why are expelled IWA sections growing?
Oct 5 2006 16:25
does anyone have any theories as to why it is that, in general, syndicalist groups either expelled or formed outside the IWA are currently growing, and usually far larger than their IWA counterparts?
Italy, Spain, Sweden, France, USA - all as far as I can see have far larger, functioning syndicalist unions, outside the IWA, which does not have any significant sections outside of these countries (as far as I'm aware).
So what is it that they're doing that we aren't? Is it simply a product of those elements that we would describe as "reformist"? Or is it something else in their practice that could be replicated without necessarilly adopting those elements of their tactics which are found to be objectionable?
(maybe this should be in the SolFed forum, tho I think it might be of wider interest)
Oct 5 2006 16:56
#2
rata wrote:
Sorry. wrote:
does anyone have any theories as to why it is that, in general, syndicalist groups either expelled or formed outside the IWA are currently growing, and usually far larger than their IWA counterparts?State funding?
Sorry. wrote:
Italy, Spain, Sweden, France, USA - all as far as I can see have far larger, functioning syndicalist unions, outside the IWA, which does not have any significant sections outside of these countries (as far as I'm aware).Which unions are you referring to in Italy? Maybe I missed it, by what do you define as syndicalist unions - anarcho-syndicalist unions, revolutionary syndicalist unions or something else? Also, as far as I am aware, for example, in France, after initial start, unions such as CNT-Vignoles are getting smaller each congress.
Was referring primarily to UNICOBAS. I was using the phrase "syndicalist" to include those groups which self-identify as being somewhat within our tradition. I'm not trying to imply approval for these organisations or all their policies, just discuss whether we have anything to learn from their relative success.
Oct 5 2006 17:02
#3
edit
Forget it.
Oct 5 2006 19:24
#4
The obvious answer would seem to be that these unions are more concentrated on bread and butter issues than on political ones - and hence in most cases are not anarchist enough for the IWA.
Oct 5 2006 19:56
#5
Hi Sorry.,
I don't think they all are growing, and the reasons they are bigger than the IWA sections there is different for each place.
Firstly, in Sweden and US there is no IWA section, and both the IWW and SAC have their own long histories. In Spain the CGT is bigger because of its tactics. If you are primarily oriented to workplace organising, the CNT is quite marginal and not present in some cities. The CGT offers all that, and many people would rather be in a big organisation than a small one, particularly when on the ground the political differences are relatively small except for the union elections issue.
In Italy, I am not sure that you can place Unicobas directly in the anarcho-syndicalist tradition, as it draws from many other traditions from the Italian left, particularly the Autonomia Operaia. From the impressions I've got as well, I think the USI are growing as well.
I also understand that the French CNT-AIT is growing now, having been involved in a lot of struggles of urban youth in the last couple of years. I also detect that they are more oriented now to their own activities, rather than attacking the CNT of Vignoles.
But this does bring us back to what constitutes "growing" and in what circumstances groups grow. In France the CNT split happened at a time of a lot of struggles, since then there have been ups and downs and I get the impression that the CNT-AIT is more in tune with the current mood amongst those workers and students in France who are being radicalised than the CNT-Vignoles. The IWW is growing at the moment in the US, but it wasn't the case 20-25 years ago, and it shrank for decades from the 1920s to the 1960s when it nearly ceased to exist.
There is also the question of the "quality" of that growth where it happens. The CGT might have 50-70,000 members, but they're not all active.
I think one of the things you're hinting at here, possibly not fully realised, is whether there's anything we can usefully learn from these groups' tactics. This, however, might mean we would need to dialogue with people we don't necessarily agree with, which won't go down well with everyone. But is it not worth asking CGT what they gain or lose from the participation in the union elections, or Vignoles a similar question?
Regards,
Martin
Oct 5 2006 20:37
#6
The comrades at SAC talked about what turned the long decline of SAC in the 90s and they contributed that solely to change of focus to the practical organising primarily in the workplace, instead of political recruiting which (to quote one member) lead to "mostly punks and goths joining". So there must b some truth in the practical organising and how it atracts militants at the workplace, instead of political recruiting which mostly atracts lefties.
