10-Point Program of the Catalan CNT

Very interesting. For this are the agreements of congresses, to have a base to position the union in struggles and to offer a revolutionary strategy to the working class.

It would be nice if the working class came up with strategy for themselves and overthrew the vanguard cliques which have led them away from truly revolutionary positions.

A great document, puts in a program for the present moment the agreements emanated in the congresses. It also marks a revolutionary position, a working class, labor, economic and social approach. It also generates discourse, makes other union, social and political actors position themselves.

What exactly does ''We support the Catalan population in it's current demands....'' etc actually mean?

Is this radical reform programme aimed at a social republic specifically for Catalonia rather than for Spain or a wider area?

What exactly does ''We support the Catalan population in it's current demands....'' etc actually mean?

the possibility of self-determination and decide how to organize the economy and politics in Catalunya. As anarcho-syndicalists we have proposals, ways of thinking, where to get it and what is the real self-determination going through the social revolution. As they explain it in the program.

The program is taken from the congress agreements of the CNT, it is a program that serves the whole Spanish territory. In this case, the regional confederation of CNT in Catalonia and the Balearic Islands has published the agreements in a program format, in such a way that they can influence with them the labor and social struggle processes in a region (Catalonia) that has a population in agitation (many of them working class, to whom this program specifically goes)

SpikyMike, that's a very good question. And I don't think that the revolution they have in mind is really in the direct of internationalism and anarcho-communism.

Don't think anybody needs vanguards, whereever they' re from.

Akai, your opinion is funny, how does the working class create a revolutionary opinion for themselves? through their class organizations, right?. the CNT as part of the conscious working class develops a revolutionary program to advance towards the social revolution, part of that program is tried to start up nowadays in the fights in the companies or next to social movements like the one that carried out the 8M. Where is the minority, small and tiny vanguard party that only theorizes?

I hope that your hatred towards CNT does not cloud your mind too.

My mind is very clear.

The movement that displays the most abundant signs of decomposition is anarchism, which is hardly even the shadow of its former self. It has succumbed to every reactionary ideology and its disarray is so profound that nothing could have been expected from it but that it would serve as the pimp of sovereignty, the spearhead of vulgar trade unionism, the exponent of apocryphal identities and the mouthpiece of postmodernism. These roles will only serve as temporary stepping stones towards more highly paid activities, integrated into the dominant system, such as social economy, institutional environmentalism, civil society politics or populist nationalism. In the past, anarchism always existed in symbiosis with the workers movement, to which it contributed ideals, and often enough, courage. Any anarchist from that era would have said that nationalism was nothing but an attempt by the bourgeoisie to divide the proletariat; that the nationalist conflict was a false conflict (Madrid-Catalonia, central state-Catalonian people) whose purpose was to conceal the real conflict (bourgeoisie-proletariat); that the issue was not nationality, but anti-capitalism; that the real colonized and oppressed people were not the Catalonians, but the workers; that the workers have neither a fatherland nor a State. In the anarchist press of the past we easily find analyses of nationalism from a class point of view. And in practice, anarchists were frequently engaged in conflicts, often bloody ones, with nationalists. The line separating anarchism from nationalism was well-defined, and this is what today’s pro-sovereignty movement has succeeded in erasing. The pro-sovereignty movement, by setting itself up as the principal social and political force, has polarized society, obliging all the other forces to define themselves in relation to it, for or against, that is, to take sides. The pro-sovereignty caste is the only caste with an explicit project for a “State” and a “country”, and this is why it was easy for it to outflank the civil society “left” and render it impotent. It knows what it does not want and where it wants to go, even if it does not have a very clear idea of how to get there. And while the genuine civil society movement tries to remain above all “blocs” with increasingly higher doses of ambiguity, most anarchists have jumped aboard the pro-sovereignty bandwagon with the fatuous hope of finding cracks in its edifice where they can promote their social causes and identity issues.

