements and he has discussed about Finland and he has already spoken about Sudan and make a caution to all of us and indirectly also we can get trapped in question of a majority or minority. But the basic question is that the right to choice and the right to decide what is wrong and what is right sometimes confuse us. Even while leading the movement sometimes people who lead have some kind of ideas which are often or sometimes which may not be the right kind of idea or which may not be supportive to people. So it is very difficult here to decide here and say that this is right and this is wrong. So it is basically if I ask myself also sometimes, I get confused as to what is right and what is wrong. Because you get lots of information. Yesterday, I attended a seminar, which talked a lot about the pollution level here. When we talk about pollution and when it is happening right in front of us and we do not have a role to do anything and we can only talk. So it is very difficult to build a movement and see its results. So at least all of us should try our best to choose to decide what is wrong and what is right. I thank you all for participating here and we have volunteered us to decide and discuss. Thanks a lot. We conclude the session.

For Hindi click here

Copyleft. Any part of the content on this site can be used, reproduced, or distributed freely by anyone, anywhere and by any means. Acknowledgement is appreciated.

Designed and maintained by CAPITAL Creations, New Delhi. Phone 91-11-26194291