La Asamblea de Sociólogos sin fronteras internacional aprueba la realización de campañas a medio y largo plazo. La actual campaña, vigente desde finales de 2007 consiste en subrayar las relaciones entre Sociología y Derechos Humanos tanto en actividades académicas como en colaboración con activistas, tal y como ha ocurrido en Boston con ocasión del Congreso de ASA en Agosto del 2008. Como señalan los documentos que se presentan a continuación, los sociólogos necesitan hacer más suyas las reivindicaciones pro derechos humanos que se están produciendo desde que Naciones Unidas aprobó en 1948 la Declaración Universal.
El Comité ejecutivo de SSFI coordinara las actividades que a tal efecto vayan a realizar tanto las Asociaciones nacionales de SSFI como los miembros propios de ésta.
Para inscribirse y recibir más información, escribir a: ssfinternacional@gmail.com
Mantenga su contacto con nosotros en la red, entrando en http://www.ssfthinktank.org/
y en SSF Latinoamerica: http://ssflatinoamerica.org
1. The Association will be founded on agreement and signature of Judith Blau, from SSF USA, Isabella Paoletti, from SSF Italy, Paulo Martins, from SSF Brasil, Linda Deuschman, from SSF Canada, Karina Rodriguez ,from SSF Chile Ali Tayefi, from SSF Iran and Alberto Moncada, from SSF Spain
2. The first act of this founding group will be to elect a President.
3. The President will then appoint a Chair of the Council. The Council will consist of all the founders plus twenty more people who are active members of chapters.
4. In consultation with the founders, the President will provide guidelines about the number of people who will be selected or elected to serve on the Council from each country.
5. The national chapters of SSF will be invited to join SSF-I as collective members
6. The President will appoint a small group, the Executive Council, who will serve in an advisory capacity to the President.
7. The President, the Chair of the Council, and Council Members will identify ways
to advance and coordinate international activities – collective conferences, research, fellowships.
CAPITULO PRIMERO. DENOMINACION, DOMICILIO, AMBITO, FINES Y ACTIVIDADES
Art.1º Denominación
Se constituye la Asociación denominada Sociólogos sin Fronteras Internacional, que se acoge a lo dispuesto en la Ley Orgánica 1/2002, de 22 de Marzo, reguladora del Derecho de Asociación, y al amparo de lo dispuesto en el artículo 22 de la Constitución, careciendo de ánimo de lucro.
Art. 2º Personalidad Jurídica
La Asociación tiene personalidad jurídica propia y capacidad plena de obrar para administrar y disponer de sus bienes y cumplir los fines que se propone. Estos Estatutos tendrán como norma supletoria y complementaria los términos de la Ley Orgánica reguladora.
Art. 3º Domicilio y ámbito de actuación
El domicilio de la Asociación se establece en Gandía calle Comtat 60, código postal 46730
La Asociación realizará sus actividades en todo el mundo
Art 4º Fines
Constituyen los fines de la Asociación estudiar, compartir y difundir a nivel internacional las nuevas formas y principios de una Sociología sin fronteras cosmopolita, crítica, pública, comprometida con la defensa de los derechos humanos y los bienes comunes, en estos tiempos de globalización.
Art.5º Actividades
La Asociación realizará estudios, promoverá reuniones a nivel local, nacional e internacional, publicará documentos, libros y otras formas de comunicación, incluídas las que se realizan a través de Internet. Y tratará de que sus averiguaciones beneficien a los principales perjdicados por la globalización.
CAPITULO II LOS ASOCIADOS
Art 6º Capacidad
Podrán formar parte de la Asociación cuantos científicos sociales, de cualquier nacionalidad, compartan estas ideas y deseen participar en su formulación y difusión. Asociaciones de Sociólogos podrán también ser socios y la Asociación internacional funconará como coordinadora de las Asociaciones nacionales de Sociólogos sin fronteras que lo soliciten. En la primera reunión de la Asamblea se incorporarán a la Asociación los primeros socios no españoles que ya han manifestado su interés por pertenecer a ella.
Art 7º: Los derechos de los asociados se ejerceran de acuerdo a lo establecido en la Ley de Asociaciones y a las resoluciones que tomen los organos de gobierno que no la contradigan. La condición de socio se adquiere por su admisión por el Comité ejecutivo.
Art.8º: Igualmente los deberes de los socios se regirán por dicha Ley
Art.9º Causas de baja a tenor de la Ley y, especificamente, no satisfacer las cuotas fijadas en dos anualidades.