Anarchism has lost its “bond” with the workers, but it seems to have discovered a solid enough connection with nationalism. The rights of labor have joined forces with the liberty of peoples, and ballots have joined forces with direct action. Anarchism has converged with the Catalonian Left in the Committees for the Defense of the Referendum, first, and then with the Committees for the Defense of the Republic, becoming esoteric and populist, since it defends an illusory “people” and fights on behalf of a phantom State. It is prepared to serve as the cannon fodder for the pro-sovereignty movement, that is, for a fraction of the bourgeoisie. The CNT and the CGT themselves have university professors serving as the general secretaries of their organizations; the crème de la crème of the citizenry direct these organizations that have nothing anarchosyndicalist about them except their names. And the worst thing of all is that libertarian reformism and pro-sovereignty have not given rise to an extreme left that would seek to draw clarifying lines in the anarchist movement. The latter is not capable of such a thing, and is no longer capable of conceiving a social project that is clearly demarcated from the pro-sovereignty and civil society movements. It is not capable of constituting itself as a radical social current distinct from the other substitutes for such a current such as the CUP, Podemos or Los Comunes. The neo-anarchist ideology revolves around the concept of “the people”, an idea borrowed from primitive bourgeois nationalism. “The people”, however, is not a political subject, much less a class distinct from the bourgeoisie, a socially homogeneous and unified majority that fights for liberation and to construct a State that would guarantee its liberty. It is indeed true that there is no revolutionary subject, since there is no workers movement that could perform such a role. But there is no Catalonian people, either; what is called by that name is only the product of the institutional propaganda of the pro-sovereignty movement, a submissive mass of voters related to one another virtually through social networks and apps on their smart phones, rather than the manifestation of an independent will emanating from a collectivity that is conscious of its past, forged with direct relations and real common interests. In the final analysis, the Catalonian people is an entelechy by means of which the pro-sovereignty caste turns itself into a national class and constitutes itself as a nation, for which purpose it only lacks its own State. Patriotism is a statist religion. This is the reality that lies behind the alleged “sovereign people”: a public relations image, an abstraction that leads to other abstractions like “fatherland”, “nation”, “democracy” or “State”. A myth that allows a few clever social climbers to speak in its name and to claim its institutions as their own patrimony, for their own personal advancement. In a world of full-blown globalized capitalism, there are only exploiters and exploited, whether or not they are Catalonians, there are only a ruling class and the ruled classes; there are only leaders and led, oppressed masses and the State, and there is room only for nationalist false consciousness or revolutionary class consciousness, for narrow-minded patriotism or the universal ideals of emancipation. There is nothing to be expected from the fatherland but abstract liberties, ruled over by a privileged caste; real liberties will be the product of a class struggle prosecuted to its ultimate consequences. http://libcom.org/library/catalonian-affair-miguel-amor-s#new

So... apart from putting abstract ideas of Miguel Amorós. Any objection to the proposals of the program? because I don´t see them in what you say.
By the way, one among other lies of the text, CNT has a general officer who works in the metal sector and the general officer of CNT in Catalonia is a waiter by profession. They are not university professors like Amorós who, apart from being an academic, has not known what the workers' struggle is for many years.

The CNT program carefully tries to accommodate both nationalism & leftism - it describes the working class as their constituency within "the struggle of the Catalan people" - ie, The Nation - opportunistically pretending that there can be a national solution that positively accommodates all presently active forces; whatever happened to the syndicalism/industrial unionism of “the working class and the employing class have nothing in common”? Sold down the river... “we, the people of Catalonia” are identified as the agent of change with workers as a component of that category.

If it had any real guts and clarity it would come out and openly break with the nationalists and criticise their bourgeois role and statist goals. But that would lose the CNT some popularity so they play the populist game instead, hoping to get a seat at the nationalist table or within its future regime. They've learnt nothing since 1936 and once again seek accommodation with a bourgeois state and its reformism. The rank opportunism of such an approach is unfortunately not surprising. ''We support the Catalan population in it's current demands....'' – yes, ‘we’re all in it together’ in a cosy cross-class national unity.

We support the Catalan population in its current demands as a population and a society, insofar as we form a part of this population and this society. Once these goals have been achieved, we will continue working for our ultimate objectives.

