Teremos uma apresentação inovadora neste X Simpósio sobre Cidade Do Futuro, instrumento político formado no início de 2013 na cidade de Rosário, a partir da confluência de dois movimentos sociais autônomos da cidade, o movimento Giros e o Movimento 26 de Junho, movimentos sociais que são referenciados na tradição das experiências pós-2001.
Apresentarão em concreto o método de construção política que tem, segundo sua experiência, um poder de convicção muito maior do que dar uma discussão política em abstrato. Eles nos dizem que, para construir um mundo onde cabem muitos mundos, precisamos convidar e convencer que existe uma maneira diferente de gerenciar educação, cultura, produção, marketing, organização comunitária. Nosso trabalho propõe uma forma de fazer isso.
Contarão a experiência de construção desse chamado "partido do movimento" que é Cidade Do Futuro, cujo objetivo não é apenas representar nas instituições do Estado, mas ser uma expressão materializada da sociedade em movimento.
É um instrumento político onde:- projetos territoriais,- escolas,- cantinas/casas comunais,- espaços culturais,- unidades produtivas, marketing,- mídia, - mandatos populares no Conselho municipal de Rosário e outras localidades da província de Santa Fé, e políticas prefigurativas de escala, como a urbanização de Nuevo Alberdi ou a empresa pública de alimentos coexistem.
Todos esses projetos convivem no mesmo instrumento porque há uma hipótese de construção política por trás disso: esse processo crítico de desafeto que a sociedade tem com a política deve ser suturado de alguma forma. Isso é feito de baixo para cima, aproximando a tomada de decisões de onde essas decisões têm impacto e vinculando os problemas do cotidiano à política. Buscamos captar no presente pedaços daquela cidade e daquela sociedade que queremos para o amanhã.
Todos concordamos que existe um modelo injusto de produção de alimentos, que a educação é importante, que a cultura é fundamental, etc, mas poucos podem dizer o que é um modelo justo ou como seria. É aí que Ciudad Futura nos mostra em menor escala, através de uma prática prefigurativa e concreta, que existe um modelo diferente.
Este trabalho será apresentado por Epifan Mitsuba Estefan Mitsuba Bianco e Alejandro Gelfuso. Estefan Mitsuba é membro do Ciudad Futura. Coordenador Territorial da futura circunscrição do centro da cidade. Coordenador das escolas de formação da Fundação cidades sem medo-Cidade Do Futuro. Alejandro é membro do Ciudad Futura. Fatos-Mídia Cidade Do Futuro. Coordenador Provincial de desenvolvimento da Cidade Do Futuro. Licenciatura em Comunicação Social UNR. Doutor em Ciência Política.
Avremo una presentazione innovativa in questo X Simposio sulla Città futura, uno strumento politico formato all'inizio del 2013 nella città di Rosario, dalla confluenza di due movimenti sociali autonomi della città, il Movimento Giros e il Movimento 26 de Junio, movimenti sociali a cui si fa riferimento nella tradizione delle esperienze post-2001.
Essi presenteranno il metodo di costruzione politica in concreto che ha, secondo la loro esperienza, un potere di convinzione molto maggiore che dare una discussione politica in astratto. Ci dicono che per costruire un mondo in cui molti mondi si adattano, dobbiamo invitare e convincere che esiste un modo diverso di gestire l'istruzione, la cultura, la produzione, il marketing, l'organizzazione della comunità. Il nostro lavoro propone un modo per farlo.
Racconteranno l'esperienza della costruzione di questo cosiddetto ”partito del movimento" che è Città Futura, il cui obiettivo non è solo quello di rappresentare nelle istituzioni statali, ma di essere un'espressione materializzata della società in movimento.
È uno strumento politico in cui coesistono:- progetti territoriali,- scuole,- mense/case comunali,- spazi culturali,- unità produttive, marketing,- media, - mandati popolari nel consiglio comunale di Rosario e in altre località della provincia di Santa Fe, e politiche prefigurative di scala come l'urbanizzazione di Nuevo Alberdi o l'Azienda alimentare pubblica.