Art 10º Régimen sancionador a tenor de la ley aunque los socios no españoles podrá alegar su legislación respectiva si no es incompatible con la española
CAPITULO III EL ORGANO DE GOBIERNO
Art. 11º Asamblea General. Regimen a tenor de la Ley Orgánica
Art. 12º La Asamblea se reunirá en sesión ordinaria, como mínimo una vez al año, en el último trimestre.
Art. 13º y 14º a tenor de la Ley Orgánica
CAPITULO IV.- EL ORGANO DE REPRESENTACION
Art. 15º.- La Asociación la regirá, administrará y representará el órgano de representación denominado Comité ejecutivo formado por el Presidente, el Secretario y el Tesorero.
Art. 16º.- Los miembros del Comité ejecutivo ejercerán el cargo durante un período de cuatro años y podrán ser reelegidos indefinidamente.
Art. 17º, 18º, 19º, 20º y 21º a tenor de la Ley Orgánica
Art. 22º.- Patrimonio inicial y recursos económicos
El patrimonio inicial de esta Asociación está valorado en cero euros
Art. 23º.- A tenor de la Ley orgánica
Art. 24º- El ejercicio económico se cerrará a finales de año antes de la celebración de la Asamblea
Arts 25º y 26º a tenor de la Ley Orgánica
Art 27º.- El remanente que resulte de la liquidación se destinará a UNICEF
Art. 28º A tenor de la Ley Orgánica
2. The Association bylaws will be the following:
Article 1°: The Association “Sociólogos Sin Fronteras Internacional” (Sociologists without borders International) (SSFI) is established for unlimited time at the address: Comtat 60, Gandia 46730, Valencia, Spain with the purpose of doing research, study, share and disseminating the new ways and principles of a new Sociology Without Borders – cosmopolitan, public, critic, with a compromise on the defense of Human Rights in the global era. The Association will do research, promote meetings, especially at an international level, will publish documents, papers, books and fulfill other ways of communication, including the ways that can be developed through Internet and will cooperate with groups sharing the same goals. SSFI research will try to understand how globalization victimizes people and will work in solidarity with people who are victimized to draw attention to their problems.
Article 2°: Any social scientist can be part of the Association who share these goals and who want to participate on its formulation and diffusion, regardless of their nationality. Sociological Associations can be members of SSFI. SSFI will also work as a coordinator of national association of “Sociólogos Sin Fronteras” which would like to join.
Article 3°: Members can be from any nationality. Every one of them should be accepted by the Executive Committee., and the Executive Committee has the power to remove them as members.
Article 4°: All members will constitute the General Assembly of the Association, deliberative, which will be ultimate responsible for the activities of the Association.
Article 5°: The organs of government of the Association are the Executive Committee and the International Council. The Assembly will have a session at least once a year, appoint the members of the Executive Committee and foster the goals of art.1. The assembly as a deliberative organ will promote the aims defined at the article 1°. The Executive Committee functions will be administration, accounting and documentation of the Association and will gather if a simple majority of the members or the President requires to. Meetings of both organs by Internet will be allowed to conduct their business.
Article 6°: At the foundational act, the promoters will appoint a President of the Assembly and a Chairperson (President) of the International Council.
Article 7°: The Association is constituted with an initial deposit of seven hundred Euros, contributed in equal parts for the seven founder members. The associative year will coincide with the end of the natural year. The Assembly will decide its dissolution when the purpose/goals are achieved or the absolute majority of the members require it.
3. This foundational record is signed for each of the promoters on May 30th, 2007 and will be the only document with all signatures.
4. The signers appoint Judith Blau as Chairperson of the Council and Alberto Moncada as President of the Executive Committee at his foundational record and later on will proceed to appoint the other members of each organ according to the bylaws
SOCIOLOGISTS WITHOUT BORDERS
Sociology and human rights have had an awkward and complex relationship. During the Enlightenment, early sociologists – social philosophers, really – embraced freedom, equality, and liberty. “By right and by convention,” Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote in 1762, “people will be equal” as they forge a social contract with one another. These early sociologists did not consider themselves mere students of society, but used their education and imagination to devote themselves to understand how people could liberate themselves from oppression and create better societies.
