Complexity and Social Movements: Multitudes at the Edge of Chaos ...

Beyond resistance to global nexus 125
of the WSF are flexible enough to enable many of the criticisms originating
in the alternative or ‘autonomous’ spaces to be incorporated into the
design of the WSF ‘event’. Consequently, the 2005 WSF integrated the
‘Youth Camp’ within the main body of the forum and dispensed completely
with the plenary format to dilute the much-criticised opportunities
for grandstanding by political actors seeking a large stage upon which to
rehearse familiar arguments.
Thus, the WSF has the capacity to adapt its internal structure as a result
of dynamic interactions between its constitutive parts and its external environment
leading to emergent outcomes that are unforeseen and unpredictable.
This is perceived to be problematic by orthodox political actors
who wish to actualise the social and political force immanent to the forum
either by means of a manifesto or through aggregation to form a party or
campaigning organisation. This has led to attempts to exert control over the
direction and outcomes of the WSF by powerful actors, from members of
the International Committee 9 to political parties. 10 However, these attempts
have been largely unsuccessful because of the competition between attractors
and the inability of any actor to hegemonise the process. It would
appear that ‘control’ is no longer an option. This is not to suggest that the
WSF process could not be stopped or moved towards a less dynamic state,
as either is possible. However, it is to suggest that the cultural–political
attraction of the process for its participants is strong enough for it to resist
obvious attempts at subversion or control.
These outcomes are the result of the complex and adaptive qualities that
the system of relations underpinning the WSF exhibits. When we examine
the WSF as a state space we can begin to see how the attractors referred to
above are themselves emergent qualities of dynamic interaction between
other systems that are nested within the WSF. These are systems of relations
that are internal to Social Movement Organisations and Networks
(SMOs/SMNs) and systems of relations between those SMOs/SMNs and
between those SMOs/SMNs and the structure of the WSF – the IS and
the IC. Within these reticular structures diverse motivations, aims and
intentions, strategies and expectations circulate. For the most part, they
co-exist as aggregations of particular identities, issues or organisational
forms retaining their cohesion by organising with those of similar character
interactions that represent the familiar, despite the contextual potential for
perturbating established modes of action. Thus they often talk within and
not between. However, the discursive ‘bleed’ that takes place between these
aggregations and the growth of affectivity encouraged by proximity and
cultural exchange leads to an increased awareness of the immanent qualities
of the encounter and its valorisation as a form. In this sense the term
‘open space’ captures, in a common sense fashion, the complexity of interactions
and the diversity of outcomes which do indeed began to feel like the
‘secret of fire’ and as such prompt strident resistance to attempts to confine
or inhibit this process.