Tutti questi progetti coesistono nello stesso strumento perché dietro c'è un'ipotesi di costruzione politica: questo processo critico di disaffezione che la società ha con la politica deve essere in qualche modo suturato. Questo viene fatto dal basso verso l'alto, portando il processo decisionale più vicino a dove queste decisioni hanno impatto e collegando i problemi della vita quotidiana con la politica. Cerchiamo di catturare nei pezzi presenti di quella città e di quella società che vogliamo per domani.
Siamo tutti d'accordo sul fatto che esiste un modello ingiusto di produzione alimentare, che l'istruzione è importante, che la cultura è fondamentale, ecc., ma pochi possono dire cos'è un modello equo o come sarebbe. È qui che Ciudad Futura ci mostra in scala ridotta, attraverso una pratica prefigurativa e concreta, che esiste un modello diverso.
Questo articolo sarà presentato da Epifanía Estefanía Bianco e Alejandro Gelfuso. Estefanía è membro di Ciudad Futura. Coordinatore territoriale della circoscrizione del Futuro centro città. Coordinatore delle Scuole di Formazione della Fondazione Città Senza Paura-Città Futura. Alejandro è membro di Ciudad Futura. Fatti-Media Città futura. Coordinatore provinciale per lo sviluppo di Future City. Laurea in Comunicazione Sociale UNR. Dottorato in Scienze Politiche.
Nous aurons une nouvelle présentation dans ce Symposium X sur Futura City Un instrument politique formé au début de 2013 dans la ville de Rosario, de la confluence de deux mouvements sociaux autonomes de la ville, du mouvement Giros et du mouvement du 26 juin, social Mouvements référencés dans la tradition des expériences post-2001.
Ils présenteront la méthode de construction politique spécifique qui a, selon leur expérience, un pouvoir de conviction beaucoup plus que de donner une discussion politique dans le résumé. Ils nous disent que pour construire un monde où de nombreux mondes, nous devons inviter et convaincre qu'il existe une façon différente de gérer l'éducation, la culture, la production, le marketing, l'organisation communautaire. Notre travail propose un moyen de le faire.
Ils compteront l'expérience de construction de cette «partie de mouvement» ainsi appelée qui est une future ville, dont l'objectif est non seulement de représenter dans les institutions de l'État mais d'être une expression matérialisée de la société en mouvement.
Il s'agit d'un instrument politique où ils coexistent: - projets territoriaux, -escueas, -comadores / maisons communautaires, espaces culturels, province de Santa Fe et des politiques à l'échelle préfigurative telles que l'urbanisation de Nuevo Alberdi ou la société d'alimentation publique.
Tous ces projets vivent dans le même instrument car derrière il y a une hypothèse de construction politique: à ce processus critique de désaffection que la société a avec la politique doit être suturé d'une manière ou d'une autre. Cela se fait de bas en haut, en prenant des décisions où ces décisions ont un impact et liant les problèmes de la vie quotidienne à la politique. Nous cherchons à capturer dans les pièces actuelles de cette ville et cette société que nous voulons demain.
Nous convenons tous qu'il existe un modèle injuste de production alimentaire, que l'éducation est importante, que la culture est fondamentale, etc., mais peu peuvent dire ce qu'est un modèle juste ou ce qui serait. C'est là que Ciudad Futura nous montre à plus petite échelle, grâce à une pratique préfigurative et concrète, qu'il existe un modèle différent.
Cet article sera présenté par Epiphany Estefanía Bianco et Alejandro Gelfuso. Estefanía est membre de la ville de Futura. Coordinateur territorial de la circonscription Centro de Ciudad Futura. Coordinateur des écoles de formation de la Fondation des villes sans crainte de villes. Alejandro est membre de Ciudad Futura. Faits - Moyen de communication Ciudad Futura. Coordinateur du développement provincial de Ciudad Futura. Baccalauréat en communication sociale Unr. Doctorat en science politique.