However, as sociologists increasingly aligned themselves with the natural sciences, beginning with August Comte, they embraced the idea of studying social life and society dispassionately and uncritically, rejecting any notion of aligning themselves with agents of progressive social change or even of envisioning possibilities for a better society. As a consequence, sociologists, especially American sociologists who were the most adamant about scientific sociology, were alienated from indigenous agents of progressive change in their home countries, including labor unions, Marxists, and in the US, the Civil Rights Movement. Academic sociology in the US was mostly irrelevant in the twentieth century, and, it is likely that social movements were stalled as because sociologists and other social scientists were holed up in the Ivory Tower.
In 1948 when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, perhaps the world’s most significant statement regarding human rights, was proclaimed by the nations of the world when American sociology was overwhelmingly functionalist and scientific. Sociologists took no notice. Because of the dominant position of the US after the war, US sociology too exercised a hegemonic role in the world. Incorporated into US sociology was the idea that democratic capitalism was part of the framework of coexistence. Capitalism was naturalized along with a neocolonial approach to development. This model improved somewhat with T. H. Marshall’s conception of social citizenship and Keynesian reforms that buffered the public against the most serious harms caused by the private-sector, Still, functionalism as a premise in sociology always underscored that the status quo should be preserved.
.
We do not want to imply that there were not cracks in the edifice. There were: the Frankfort Schools, Political Economy of the World System, Conflict Theory, the Birmingham School, various French authors (Bourdieu, Touraine, Baudrelaird), and, recently, cracks are appearing everywhere are abandoning value neutrality to advocate for social justice (race, gender, GLBT, migrants).
Where is American sociology now? Sociologists are challenging the human rights) consequences of class, race, gender, and other injustices, but may not be seeing the forest for the trees. The wise and inexorable market’s rationality is a subterfuge for presenting capitalism in a better light, as if the market was really free and wasn’t dominated by the most powerful who are often the perpetrators of financial and fiscal frauds. In his recent book “One Market under God”, Thomas Frank has explained with sagacity the fallacies of the explanation that several economists and sociologists adopt easily. The model is based in the “trickle down” principle that says that governments have to give money and freedom to the rich, in order to reach the poor in a “mysterious” way (Frank talks about the market theology). Two percent own half the world’s wealth, according to a report of the United Nations University, and half of the world’s population live on less than two euros a day according to a Population Reference Bureau report.
Globalization is the third chapter in capitalism’s history. The first one was State capitalism, which was the colonialism practiced by the powerful States over the weak ones with the object of appropriating their wealth, generally by violent means. This is the case of Spain with America, of England with India or Belgium with the Congo. The second chapter is represented by the protection that the State gave to Companies, as in the case of the United States sending its army to protect the United Fruits’ interests in Central America (resulting in the “banana republic” expression). Other examples include the origin of the Chilean military coup and the constant crisis relating to oil in Middle East. In globalization, the third chapter, the main players are the multinational corporations that count on the protection of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and, especially, the World’s Trade Organization. With the support of these institutions and trade agreements, the interests of multinational corporations in foreign countries prevail over the host countries’ interests. This chapter represents the period in which capital is really free, not only to overcome borders, but to disregard other countries’ labor and environmental laws. This freedom allows a network of organizations that goes from fiscal extraterritoriality to the creation of paradises for hiding money, along with the overvaluation of the financial sector and, always, the exploitation of the countries that accept free trade.
With globalization, the main economic power is the multinational corporation. There are also two political powers. One is built by these three entities, which has a poor democratic nature and which works in favor of companies. The other is the UN, which is becoming weaker. It represents US antagonism and even rejection, as demonstrated in Iraq. The UN is supposed to have a legal international power that would allow it to act as an international police force and wealth balancer.
The UN is supposed to have a legal international power that would allow it to act as an international police force and wealth balancer but it lacks the means and political legitimation to do it and is a witness to the growing inequality of people and environmental damage
The inequality is not only between North and South. In United States, 48 million inhabitants don’t have health insurance. However, it is in the South where the inequality and shortages are increasing. In Africa, the AIDS crisis continues because of the pharmaceutical companies’ avarice. The recent Di Caprio movie, “Blood Diamond”, shows how gem smuggling, encouraged by specialized firms, promotes the political instability of producer countries. There are lots of cases that illustrate the damage to the environment accompanied by multinational arrogance. In the meantime, wars, some waged for practical purposes such as the control of oil, and others, such as in Iraq, result in the creation of an international enemy: Terrorism is much like the old enemy of communism. These omnipresent threats divert the world’s attention from the inequality and scarcity for the poor populations of the world. These wars also continue favoring the maintenance of a military-industrial complex, which in the American version considers the United States as the military appendix of the new global economic power.