But what would be the lesson to a group like Solidarity Federation? Of course because of our size we need to mainly do political recruiting and typical leftist activism, but even small examples of practical victories in the workplace could change things around quite quickly. I think in places like Manchester SolFed local we should just focus more and more on practical local campaigns and organising (not that we dont do that already, but perhaps we dont bang our drum about it enough).
Oct 5 2006 20:52
#7
Quote:
Of course because of our size we need to mainly do political recruiting and typical leftist activism, but even small examples of practical victories in the workplace could change things around quite quickly.
Why is there a need to do 'political recruiting' and 'typical leftist activism'?
I can understand that 'recruits' are likely to come politically, but that's different to active recruiting as something you do consciously. What typical leftist activism is solfed involved with? Do you mean anti-war marches etc? What's the need for that?
Oct 5 2006 20:57
#8
JDMF wrote:
Of course because of our size we need to mainly do political recruiting and typical leftist activism, but even small examples of practical victories in the workplace could change things around quite quickly.
Absolutely! I guess our union is a good example of that. After our recent action (if the link is not working because our server is being fixed, use this one) in a restaurant, that went well and got the goods for the worker involved in the conflict, we are receiving tons of call, and much more people are involved in the work of the organization in Belgrade. We even didn't do much talking around about it, the word was mainly spread through the personal channels that no propaganda leaflet could reach. After that action we are having enough people to form an union in the services sector, something that was unimaginable just short time ago.
Oct 6 2006 03:35
#9
The IWA is an ossified church grouped around an anarchist orthodoxy?
Oct 6 2006 08:46
#10
That was both extremely poor manners and contributed nothing to the debate. Either put forward a reasoned contribution rather than trite sweeping statements designed to irritate people, or shut up.
Oct 6 2006 08:54
#11
catch wrote:
Why is there a need to do 'political recruiting' and 'typical leftist activism'?
you are asking why an organisation seeks to grow in size and influence? or why A-S group is stuck in political recruiting in its current stage?
Have a look at the discussion i responded to, basically some of the A-S groups in europe have grown lately and one reason mentioned for that is that the growth has been from economic rather than purely political organising and recruiting. Of course for A-S group these two go hand in hand, but as an example of mainly economic recruiting would be an organising drive at a workplace, or a group of workers making the shift from reformist union into a revolutionary union (political move with economic base).
No SolFed is not in a position where it could do organising drives within a workplace, and it would not be wise to do so i guess. So all new SolFed members are individuals from different backgrounds, workplaces and locations but who largely agree with the politics of the group and see it as a project worth getting involved in.
Quote:
I can understand that 'recruits' are likely to come politically, but that's different to active recruiting as something you do consciously.
actually SolFed is pretty poor in recruiting 
There are no active recruitment drives going or anything, sometimes it is actually quite difficult to join SolFed because of lack of local group, or just the whole org feels remote and not easy to approach. So dont get me wrong, there is not conscious recruitment drives going on or anything like that, i mean recruiting in the broad sense of word, basically meaning getting any new members to join and the processes involved.
Quote:
What typical leftist activism is solfed involved with? Do you mean anti-war marches etc? What's the need for that?
immigration issues and defence of asylum seekers, anti-racism, anti-war, solidarity actions and campaigns, stuff your boss, running the local radical social centre, organising events, talks, discussion meetings and what not.
SolFed also (at least in Manchester) offers workplace advice, help in disciplinary, grievance and tribunal issues, health and safety advice and so on.
Oct 6 2006 10:33
#12
Horselover Fat wrote:
The IWA is an ossified church grouped around an anarchist orthodoxy? I know that might sound oversimplified or distasteful to some, but maybe it's also how it is.
If I was you I'd concentrate on understanding the concepts you bandy about so brazenly rather than sticking your nose into issues you have even less of a clue about.
Oct 6 2006 11:36
#13
JDMF wrote:
actually SolFed is pretty poor in recruiting
OK it sounded like there was some kind of recruitment drive going on, which I'd not heard about before. This alongside the 'anarcho-syndicalist union not union of anarcho-syndicalists' stuff on other threads had me worried for a moment there 
Quote:
i mean recruiting in the broad sense of word, basically meaning getting any new members to join and the processes involved.
OK that's fine. I mean we'd like more people to get involved helping with this site, and that's going to be based on politics and not much else.