Tendremos una novedosa ponencia en este X Simposio sobre Ciudad Futura un instrumento político conformado a principios del año 2013 en la ciudad de Rosario, a partir de la confluencia de dos movimientos sociales autónomos de la ciudad, el Movimiento Giros y el Movimiento 26 de Junio, movimientos sociales que se referencian en la tradición de experiencias post-2001.
Presentarán el método de construcción política en concreto que tiene, según su experiencia, un poder de convencimiento muchísimo mayor que dar una discusión política en abstracto. Nos dicen que para construir un mundo donde quepan muchos mundos, necesitamos convidar y convencer de que existe una manera distinta de gestionar la educación, la cultura, la producción, la comercialización, la organización comunitaria. Nuestro trabajo propone una vía para hacerlo.
Contarán la experiencia de construcción de este denominado “partido de movimiento” que es Ciudad Futura, cuyo objetivo no es solo representar en las instituciones del Estado sino ser una expresión materializada de la sociedad en movimiento.
Es un instrumento político donde conviven: -proyectos territoriales, -escuelas, -comedores/casas comunales, -espacios culturales, -unidades productivas, de comercialización, -medio de comunicación, -mandatos populares en el concejo municipal de Rosario y otras localidades de la provincia de Santa Fe, y políticas prefigurativas de escala como la urbanización de Nuevo Alberdi o la Empresa Pública de Alimentos.
Todos esos proyectos conviven en un mismo instrumento porque detrás hay una hipótesis de construcción política: a este proceso crítico de desafección que tiene la sociedad con la política hay que suturarlo de alguna manera. Eso se hace de abajo hacia arriba, acercando la toma de decisiones donde esas decisiones tienen impacto y vinculando los problemas de la vida cotidiana con la política. Buscamos plasmar en el presente pedazos de esa ciudad y esa sociedad que queremos para mañana.
Todos estamos de acuerdo que hay un modelo injusto de producción de alimentos, que la educación es importante, que la cultura es fundamental, etc, pero pocos pueden decir cuál es o cómo sería un modelo justo. Por ahí es donde Ciudad Futura nos muestra en una escala menor, a través de una práctica prefigurativa y concreta, que existe un modelo diferente.
Esta ponencia será presentada por Epifanía Estefanía Bianco y Alejandro Gelfuso. Estefanía es militante de Ciudad Futura. Coordinadora territorial de la circunscripción centro de Ciudad Futura. Coordinadora de las Escuelas de Formación de la Fundación Ciudades Sin Miedo-Ciudad Futura. Alejandro es militante de Ciudad Futura. Factos - Medio de Comunicación Ciudad Futura. Coordinador desarrollo provincial de Ciudad Futura. Licenciado en Comunicación Social UNR. Doctorando en Ciencias Políticas.
We will have an innovative presentation at this X Symposium on Future City, a political instrument formed at the beginning of 2013 in the city of Rosario, from the confluence of two autonomous social movements of the city, the Giros Movement and the 26 de Junio Movement, social movements that are referenced in the tradition of post-2001 experiences.
They will present the method of political construction in concrete that has, according to their experience, a much greater power of conviction than giving a political discussion in the abstract. They tell us that in order to build a world where many worlds fit, we need to invite and convince that there is a different way to manage education, culture, production, marketing, community organization. Our work proposes a way to do this.
They will tell the experience of building this so-called ”movement party" that is Future City, whose objective is not only to represent in the State institutions but to be a materialized expression of society in movement.
It is a political instrument where: -territorial projects, -schools, -canteens/communal houses, -cultural spaces, -productive units, marketing, -media, -popular mandates in the municipal council of Rosario and other localities of the province of Santa Fe, and prefigurative policies of scale such as the urbanization of Nuevo Alberdi or the Public Food Company coexist.
All these projects coexist in the same instrument because there is a hypothesis of political construction behind it: this critical process of disaffection that society has with politics must be sutured somehow. This is done from the bottom up, bringing decision-making closer to where those decisions have impact and linking the problems of everyday life with politics. We seek to capture in the present pieces of that city and that society that we want for tomorrow.
