Ingrid wrote [at 03:25 PM 11/27/2006] :
my own experience with gatherings of the wsf kind suggests that they do
provide a useful platform, especially for smaller, less well-known groups
and causes to find an audience, opportunities for partnership and a sense of
solidarity. they are also unruly, noisy and somewhat chaotic. i suspect the
real issue is with the apparent lack of tangible outcomes. as with any free
market that's self-correcting, however.
The underlying assumption behind "free market" seems to be that
*somebody* who is currently bankrolling these groups is free to vote
with their feet?
movements often make for strange bedfellows. i suspect the anti-slavery
movement, india's freedom movement or the environmental movement all
included some people whose primary interests were more self-serving than
altruistic.
I have no problem with this whatsoever. The invisible hand, and all that.
What I do have doubts about is about groups that have incompatible
goals (as Rishab illustrated) claiming to be part of a *movement*.
This seems to me to be a recipe for a messy implosion.
Udhay
--
((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
