Nomad in POA fsm 2005 - report in english

[ljesover]

REPORT: Nomad International in the January 2005 World Social Forum in Porto Alegre

Published in "International-Nomad" mailinglist on Monday 21 Feb.

This report was made by the Nomad International team (ljesover is just the person who copied it and pasted it here)

The aim of this report is to give a brief account from Nomad's perspective of the events leading to our partcipation in the 2005 WSF in Porto Alegre (POA) and to outline the lessons to be learned for future forums.

In May 2005 the first meeting between the people of Porto Alegre wishing to participate in the NIFT installation of the WSF and Nomad, took place. In September 2005, Julien flew to Porto Alegre to help create a local team that would start the production of the various equipment in time for the arrival of Nomad International in January 2005. A local team was created around Itair (an electrotechnician and the curator of a local community radio in one of Porto Alegre's favela), whom we had met at our first (May) meeting. Julien suggested that a research and develoment laboratory be set up (in the Gasometro). This local team worked with and under the control of the Porto Alegre organizing comittee which reported to the Brazilian Secretariat. The POA organizing committee followed one of Nomad suggestions by entrusting the production of the requested material (designed by the Brazilian team following Nomad International's proposals) to a local cooperative. The production of this material started only in January 2005 because its funding was delayed by the Brazilian secretariat.

From January onwards, the process of preparation suffered from a clear contradiction between the vertical (hierachical) line of command practised by the Brazilian organizing committee and the horizontal (and we think : more democratic) organization aiming at involving international activists in the construction of the forum.

This contradiction was striking:

In terms of responsibility: political and practical, of the project. It had not really been defined who was in charge of what. Nomad had been recognized by the Internationan Council of the WSF as politically responsible for the project, but this responsability was hijacked by the local team who decided everything withour refering to Nomad International. Javier, who had travelled in mid November from London to Porto Alegre, found himself cut off from the decision-making process as much by the local translator (not being called to the meetings) as by the local production team which was following the instructions from the Brazilian committee without informing – let alone consulting - Nomad International.

This confusion of responsibility led to a definite lack of communication between the local participants and the international network. Decisions were taken or followed vertically, according to an inter-Brazilian pattern and information only travelled up and down. This lead to a specific division of labour : the local team taking unique responsibility for the audio side (transmission of the translation to the public) while the computer software and hardware was left to Nomad International (for recording and streaming).

The local team chose to follow only the local committee's instructions, making it impossible to decide anytthing collectively within the Nomad network. Things got even worse when Nomad International found out that Itair had decided to 'protect' the work of the laboratory by copyright...

To conclude : Nomad was politically excluded from participation in the Forum...

The consequence of this series of contradictions was that the Nomad participants in the international network as well as the local people supervising the hardware production only found out two days before the forum that the material was far from being ready. The cooperative, working under the supervision of Itair, had finished neither the radio transmitters (which were sent urgently to another factory to finish during the night of the 25th of January) nor the mixers (the production of which was postponed with the possibility of having them completed after the forum). Two days before the forum, Nomad International had to start imagining a way to cope with the translation (while reducing the number of cabins originally set at 40, because we could not find enough material locally to equip the cabins).

Then we faced another problem, with direct implications on the proceeding of the forum: how to train the volunteers to operate the new system.

About 600 volunteers had been recruited by the POA organising committee to welcome, distribute the necessary equipment (helmets...) and generally manage the audio and computing side (recording and streaming) of the system. 200 Babels volunteers were also supposed to help coordinating the rooms. The change in the equipment generated a crisis among the volunteers who were not trained to handle the new material. Only the members of the Brazilian Laboratory and of Nomad International (now 15, including the newcomers) could handle the translation system for the duration of the forum.

Since the working methods of the two teams were utterly contradictory (the Brazilian lab. on their own, but under the command of the local committee), we ended up by dividing the forum territory into two different entities.

This crisis situation was made even worse when, on the second day of the forum, we learnt that the cooperative workers might not be paid for their work because they had not completed the production of the material on time. In a normal business contract, where the terms would specify that the goods had to be produced for a specific date, this could be understood. But in this case, the cooperative was not working independently on a specific job. They were working under the instructions of a forum controller who oversaw and managed the whole production process and therefore it was not the cooperative but the POA organising committee which should have been made accountable for the delay. The Nomad collective and some Babels members called for a meeting with the cooperative's managers, and one of the leaders of the POA organising committee so that the workers would not suffer any prejudice in this situation. It was agreed (but not in writing) that the cooperative should finish their job, be paid for it, while taking into account the expenses incurred by the forum because of the delay.

For the first two days of the forum, the translating system was fairly chaotic, depending everywhere on the local volunteers ability to cope with it, but it worked fine for the last two days. Unfortunately, we had to reduce the number of cabins in each room, while we endeavoured to maintain the number of rooms which were accessible.

Nomad International was reponsible for the streaming and recording ; in this emergency situation, it could not deal with these during the first two days.