In capitalism’s logic, everything is left in the hands of the free markets and its corollary, the privatization of even basic services. From here the human rights’ logic emerges, a logic that has had its own evolution. In the beginning, it was the recognition of people’s basic equality, with the abolition of slavery. After that, it was the protection of minorities’ political rights. At the same time, the humanitarian rights emerged with the Geneva Convention for prisoners of war, calamity victims, etc. Now, we are in the midst of a third generation of basic rights: those relating to health, education, and housing.
Basic rights include healthy standards for common goods like the quality of the air we breathe and the water we drink. These rights should be maintained by States and the by the UN to prevent the privatization of these goods by the adoption of repressive and control measurements. This would allow the human rights’ logic, which is now being neglected, to flourish. It is not only about having free education, housing and health. Most of these services are paid through taxes. The majority of these are indirect taxes that citizens must pay throughout their lives and which have a disproportionately adverse effect on the poor. We don’t oppose the utilization of taxes for the use of public services, as the “utilities” traditional model establishes in the Anglo-Saxon model. We say that human rights cannot be a matter of business or an object for speculation; they must be separate from commerce.
There is an inevitable confrontation between these two logics. As sociologists we must choose the human rights model over the market model. Many young sociologists as many young journalists only want quick success in life, to become rich as soon as they can. That is why they end up working for the people that pay the most, without questioning the causes they are supporting.
The highest powers do not want to be known and use media to disguise their motives and identities. For the most powerful, the best information is non-existent information, and the best situation is the invisibility of their affairs
Sociologists and journalists that serve these powers collaborate in those exercises of simplification, as in the case of “Spain goes well”, which the powers that be would love to be accepted as common knowledge. As everybody knows, immediately after the attacks of September 11, president George W. Bush encouraged New Yorkers to go shopping as the best thing to do to overcome the tragedy.
In the trilogy about Human Rights that Judith and I wrote, published by Rowman & Littlefield, we maintain that human rights are the last version (and the most complete one) in the long story of civic demands. Especially because they are not only about property and civil rights, but also with society’s acceptance and recognition of basic rights that are barely recognized nowadays in a world where hunger, poverty, inequality and oppression are still very real problems.
Sociologists have to feel comfortable in the analysis and defense of human rights, whether they are from the right or the left side of the political spectrum. In a certain way some Marxists did not feel comfortable with this problem because, for them, human right’s defense would arise as a consequence of the leftists taking power and, for them, taking care of this issue would mean to delay their project. Historical communism had caused violations of human rights as severely as the most pure capitalism of the Chilean model.
To embrace the cause of human rights simply means to help those who need it, maybe because they are not able to enjoy its benefits, or because their rights are seriously curtailed. We, sociologists, are especially prepared to embrace this cause, as we are part of the profession that has the most information about social causalities and broad methodologies. The next step, to go along with this cause, is almost inevitable as part of our deeply democratic communities that we believe will blossom. .
Legal and economic difficulty is a problem for human rights protection. There are more than three hundred international and national documents about human right’s protection, although, many are not carried out, because of the States’ lack of action, the nonexistence of an executive international authority and, in most cases, because of a shortage of money.
One example of this is children. Although there is an International Agency (UNICEF) that addresses this problem, more than 25,000 five year olds die each day because of malnutrition, lack of potable water, malaria, lack of sanitary facilities, etc, mostly in poor countries. Sociological studies show the relation that this tragedy has with the structural problems of the international community. That is why it is necessary to continue calling attention to this subject from a professional and committed position.
In Sociologists Without Borders we propose human rights as the base of the sociologist’s deontology, of our moral commitment. In this way, if an American sociologist is in charge of analyzing whether the death penalty serves for fighting crime, after concluding that it does not (as it is obvious), he or she also has to mention that it is a human rights violation. Unfortunately, if this sociologist was working for Texas, Nevada, China or Kuwait, he or she would have very little chance of being hired again. There is a moment in life in which we have to choose between helping the powerful or raining on their parade and if we stick to our proposed deontology and if we do not worry about the money, we should prefer the second option.
The International Sociologists Without Borders’ purpose is to organize meetings of professors and students from Social Sciences so as to spread these ideas.
http://ssfinternacional.blogspot.com/
http://www.sociologistswithoutborders.com/
Alberto Moncada amoncada1@telefonica.net
Judith Blau jrblau@email.unc.edu
Copresidents of SSF Internacional