So national state-building is supported as a transitional demand that supposedly brings the anti-statist social revolution closer. Pitiful...

Ragnar continues his usual populist line;

he possibility of self-determination and decide how to organize the economy and politics in Catalunya. As anarcho-syndicalists we have proposals, ways of thinking, where to get it and what is the real self-determination going through the social revolution. As they explain it in the program.

... “self-determination” being generally understood as national independence and state formation. No anarchism to be seen there, just a deliberate opportunist vagueness on the state question. A familiar question arises; how does helping strengthen the state lead to ‘anarcho-syndicalist’ social revolution? Anachro-swyndicalism at work.
Ragnar

They are not university professors like Amorós who, apart from being an academic, has not known what the workers' struggle is for many years.

He knows the workers struggle has nothing to do with opportunist nationalism. But just because someone has had books published doesn’t make them an academic. Amoros was jailed under Franco and then exiled and has been involved for decades in numerous working class struggles. He has previously stated in 2016 he’s an elementary school teacher, never been an academic - https://libcom.org/library/interview-ruta-66-miguel-amor%C3%B3s
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_Amor%C3%B3s
so you apparently know little, if anything about him; but that won’t stop you trying to smear him. I hope that your hatred towards critics of the statism of the CNT does not cloud your mind too much.

hehehe You follow with the straw doll, that if CNT defends statism, that if CNT supports an opportunistic nationalism ... in all the writing there is no proposal that means a support to that. Besides that you continue without making a criticism to the 10 points of the program, then they will be fine and since you can not criticize them, you look for an argument to use to talk about other things that they do not defend.

Your dismissals, as usual, have no specifics nor substance. You're unfortunately typical of the dregs of modern anarcho-reformism; Corbynism, Rojava etc.

Unfortunately Miguel Amoros himself, whilst offering some valid criticisms of much of present day anarchism is as much part of these "dregs" as those he criticises. I quote: "But it is clear that there are two factors that must be taken into account for the creation of a revolutionary subject that would take shape in a separate world within this world: those who have been excluded from the labor market, or the self-marginalized; those who, although they have not been excluded, abandon the labor market and choose to live on the margins; and the non-industrialized peasant classes. The traditional peasant classes, not just indigenous peoples, but also homesteaders or settlers, those who till land in common, or simply farmers, the landless, or those with land, with only a little land … they are the fulcrum of the defense of the territory, the class struggle of the 21st century."

Personally I have found Amoros analysis and commentary on much of modern capitalism pretty insightful but have struggled a bit to get my head round his references to defence of 'territory' as I questioned in his text here, https://libcom.org/library/civil-society-plague-middle-class-its-discontents.
Presumably he has a view of the potential revolutionary subject as being a wider dispossessed category than the more narrowly defined waged working class (which deserves a more critical consideration). Battlescarred quote above would fit into Amoros understanding and sympathy/support for the French ZAD popular with many other anarchists. Maybe Battlescarred and the ACG would find some of his contributions more relevant however to their interest in questions of land ownership and control?

Thanks, Battlescarred & Spiky. I don't know Amoros's views on peasants, territory etc. and only refer to his comments on the Catalonia situation. Obviously that doesn't mean I have to 100% support all he says on every topic.

I don´t dismiss anything. What I'm not going to do is debate something that does not happen in the program text, there is no support for nationalism or the state, those baguedades that avail themselves with the same use from the First International (in Spain) of words as people = working classes (proletariat, peasantry and craftsmen). I'm not going to try to convince you either, I don´t need it or it's my interest. I only wonder about the objections to the program, in that sense you don´t have any, which I like to know.