We all agree that there is an unfair model of food production, that education is important, that culture is fundamental, etc, but few can say what a fair model is or how it would be. That's where Ciudad Futura shows us on a smaller scale, through a prefigurative and concrete practice, that there is a different model.
This paper will be presented by Epifanía Estefanía Bianco and Alejandro Gelfuso. Estefanía is a member of Ciudad Futura. Territorial coordinator of the Future City center constituency. Coordinator of the Training Schools of the Foundation Cities Without Fear-Future City. Alejandro is a member of Ciudad Futura. Facts - Media Future City. Provincial development Coordinator of Future City. Degree in Social Communication UNR. PhD in Political Science.
1 of 5
Then click on the image to participate in the symposium
We will soon send the program by email
The aim of this presentation is not to analyse the causes of, the responsibilities for, nor viable solutions to the pandemic. Considering that the COVID-19 situation has aggravated the instability of both institutional systems and individuals worldwide, I shall begin by acknowledging that it is precisely such moments of instability that open up “cracks” in the world of the established, cracks from which elements of change may issue, leading in new directions. Looking at the state of affairs following the outbreak of the pandemic, one discerns elements pointing in an anti-humanist direction, as well as elements pointing in a humanist direction.
Hence questions arise, which I do not presume to answer in full. I do hope, however, to offer some points to ponder in order to answer them:
Could the impact of the pandemic on human conscience activate the ability to imagine and, therefore, build a new ethical, social and personal paradigm, as a meaningful step towards the Universal Human Nation?
Have the severe consequences of the pandemic, on a social and personal level, contributed to favourable conditions for a dialogue that allows the proposal of new humanism to reach interlocutors who share an interest in the same vision?
May we regard the pandemic as an agent of acceleration of historical change, in the context of the difficult transaction between the world as we know it and the world to come?
Will this acceleration allow for the image of a different future to take root into the human heart, just as the image of a different relationship between every person and their neighbour, one in which the other is looked at with new compassion and tolerance, and the image of a different relationship between every human being and their soul?
The first stage of the pandemic brought a sense of sharing and solidarity with other humans, the awareness of a fate shared by most of the world population, a shared frailty, the necessity of a shared answer, in short, the awareness of belonging to the same human family. A great number of charitable initiatives in support of the weakest bloomed spontaneously out of it. This experience seems to have been swiped away by the worsening of the situation, of fear, preoccupation, and institutional wants. This, however, is most likely a picture construed by the media, since, as a matter of fact, voluntaries continue to work assiduously to ensure support.
However things may have gone, this experience now belongs with the experiential, mnemonic baggage of individuals and communities, as a viable relationship with the other that could tear down the wall of indifference, and become part of the psycho-social background, which we have already enjoyed the opportunity of discussing[1], as an agent of transformation.
A second reflection concerns the possibility that the proposal of New Humanism, as defined by the framework of this Symposium, will reach, in the current situation, an ever-growing number of interlocutors, who are awake to its significance and centrality.
In the thesis[2] discussed at his Commencement honoris causa at the Moscow Academy of Science in 1993, Silo noticed how, when illustrating his thought, he often fell under the impression that, even though the audience could easily follow the logic of his discourse, he would still fail to get through to most. He then proceeded to analyse the necessary conditions for a dialogue to take place, defining “dialogue” as a relationship of reflection or discussion among people and sides, where one can accept, refute, or doubt what the other states. Among these, the intention underlying the discourse, defining its subject and the universe in which propositions are inscribed, becomes especially relevant. Within its field falls the global importance that each side may assign to a given theme, an importance which is not tied to the theme per se, but rather to a set of believes, a scale of values and interests independent of the theme. These are pre-dialogic elements, operating within a specific epochal and social horizon, often mistaken by individuals as the product of their personal experience and observations.
