![\"wsf1\"](\"http:\/\/www.globalresearch.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/09\/wsf1.jpg\" "\\"wsf1\\"")
<\/div>\nThis year the World Social Forum is being held in Montreal,\u00a0regrouping\u00a0committed social activists, anti-war collectives and \u00a0prominent\u00a0intellectuals.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n Most of the\u00a0participants are unaware that the WSF is funded by corporate foundations including Ford, Rockefeller, Tides, et al. \u00a0Much of this funding is channelled to the WSF organizers under the helm of the\u00a0WSF International Council.\u00a0<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n This is an issue which has been raised on numerous occasions with progressive organizations and WSF activists: you cannot effectively confront neoliberalism and the New World Order elites \u00a0and expect them to finance your activities.<\/em><\/p>\n The World Social Forum operating under the banner of\u00a0 \u201cAnother World is Possible\u201d was founded in 2001 at its inaugural venue of Porto Alegre. Brazil.<\/p>\n From the outset in 2001, the WSF has been upheld as an international umbrella representing grassroots people\u2019s organizations, committed to reversing the tide of globalization. Its stated intent is to challenge corporate capitalism and its dominant neoliberal economic agenda.<\/p>\n The World Social Forum at its inaugural meeting defined itself as a counter-offensive to the World Economic Forum (WEF) of business leaders and politicians which meets annually in Davos, Switzerland. The 2001 Porto Alegre WSF was held simultaneously with that of the WEF in Davos.<\/p>\n While \u00a0there have been many important accomplishments of the WSF, largely as a result of the commitment of grassroots activists, the core leadership of WSF\u00a0 \u2013rather than effectively confronting the New World Order elites\u2013 serves (often unwittingly) their corporate interests. In this process, co-optation has been achieved through the corporate funding of the WSF.<\/p>\n Among the two major accomplishments are the participation of the WSF in the February 2003 Worldwide protest against the US led war on Iraq. The WSF has also supported progressive movements and governments, particularly in Latin America.<\/p>\n In contrast, at the Tunis 2013 WSF, the final declaration paid lip service to to the US sponsored \u201cSyrian opposition\u201d. \u00a0Similarly the Al Qaeda affiliated Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) which allegedly led the \u201cArab Spring\u201d against the government of Muammar Gaddafi was tacitly upheld as a revolutionary force. Several workshops on\u00a0 Libya applauded Western military intervention. A session entitled \u201cLibya\u2019s transition to democracy\u201d focused on \u201cwhether\u00a0Libya was better off without Muammar Gaddafi<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n [Update] Similarly, a Montreal WSF 2016 event on Syria refers to a country \u201cin ruins as a result of a multifaceted \u00a0war between the dictatorship of Bashar al Assad and a host of opposition organizations,\u201d echoing almost verbatim the narrative of the mainstream media. \u00a0The central role of US-NATO in destroying Syria as a sovereign country is not mentioned.<\/p>\n Funding dissent<\/strong><\/p>\n From the outset in 2001, the World Social Forum was funded by governments and corporate foundations, including the Ford Foundation which has ties to US intelligence.<\/p>\n The anti-globalization movement is opposed to Wall Street and the Texas oil giants controlled by Rockefeller, et al. Yet the foundations and charities of Ford, Rockefeller et al will generously fund progressive anti-capitalist networks as well as environmentalists (opposed to Wall Street and Big Oil), etc. with a view to ultimately overseeing and shaping their various activities.<\/p>\n The mechanisms of \u201cmanufacturing dissent\u201d require a manipulative environment, a process of arm-twisting and subtle co-optation of\u00a0 a small number of key individuals within \u201cprogressive organizations\u201d, including anti-war coalitions, environmentalists and the anti-globalization movement. Many leaders of these organizations have in a sense betrayed their grassroots.<\/p>\n The corporations are funding\u00a0dissent\u00a0with a view to controlling dissent.<\/p>\n The Ford Foundation (which has links to the CIA) provided funding under its \u201cStrengthening Global Civil Society\u201d program during the first three years of the WSF.<\/p>\n When the WSF was held in Mumbai in 2004, the Indian WSF host committee declined support from the Ford Foundation. This in itself did not modify the WSF\u2019s relationship to the donors. While the Ford Foundation formally withdrew, other foundations positioned themselves.<\/p>\n The WSF (among several sources of funding is supported by a consortium of corporate foundations under the advisory umbrella of Engaged Donors for Global Equity (EDGE).