Amorós considered him an academicist in the same vein as, for example, Carlos Taibo. That is, his only activity is to talk about his books. Amoros for me is not someone to take into account because it is anti-unionist and even anti-anarchosyndicalist if you put into practice their theories, their search for the marginal as a revolutionary subject or an anti-developmentalism (I think it has another word in English for it) could have some sense for me in terms of general criticism on the territorial issue, the use of natural resources and environmentalism, but na more. Maybe you like this collective http://contraeldiluvio.es/. Apart from that Amoros is an individual who has lost popularity for 10 years within the considered Spanish anarchist "ghetto"

I maybe misunderstanding the 10-point programme above but apart from it's questionable territorial framework it appears to be a series of reforms within the framework of capitalism that are hoped to be implemented by a mix of concessions extracted through organised struggle from employers and the state and some union supported co-operative enterprises? It is not clear to what extent these have been assessed as practicable survivable measures in the context of both the global nature of modern capitalism or the current stage of the economic crisis of that system?

Like or hate it, it's an interesting and telling document

Spoken like a true politician

@Oliver ---- I just found it to be an interesting read. Really not much else to say for or against. But I usually find programatic stuff interesting. And the CNT-AIT has regularly issued yearly programs since the days of coming out of the underground. They may have also done that during underground and exiled days as well, I don't really recall at the mo.

BTW, I think smaller groups can constructively pen programs and manifestos that are reflective of their views and practical work. Personally, if folks continue to think in the cement head box of "big" and "small" or "big" versus small" it just is a nowhere argument. Over the years I've been part of small groups of worker militants or smaller organizations issuing shop oriented leaflets, workplace oriented newsletters and our approach has generally been principled, down to earth, reflective of both "here and now" stuff and non-rethorical (mostly) anarchy-syndicalsim as well.

I dunno, because someone sex they're a union doesn't always make it so. And cause others may say they're ideologically correct don't always make it so either.

I'd be interested to know how Oliver Twister and Ragnar reconcile the CNT being anarcho-syndicalist with suing the CNT-AIT in the Spanish courts.

Anarcho-syndicalism is a practice. One union suing another is an anathema to every principle of anarcho-syndicalist practice.

Last year? the IWW voted to support the initiative of the CNT to 're-found the IWA', the same CNT that is suing CNT-AIT. But then, one can't hold the IWW to anarcho-syndicalist standards as they are not anarcho-syndicalist - they say so themselves (see Myth#8 on their website).

But the FAU and USI claim to be. If anarcho-syndicalism can mean anything at all, including pursuing workers organisations through the courts, then it means nothing at all.

We never forget.

However even at the level of a city, I think it's important to have real roots in the city before issuing a program or manifesto, vs. just being some militants located in the city whose primary practice is posting online.

Not to digress from the OP. But I would say this is sorta yes and no. Years ago, when I first started out, there was no internet. So making contacts, communication etc was heavily face-to-face, open "lectures" (topical public presentations/discussions) and heavily on leaflets at demos etc etc. With today's methods of communication, using the internet as a form of communication, as form of electronic leafleting is helpful. And with many younger people, this is one way they might get started in a broader way. In-shop organizing, very different.My point is, part of the battle between some in the IWA and former Sections and beyond is either building up or belittling the size of others. OK, there are real differences, and those should be debated on merit, not "size matters" etc.

Anyway, my bad for digressing.

@olivertwister; nice try but there are not comparable as you well know. The court case 28 years ago was about the patrimony that the Spanish State owed to the CNT. The split faction of the CNT that became the CGT were reformists and it was they're actions that provoked the court case. Are you suggesting that the CNT just do nothing?

Did the IWW support the CGT in their court case? I ask because the IWW appears to be supporting the CNT against CNT-AIT. You've conveniently omitted the fact that the CNT initiated the court case against the CNT-AIT, not the other way around.

But, for the sake of an argument, let's agree with your contention that the CNT-AIT was at fault 28 years ago. Are you suggesting that it justifies the CNT's current legal action against the CNT-AIT?

The same CNT that claims to be 90% of the members. Bullying much? They're only demanding 500,000 euros.

That the IWW, the FAU and the USI (along with the rest of them) are tacitly supporting the CNT using the Spanish legal system against CNT-AIT. What an utter disgrace. It will take years of your best detergent to wash this stain out.

No, we won't forget.