If the propositions of contemporary Humanism fail to connect properly to many interlocutors, that is because of the persistency of scruples and believes pertaining to previous historical moments, which assign greater importance to themes other than those foregrounding the human being. In conclusion, Silo states that “We will see no full dialogue on the fundamental questions of today’s civilization until we, as a society, begin to lose our belief in the innumerable illusions fed by the enticements of the current system”.[3]
Now, it appears that the ongoing pandemic has thoroughly shaken said belief, given that its dramatic aftermath can no longer be concealed nor dissimulated.
The OXFAM[4] Report of January 2021, entitled “The Inequality Virus” and published at the World Economic Forum of Davos, highlights how the coronavirus pandemic is potentially destined to produce a simultaneous surge of inequalities in almost every country in the world. The virus has exacerbated and drawn attention to pre-existing disparities on the economic, racial, and gender levels.
Some data:
Billionaire capital was restored to its astronomical pre-pandemic levels in just nine months, whereas the recovery of the poorest people in the world may take more than a decade.
The increase in the capital of the 10 richest billionaires in the world, that was registered at the start of the crisis, would more than suffice to prevent all people on earth from becoming destitute because of the virus and make the anti-COVID-19 vaccine available to all.
On a global level, women are overrepresented in the economic sectors that have been most affected by unemployment.
Brazilians of African descent have been 40% more likely to die from COVID-19 than the white population and, in the United States, Afro-American and Latin-American citizens have been more likely to die from COVID-19 than white citizens.
The crisis of the coronavirus has struck an already greatly unequal world. A world in which a small group of more than 2,000 billionaires owned more capital than they could spend in a thousand lives; a world in which close to half of humanity had to live on less than 5,50 dollars a day. A world based on a twisted value system that has induced the unemployed and the marginalized into guilt and shame, turning anger into resignation.
The worsening of the situation has begun to preoccupy the institutions. The International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have declared themselves seriously preoccupied by the risk of the increase in the global level of disparity due to the pandemic and its devastating consequences.
Many Governments and supranational Institutions have had to stammer new answers to the unprecedented situation. Transformative policies, which seemed inconceivable before the crisis, have suddenly proved viable.
It is apparent that, notwithstanding the declared intention of changing the model of development, these are sectorial policies, in the economic, social, healthcare, environmental and other fields, which try to “correct” the increasingly apparent errors of a crumbling system, with the aim to recompose it, if not to benefit from the chaos of the pandemic, so as to gain in terms of geopolitical standing.
“Everything must change so that everything can stay the same”, as Tomasi di Lampedusa would say.[5]
But, as Silo writes, “Only with the continuing failure of piecemeal solutions will we come to a new horizon of questioning and conditions that are adequate for a dialogue. It is then that these new ideas will gradually be recognized and that those sectors today most bereft of hope will begin to mobilise.”.[6]
It is increasingly evident that the sectorial policies now under way are bound to fail. One needs but think of the shameful vaccine war now in full swing, blatantly prioritizing economic and political interests over human life. The pandemic has highlighted errors and falsity everywhere, starting with the lie according to which the free market would ensure health and healthcare assistance for everyone.
Will the loss of trust in any possible improvement of the current situation, already exacerbated by the pandemic and the failure of the piecemeal answers implemented by the system, pave the way for a new vision of the world and social relationships, and start a mobilisation of the social base?
“Historically, pandemics have forced humans to break with the past and imagine their world anew. This one is no different. It is a portal, a gateway between one world and the next. We can choose to walk through it, dragging the carcasses of our prejudice and our hatred, our avarice, our data banks and dead ideas, our dead rivers, and smoky skies behind us. Or we can walk through it lightly, with little luggage, ready to imagine another world. And ready to fight for it.”[8]
A final consideration regards the impact of the pandemic on what we have called “the relationship between every human being and their soul”. The impact of the pandemic seems to have accelerated the decaying process of a world which, for ages, has been showing signs of inadequacy in answering human needs, on both the individual and community level.
In the difficult transaction between the world as we know it and the world to come, the human soul finds itself exposed to the winds of change and fluctuates in search of new points of reference.
