People leave their small circles and reach for the universal. That is the whole of it, and it is harder than it sounds, because every scholarly world is a small circle that has quietly mistaken itself for the world. The Anglophone one is simply the circle that got to call itself international.
So this is not a complaint about publishers, and it is not an appeal on behalf of anyone's periphery. Charity is just the same map drawn again, with the centre being generous. The claim is plainer and it implicates all of us: a literature assembled from one fraction of the work is a worse literature, and the person reading it in Berlin is as poorly served as the person unread in Kraków.
What BICSS is today is an idea trying to organise itself on the internet. There is no legal personality, no office and nothing published. The goal is to build what social science skipped, the scholarly society it never had: journals, a congress, a book programme, owned by their members rather than by shareholders. That is why we are aiming at a registered cooperative seated in Berlin rather than a company. All of it comes later and in that order, and we are not going to pretend otherwise on a website.
We should say the obvious thing about ourselves too. The people starting this are mostly from one country, because that is who the founder knows, and that is exactly the mechanism we just described. Founding groups form through strong ties and similarity, and good intentions have been measured against it and lost. So we are not relying on our intentions. We are writing rules, now, while they cost us nothing.