It's obviously a product of deep sexist assumptions that I am the only "funny" one here, but these arrogant attempts at dismissal are pretty transparent. As are the constant prejudiced lies that come out of Twister's mouth, due to both ignorance and his attempt to be spokesperson of a movement that has moved away from libertarian ethics and finally has watered itself down to the type of pretentious populist stuff that his buddies might swallow.

As the IWA does not have any influence over the internal political programs of any of its members, it's a bunch of paranoid horseshit that the CNT had to run away from IWA to make such programs. However, it is true that those who tend towards such positions are also the people who conduct internal commissions on their own members to intimidate them for dealing with more radical elements, who threaten to beat and evict former comrades and support lawsuits to punish them and attempt to take possession of what they see as their private property. People can do all sorts of sommersaults but it's clear that many disgraceful methods have been used to achieve a certain deradicalization and to produce a more palpable alternative union product to market to the working class. While some of the points in the program could be OK, these are rather reduced to slogan form, as campaign points. Thus anybody who is serious needs to think more about the details of such and, in particular, the overall tendencies and practices of those proposing it. Furthermore, even if such reforms might be worth support, it still does not solve the deeper problems that this organization faces as a revolutionary organization.

Spikymike
Its territorial framework is quite easy to understand if you understand that CNT is a confederation of territorial confederations and that congress agreements can adapt them to the local and regional reality as best considered for their development. As an example of labor struggles with this program but in other areas, Alumansa (Aragón, Zaragoza) and Extructura Levante (Valencian Community, Valencia), two CNT sttrugles victories that reverse points of the "labor reform" (an anti-labor law ) in companies of 200-300 workers where between 1/3 and half of the staff are affiliated with CNT.
The program serves to advance positions in the struggle, grow, strengthen and have more capacity and power of action.

Akai, I don´t assume that you're funny, your argument is, just like Lugius's, that´s different to me one thing is the person that I really don´t care and other is the argument that is what I look. btw, how does the working class create a revolutionary opinion for themselves? through their class organizations, right?

Lugius, you gonna be very sad when you lost your argument the next week when pass the congress of the new internacional syndicalist revolutionary and anarcho-syndicalist.
For the umpteenth time, the CNT and the rest of the unions will not use the name of the AIT, it could be thought at first but not for months.
CGT is born of unions that leave the CNT or are expelled. The CNT fights for its acronym via judicial and wins it.
"CNT-AIT" is born of unions that leave the CNT or are expelled. The CNT fights for its acronym via judicial and will win it.
Where is the difference?
The CNT as a union also uses the legal and judicial resources it has at its disposal against bosses or those who try to usurp its acronyms and organization.

The € 500,000 is easy to understand when it is a demand made by the family of a person who fell through the hole of an elevator in the old CNT Elda (today expelled) and who did not want to take responsibility for the poor state in which the building or to fall and almost killed a person who invited to give a lecture. So the whole CNT has to assume the payment to the family and see how those same people from Elda keep calling themselves "CNT-ait" and insults us not only in social networks. Well, that shamelessness does not have logic. So they are sued for usurpation of acronyms, damages and losses to the CNT. That they do not want to pay or go to trial for that number? easy, do not use those acronyms, that are otherwise called "Spanish section - AIT" for example.

Happy May Day everyone!

OliverTwister's response to my earlier question was very helpful in clarifying the origin and function of the '10 Point Programme' although such a programme is not necessarily any more valid or useful as a result of being democratically determined. In terms of the communist objective Union lead reform programmes, even if sought through the means of direct action, do not escape the general problematic of attempts to direct the wider class struggle via the politics of 'transitional demands'. The revised (ex AIT) CNT approach does not appear to me significantly different from that of other non-anarchist 'base unions', which may in present circumstances serve a useful if temporary function in defence of our class interests but will need to be surpassed if class struggle is to take on an effective anti-capitalist and communist direction.

I realise this is the sort of thing where different people will give very different answers, but could someone give a brief summary of the legal issues at stake in a) the old CNT/CGT dispute and b) the current CNT/CNT-AIT case? Are/were both mainly about who has the legal right to the initials and union property, or are there other substantial issues at stake?