\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n This organization, which previously went under the name of The Funders Network on Trade and Globalization (FTNG)<\/strong>, has played a central role in the funding of successive WSF venues. From the outset in 2001, it had an observer status on the WSF International Council. \u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n In 2013, the Rockefeller Brothers representative\u00a0Tom Kruse <\/strong>co-chaired EDGE\u2019s program committee.\u00a0At the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Kruse was responsible for \u201cGlobal Governance\u201d under the \u201cDemocratic Practice\u201d program. Rockefeller Brothers grants to NGOs are approved under the\u00a0\u201cStrengthening Democracy in Global Governance\u201d program, which is broadly similar to that put forth by the US State Department.<\/p>\n A representative of the Open Society Initiative for Europe currently sits on EDGE\u2019s Board of directors. The Wallace Global Fund is also on its Board of Directors. The Wallace Global Fund is specialized in providing support to \u201cmainstream\u201d NGOs and \u201calternative media\u201d, including Amnesty International, Democracy Now (which supports Hillary Clinton\u2019s candidacy for president of the US).<\/p>\n Several members of the EDGE BoD, however, are from non-corporative and family foundations with a social mandate. (see below).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n In one of its key documents (2012), entitled\u00a0Funders Network Alliance In Support of Grassroots Organizing and Movement-Building<\/em>\u00a0<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0(link no longer available)\u00a0<\/strong>EDGE acknowledged its support of social movements which challenge \u201cneoliberal market fundamentalism.\u201d including the World Social Forum, established in 2001:<\/p>\n \u201cFrom the Zapatista uprising in Chiapas (1994) to the Battle in Seattle (1999) to the creation of the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre (2001), the TINA years of Reagan and Thatcher (There Is No Alternative) have been replaced with the growing conviction that \u201canother world is possible.\u201d Counter-summits, global campaigns and social forums have been crucial spaces to articulate local struggles, share experiences and analyses, develop expertise, and build concrete forms of international solidarity among progressive movements for social, economic and ecological justice.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n But at the same time, there is an obvious contradiction: another world is not possible when the campaign against neoliberalism is financed by an alliance of corporate donors firmly committed to neoliberalism and the US-NATO military agenda.<\/p>\n The following is the EDGE Montreal WSF Communique. The donors not only fund the activities, they also influence the structure of the WSF venue, which was determined in Puerto Alegre in 2001, namely the decentralized and dispersed mosaic of \u201cdo it yourself\u201d workshops.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n With regard to the Montreal WSF, the Consortium of Donors (EDGE) intent is:<\/p>\n \u201c\u2026to develop an intersectional space for funders and various movement partners \u2013 organizers thought leaders and practitioners \u2013 to build alignment by cultivating a shared understanding of the visions, values, principles and pathways of a \u201cjust transition.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0(See\u00a0http:\/\/edgefunders.org\/wsf-activities\/<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u201cJust Transition\u201d implies that social activism has to conform to a \u201cshared vision\u201d with the corporate foundations, i.e. nothing which in a meaningful way might upset the elite structures of global capitalism.<\/p>\n From the standpoint of the corporate donors \u201cinvesting in the WSF\u201d constitutes a profitable (tax deductible) undertaking. It ensures that activism remains within the confines of \u00a0\u201dconstructive dialogue\u201d and \u201ccritique\u201d rather than confrontation. Any deviation immediately results in the curtailment of donor funding:<\/p>\n \u201cEverything the [Ford] Foundation did could be regarded as \u201cmaking the World safe for capitalism\u201d, reducing social tensions by helping to comfort the afflicted, provide safety valves for the angry, and improve the functioning of government\u00a0(McGeorge Bundy, National Security Advisor to Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson (1961-1966), President of the Ford Foundation, (1966-1979))<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The limits of social dissent are thereby determined by the \u201cgovernance structure\u201d of\u00a0 the WSF, which was tacitly agreed upon with the funding agencies at the outset in 2001.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.globalresearch.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/05\/Screen-Shot-2016-08-09-at-08.23.00.png\" "\\"Screen")
<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n