Besides the audio problem, there was a more general technical one: the computers could not have been checked previously by Nomad and we had some trouble with a lot of them (they did not accept the Targ software). Internet (via Procempa) could not be connected (only infrequently) and we could not have any access to the Procempa server through which the data were supposed to transit. We could record part of the conferences and seminars where the audio system was working.

The recorded documents were supposed to be collected and made accessible to the public after the forum on a server provided by Procempa, but this server was closed immediately after the forum (????). So we gave a copy of these documents recorded on CDs to the person in charge at the POA organising committee (Jefferson).

The Nomad International team grew stronger out of this crisis. New participants joined the network (mostly from Uruguay, Ecuador, Brazil and Greece) while up to then the team members only came from India, North Africa and Europe.

For the next Forums, we believe that both sides (Nomad and the Brazilian team) must recognize their mistakes and move on from there. Looking at the Brazilian committees, we think that this experience showed that it was necessary not just to replace a few players, but to rethink the whole organization process of the forums, with a view to better incorporating the international participants and to improve the collaboration between the various teams. These participants should no longer be considered as a way of saving money (cheap labour !); they ought to fully participate in the political side of the forums' organisation.

The forums should also facilitate international collaboration (and break away from manifestation of petty nationalism). On Nomad's side, we must rethink our methods of work during the preparatory stages and review our relations with the various international groups (1). We must also define more clearly (and this is also valid for the forums) the basis of any agreement with other groups or individuals (2).

1After Mumbai, we thought that to make sure that we could install the NIFT during the forum, we should help create a local Nomad team which would prepare the ground, politically as much as technically. We followed this idea in POA without realizing that there were some risks in involving any activist and putting him/her in charge in the name of Nomad with no prior political experience in the Nomad network. In the POA case we gave all the responsability to one person only. This was a mistake because, by entrusting all the decision to one person, we undermined the dynamics of international collaboration. And an international dynamic (sharing reponsibility with other people based abroad) allows local members to free themselves (more or less) from local conflicts and pressure and to become more politically independent. That is why, for future forums, we are thinking of dividing some jobs internationally, in political as much as in technical terms.

Another problem raised before the forum (before the crisis situation where we found ourselves with no material to share anyway) was: what is to be done after the forum with the material produced for and by the forum ? Nomad's proposition so far is to keep the resulting tools and equipment as a basis on which Nomad could act independently from 'the market' or political pressures. We could also give free or cheap access to these tools and equipments to social or political movements that could not otherwise afford them or train some activists of these movements to use them when this equipment is not needed elsewhere.

We must also consider the relationship between Nomad and Babels. At the International meeting before the POA forum, Nomad and Babels had presented a common project; in practice, they worked separately. For future forums, we must collaborate more with Babels: some Babels members could integrate the Nomad team to give some advice and help us prepare the ground. Babels activists must know what is going on at all stages of the preparation of the forums. To clarify the situation, we think that Babels members should know exactly Nomad's political principles, and what pratical risks can be faced when its political project is followed.

Another problem has to be discussed before the next forum : the Forum Memory.
What is to be done with the recorded documents ? Who keeps them and who gives access to them ? According to what criteria ? Nomad and Babels started discussing this subject after Mumbai and a common position is beginning to emerge. But the relations between the Memory Collective, Babels and Nomad have to be clarified. Are Babels and Nomad part of this collective ? How are decisions taken within this collective ? Etc.

Proposed conditions (obviously subject to further discussions) for the realisation and the installation of the NIFT (which have to be described in more details: how many rooms can be equipped, streaming and recording, knowledge sharing, training...) in the Forum:

- the Forum should agree formally to give Nomad a budget that it could manage independently to install the NIFT in general and produce the various equipment (under the responsibility of Nomad International).

- the Forum agrees with Nomad International to adopt the Nomad Copyleft Patent (the first draft of such a patent is being elaborated by Jean François – of Nomad International, following various discussions at the last Nomad meeting in POA) for all the equipment produced by and for Nomad and Babels.

- the Forum finances the transport of the Nomad International activists to and from the Forum as well as their accommodation reasonably near the Forum.

- the number of rooms available have to be agreed with Nomad and Babels (depending – for Nomad – on the number of teams that could handle the various installations).

- the Forum helps Nomad find local teams of technicians who could help them install the material before, and manage it during, the Forum (these technicians could be local technicians or university or college students...)

- the coordination and installation of the equipment is done under the responsibility of Nomad International.

- Nomad's technicians guarantee to be present on the ground at least one month before the Forum in order to train local volunteers.

If the technical conditions are not filled, Nomad can still agree to install a translation transmission system, but cannot guarantee that the outcome will be fully satisfactory. This is the 'emergency option': the number of rooms fully equipped and managed depending on the number of people likely to properly handle the technical side in each room (with consequences on Babels work...).

If the main political principles of the agreement are not respected, Nomad can pull out at any time.