Joseph Kay wrote:
Organisational dualism = a 'mass' workers organisation organised on economic lines (typically a trade union), and a separate political organisation (typically a party, but also a 'specific' anarchist organisation).Political-economic organisation = organisation with political principles which organises economic struggles, e.g. the CNT.
'Unitary organisation' = a term from left/council communist theory apparently included here to muddy the waters (meaning an organisation which, on the eve of revolution, unites the working class behind a revolutionary programme, e.g. the historic AAUD-E, or workers councils themselves)..
These are all 'the same' in the way the AF is 'the same' as the labour party and promoting 100% trade union membership is 'the same' as organising a mass meeting of all workers regardless of union membership.
VENN DIAGRAMS!!!!
Sorry but using your definitions, these things are not exactly the same thing but are largely subsets of each other.
A unitary organisation is an "organisation with political principles which organises economic struggles". And a separate organisational dualist political organisation is also an "organisation with political principles which organises economic struggles". I've drawn the "separate political organisation" as including things which are not "organisation[s] with political principles which organises economic struggles" because you can of course have "separate political organisation" which organise around 'political' issues that are not simply 'economic'. (To be honest I think class struggle as a social struggle, not an economic one, nor a political one, nor an economic/political one, so I don't see this distinction as useful.) Examples of none economic struggle would be i don't know occupying a jobcentre in opposition to legislative changes.
For what its worth, I think SolFed have been doing great stuff over the last few years so I'm not having a go at what you are doing. Rather, I'm having a go at this "political/economic organisation" idea.
The way I see it is that there is the social class, and subsections of that social class that have common 'political beliefs'*. They can and do organise together to advance their common beliefs.
People organising together on the basis of shared beliefs can take many forms. It can be like the ICC, the Adam Smith institute, the US Democrats, SolFed, Aufheben, The Economist etc. etc. The question is what is most appropriate to what you are trying to do, general transhistorical rules about how people with shared politics should organise don't exist. Lessons do, the correct organisational form doesn't.
*There is an obvious difference here between a political belief (i.e. a belief about the distribution and organisation of power and violence in society) and the economic/political distinction which rests on the separation of the 'political sphere' (the state) from the 'economic sphere' (the market); a separation that only exists in its developed form in bourgeois society.
You can take the comrade out of L&S but...
I was only commenting on Venn Diagrams generally!
As for Vanilla, I believe this is where he's coming from:
http://www.p-crac.blogspot.com/