Quote:
immigration issues and defence of asylum seekers, anti-racism, anti-war, solidarity actions and campaigns, stuff your boss, running the local radical social centre, organising events, talks, discussion meetings and what not.
See none of these things are 'bad' per se, but some of those sound like a lot of work for not a lot of people.
Quote:
SolFed also (at least in Manchester) offers workplace advice, help in disciplinary, grievance and tribunal issues, health and safety advice and so on.
Is that to other SolFed members (serious question in case it reads wrong)? Or are you running advice workshops/drop-ins open to anyone?
Oct 6 2006 11:46
#14
catch wrote:
This alongside the 'anarcho-syndicalist union not union of anarcho-syndicalists' stuff on other threads had me worried for a moment there
that, my friend, would not be a reason to worry, but a reason to celebrate But alas, it is not the time yet...
Quote:
OK that's fine. I mean we'd like more people to get involved helping with this site, and that's going to be based on politics and not much else.
true, but you have a very clear remit and purpose which doesnt even cover the area of your tightly knit political group, so of course your "recruitment" should be based on politics.
but having said that, you also get contributions based on non-political (in the sense that it is used on this thread) basis, like from workers in active struggle who might not be anarchists or libertarians at all.
Quote:
See none of these things are 'bad' per se, but some of those sound like a lot of work for not a lot of people.
Manc SolFed has currently 16 members, i think you can get a lot done with that amount!
Quote:
Quote:
SolFed also (at least in Manchester) offers workplace advice, help in disciplinary, grievance and tribunal issues, health and safety advice and so on.Is that to other SolFed members (serious question in case it reads wrong)? Or are you running advice workshops/drop-ins open to anyone?
that is to everyone, but currently not advertised widely due to lack of resources, so the knowledgeable and experienced members who are doing this mainly do it in established communities and links they have already (in their workplaces etc). It would be great to make it more formal and start running some advice drop ins and stuff (i believe that has been done before)
Oct 6 2006 11:55
#15
JDMF wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
SolFed also (at least in Manchester) offers workplace advice, help in disciplinary, grievance and tribunal issues, health and safety advice and so on.Is that to other SolFed members (serious question in case it reads wrong)? Or are you running advice workshops/drop-ins open to anyone?
that is to everyone, but currently not advertised widely due to lack of resources, so the knowledgeable and experienced members who are doing this mainly do it in established communities and links they have already (in their workplaces etc). It would be great to make it more formal and start running some advice drop ins and stuff (i believe that has been done before)
The same thing happens in Preston. We do not have formal sessions but we get people coming to us for advice because of local contacts. They seem to trust us to give an informed and honest with no strings attached. This comes from those already in unions who don't trust the officials and from individuals with no workplace organisation who feel totally alone. We always emphasise the need to talk to workmates to see if they are experiencing the same problems and to act collectively if at all possible.
Oct 9 2006 21:54
#16
does anyone have any theories as to why it is that, in general, syndicalist groups either expelled or formed outside the IWA are currently growing, and usually far larger than their IWA counterparts?
Comment
Well. I think allready some people answered. Some sections expelled from IWA groing some of them shrinking like CNT-Viniol. Olso what means "groing"? I was in Spane in Cordova. There is CGT organisation with 200 members and CNT with 30 members. But in generally 15 people of CNT active and 3 of CGT. Members of CGT pay some union money and some of them sometimes partisipate in mitings (like 1 of May) but they doing nothing in generaly. This is just normal tred-union.
But i wood like to say something els.
I know organisation wich is in 100 times bigger than even SAK or CGT - Labor Party of UK. So what?
I think if contr-revolutionary movement is groing it is the reason to be sad. It is the reason to be happy only for contr-revolutionaris.
Mar 23 2007 04:27
#17
revol68 wrote:
Horselover Fat wrote:
The IWA is an ossified church grouped around an anarchist orthodoxy?If I was you I'd concentrate on understanding the concepts you bandy about so brazenly rather than sticking your nose into issues you have even less of a clue about.
haha what?
State funding?
Which unions are you referring to in Italy? Maybe I missed it, by what do you define as syndicalist unions - anarcho-syndicalist unions, revolutionary syndicalist unions or something else? Also, as far as I am aware, for example, in France, after initial start, unions such as CNT-Vignoles are getting smaller each congress.