Ortega y Gasset describes it as alma desilusionada, disappointed or disillusioned soul, the last stage of the cycle that he observes in three great historical communities: the European, the Greek and the Roman. “In each of these, man went through three different spiritual situations…From a state of traditional spirit to a state of rationalist spirit, and from this to a regime of mysticism.”[9]
The cycle begins with the traditionalist soul, which finds in tradition, in the past, its point of reference and its rule; in the European Middle Ages, bourgeois and peasant movements did not aim to transform the political and social regime; rather, they limited themselves to pursuing the correction of an abuse without questioning the established regime. This is followed by the revolutionary soul, which substitutes tradition with reason, and elaborates ideas and ideologies, on the basis of which it rises not against the abuse of the regime, but against its use, that is against the regime itself. The failure of ideologies closes the revolutionary era, and the disillusioned soul follows the defeat of ideologies, the daring attempt to substitute reality with an idea, losing faith in both tradition and reason, and beginning to lift its gaze.
The lack of faith, the disappointment, and the loss of hope make it necessary for individuals to change the direction of their gaze. Once the reference points of tradition and reason, religion and ideologies are lost, individuals find themselves alone.
“…the individual’s finding themselves alone brings them to confront the questions regarding human existence, independent of any one situation, and, therefore, beyond any relativism, and it induces them to broaden their horizons beyond the particularity of the nation, the tribe, the family, the company, to the universality of the question regarding one’s destiny, that each individual, insofar as they exist, cannot help but contemplate”.[10]
But how to choose the new image of the world, the kind of society, the kind of economy, the values, the kind of interpersonal relationships, the kind of dialogue between every person and their neighbour?
This questioning in search of what one really needs, having foregone the delusions once vainly pursued, gives each and every one access to the deepest aspirations guarded in the depth of their soul, to that religious feeling – from Latin re (an emphasizing prefix) and ligare (to tie) – which ties them to the fate of other human beings and the evolution of everything that is, and which is independent of any adherence to a specific religion.
They will then rise from resignation to stand as human beings, acknowledging the signs of the sacred within themselves, their creative and world-transformative attitude, awakening from its deep slumber the kind of spirituality which nurtures the highest aspirations of the human b
[1] L. Cici, Il Messaggio di Silo e la trasformazione del trasfondo psicosociale [Silo’s Message and the Transformation of the Psychosocial Instillation], 3rd International Symposium of the World Centre for Humanist Studies “Un nuovo Umanesimo per una Nuova Civilità”, Parks of Study and Reflection, Attigliano, 2-3-4 November 2012.
[2] Silo, Le condizioni del dialogo, in Silo, Opere Complete, vol. 1, Discorsi, p. 945, Multimage, Florence, June 2000, and, in digital format, Silo, The Conditions of Dialogue, “Silo.net”, www.silo.net/collected_works/silo_speaks.
[4] OXFAM (Oxford Committee for Famine Relief) is an international confederation of non-profit organisations dedicated to the reduction of global poverty, through humanitarian aid and development projects.
[5] Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa, Il Gattopardo [The Leopard], 1st ed. Feltrinelli, 1958.
[7] Arundhati Roy is an Indian writer and political activist in the field of human rights, environmental and anti-globalisation movements. In 1997, she won the Booker Prize with her debut novel, The God of Small Things.
[8] [Arundhati Roy, “The pandemic is a portal”, Financial Times, 03/04/2020, https://www.ft.com/content/10d8f5e8-74eb-11ea-95fe-fcd274e920ca].
[9] Ortega y Gasset, El caso de las revoluciones, in El tema de nuestro tiempo. Ed. Calpe, madrid, 1923.
[10] Aldo Masullo (1923-2020), Etica della salvezza, Intervista di Renato Parascandolo [“Ethics of Salvation”, an interview by Renato Parascandolo]. The interview is included in the videotaped work “Viaggio tra i filosofi”– Enciclopedia Multimediale delle Scienze Filosofiche, published by VideoSapere-Paravia.