NEFAC and "rise"

Wait, did you just quote Rises clarification about his position in which he stated HE DOESNT think they are getting paid by the US? Or am I an idiot?

Can we all agree to call him Risesky from now on.

Not to make light of the situation, but this thread is a great candidate for a drinking game. For every time Oliver says/quotes "black propaganda for the US State Department", take a shot.

I was doing that anyway!

Drinking everytime someone posts a word with more than 2 letters is only a game in NEFAC.

I've lost track of all the NEFAC drinking games at this point. I think we had something like 4-5 that involved a Wayne Price theme alone...

Uh... yeah... but that ain't booze.

Well it was before breakfast.

and

What experience is this based on and where at? Because that's not my perception of the IWW at all from the places where I've been involved. There may well be branches like this, but I don't know about them.

What experience is this based on and where at? Because that's not my perception of the IWW at all from the places where I've been involved. There may well be branches like this, but I don't know about them.

`1. Where is the plan behind bike messangers, recyclers, social service agencies, starbucks, truck drivers?

2. Where is the growth? When I was a member there were 1000 members, from what I know there are still about 1000 members. It's been 10 years.

3. Where is the leadership development? Who workers are getting trained to run the union and organize?

Organizer, I'll answer your questions but I'd appreciate it if you would return the favor. What experiences do you have with the IWW? Where were you a member? For how long? What did you take part in?

1. At present to the best of my knowledge there's not a union wide plan that is agreed upon beyond "organize more." There have been a lot of conversations across the union about strategy, but no final decisions. Your criticisms would have more weight in these conversations if you were a member or if you had any interest at all in the success of the organization. In branches where there's organizing often the plan is simply to try to win the campaigns that have come up or to maintain the existing organization. In my branch the plan I advocate for is for us to organize in workplaces in order to build the experience, ability, and dedication of existing membership and build a culture of organizing. A part of this plan is to train members better. Our intro organizing training is a good start. (Personally I'd like to see more of our members also take part in the OI or whatever CTW's equivalent is, in order to get some more training, but that's a controversial opinion in some parts of the union.) Another part is to build ties between members locally and members across the union, educate members about the union, and get members to step up into leadership roles locally and across the union. So far it's working well, especially given that our branch didn't exist two years ago. Of course everything could be faster.

I'd like to see this plan extended across the union, with some benchmarks set and a date by which the plan will be evaluated. After that then we should start picking industrial targets. The organizing department can help with some of this stuff.

2. The growth varies by branch. It's not been great but it does exist, especially qualitatively. A lot of people have also left the union, but personally it's not always a tragedy when someone leaves - it depends on what they were contributing to the union. People who have been around longer than me tell me we're shedding deadweight.

3. Who do you think runs the IWW other than workers? I assume you mean here something like "workers who joined out of shopfloor organizing instead of pre-existing ideological affinity." I'm not going to name names on the internet of people who aren't on here but I can think of a lot of people (relative to our small size) who joined up out of organizing, then became involved in the rest of the union including taking on leadership roles and getting trained to organize better and to help other campaigns succeed. This doesn't happen perfectly and we could be better at it. It also varies by branch and by campaign. But it happens and we try to have plans that will make it more likely.

puking every time you quoted rise? that's dedication comrade

Is "organizer" chuck h in disguise?

he's denied it elsewhere, though the similarity is uncanny

you can call me RK

i'll stick to cunt, thanks.

Thats why I don't have sex with anarchists or octopi.

oh i missed that post.

glad the fuckwit has a clue about our activity (or lack of for that matter).

one question though, just how many people do NEFAC meetings attract and exactly who in the name of fuck are NEFAC organising, as far as I can see their most successful at producing ambiguity over nationalism and the next batch of union parasites.

more to the point what 'anti nationalist' posters have we put up in west belfast?

and seriously speaking french might impress the yokels in north america but us europeans are abit above that kind of thing, youse just come across as colonialists who were so shit youse got colonised yourselves, boo hoo!

Hahaha. Well played!

More support for private control of the Venezuelan oil industry by foreign firms from El Libertario/CRA

EL LIBERTARIO, # 49, 2007

From the editorial group of El Libertario, newspaper of CRA, Comision de Relaciones Anarquistas from Venezuela, we reflect on the prospects for this country after the seemingly undisputable electoral victory of Hugo Chavez. --- Venezuela has landed on the dark side of the moon. The recently opened 21st century seems to be escaping us for good. We will not have a chance to face it with any prospect of success. Eight years of speeches drawn from a time past, eight years of inefficiency in the management of public funds, of unstoppable corruption, of the waste of immense riches, of awful public services, of leaving the most basic necessities unsatisfied, of unemployment, of the breaking down of the industrial infrastructure, including the oil industry, of no social security, of charity as a way of survival, of lies and debasement as pervading attitudes...eight years of totalitarian control over the social and political system by the faction in power, of lack of ideas and of any initiative which could mark the way, of deprivation of the educational establishment.....yet eight years of all this have not been enough to make it clear to a substantial fraction of the people that a change was needed. And they voted to keep Chavez in power.

i've never seen a clearer statement in favour of foreign private ownership

though is that bit at the end advocating electoral change, or criticising electoral illusions? - where's that article/translation from?

yeah like the time those CIA backed doctors and nurses protested about underfunding in the NHS.

Yeh, dumb disinformation post Navindra. That seems a very biased interpretation of what they're saying - it may be factually correct (I don't know) that the Chavez regime's administration of the oil industry has been less 'efficient' than the previous owners. This may have had negative consequences for working class consumers due to fuel shortages, and this may be what CRA are commenting on. That doesn't necessarily mean they support private ownership over nationalisation. At the very least, your quote doesn't prove what you claim it does.

the statement was on a-infos. that's just the first paragraph.

i'm sure there will be plenty of responses to this saying "where does it say they support private ownership?", but given the history of statements made by el libertario and what they're saying here, one can read between the lines and see that they're saying that the situation was better under the previous industrial structures (e.g. - private ownership by bp plc, exxon, chevron, total sa, statoil, conoco-phillips, etc).

ok cheers, i'll have a read

edit: it's here

the problem is "the history of statements made by el libertario" is just as tenuous, with denunciations of the opposition and chavez turned into 'black propaganda for the US state department' in the minds of critics etc

As I said, the situation may have objectively been better for consumers under "previous industrial structures"; saying that does not equal "supporting private ownership".
So provide us with a quote where they say they explicitly support private control of industry.

self-important maybe, but not pro-opposition as far as i can tell. certainly nothing pro-private ownership (not sure what relevance the nationality of the capitalist is).

nah your wrong it's like someone pointing out the better standards of living in Iraq under Saddam is actually supporting Saddam.