@oliver

@syndicalist, totally agree that there are many times where all there is is a small group, and it's fine and good for them to be bold. I don't know, it might be a generational thing, where I've seen too many people of my generation (and the next one even more) who have very grandiose theory on Twitter or whatever, but very little actual engagement with struggle.

Naw, there's a tendency from generation to generation for this sorta thing to happen. There have been plenty of times of the past decades where some have put forward "big things", only to drop the ball. My own credo is: "If you can't get your hands dirty, don't make a proposal" I'd refine that to mean, huge proposals where lots of time and work are required.

I read the comments above before the text itself. I don't see where people have gotten the idea that this is a nationalist or reformist program. In fact I'd say it's encouraging to see a statement coming out of Catalonia right now that says explicitly:

'We have to make it clear for the people in Catalonia that the Catalan problem requires an internationalist and anti-statist solution. We can't fall into xenophobia, or into promises of better states within the capitalist regime.'

Yes, the document is advocating achievable improvements - some, like the call for the self-management of closed factories etc., that leave the door open to increasing control are not quite straightforward reforms.

Unlike the base unions in Italy - who I like, to be fair - this statement does keep coming back to a wider revolutionary perspective. I don't think this is just rhetorical.

On this of all days (you know, the celebration of the movement for the 8-hour day), it's positive to see fairly large-scale and serious discussions about how to link anti-capitalist politics with concrete demands and strategy. A class struggle 'distracted' by transitional demands would need to be surpassed for a clearer communist direction, but there needs to be something to surpass!

So a union has a program aimed at improving workers’ conditions via union recognition? That is unremarkable, hardly new and normally barely worthy of mention here; but that it is presented as the CNT’s orientation and contribution to a nationalist movement is its specific context and significance. The quality of the program content is not really the issue, it’s the pinning of it to the tail of a nationalist movement and portraying support for “self-determination” of “the people”/”citizens” etc as a route to realisation of that program – ie, a desired piggy-back for class improvement via cross-class national movements; and dressing all this up as “a revolutionary programme”! If one wanted to avoid such opportunist alliances and really encourage revolution one would have to deliberately use different terms from that of nationalism to clearly make one’s position distinct. All the nonsense about the 1st International and how terms were used then is an irrelevant deceit designed to have the cake and eat it too; deliberately ambiguous terms that the nationalists and leftists can read as they wish so as not alienate popular national sentiment and so to bury any contradictions.

CNT Program

We only want a republic if it is social and anarchist, based in the self-management of the means of production, distribution, and consumption. The Catalan population's aspiration towards self-determination and social justice is only possible if we have a class perspective, and a focus on creating the structures of self-management that help prepare the working classes to construct the society we desire.

?? The multi-class national entity known as “The Catalan population’s aspiration towards self-determination”, if realised, would enthrone and strengthen the local ruling class whose function is to deny “social justice” (in any meaningful way that that term can be understood) by the continued enforcement & maintenance of class society. And this is the 'hegemonic thinking' the CNT wants to promote? The program reads as a call for strong union recognition within a self-determined republic state. Or does the 'anarchist' CNT still not grasp that a republic is a state form? And that neither socialism nor anarchism are possible in one country/nation/republic?

Regardless of any other of his possible failings and Ragnar’s cynical attempted use of them to dismiss all he says, Amoros’s critique of the present situation is either helpful in understanding the present situation or not. It rings far more true & coherent than what I’ve heard from the CNT.

Red Marriott

The quality of the program content is not really the issue, it’s the pinning of it to the tail of a nationalist movement and portraying support for “self-determination” of “the people”/”citizens” etc as a route to realisation of that program – ie, a desired piggy-back for class improvement via cross-class national movements; and dressing all this up as “a revolutionary programme”!

I don't see this at all. The text gives a good argument for internationalism against nationalism. The use of 'self-determination' in context means Catalan *working-class* people's desire for greater democratic freedom - i.e. control over their lives - and 'social justice'. In other words, instead of joining the nationalist bandwagon they're trying to communicate to the many w/c people inspired and caught up in the campaign for independence, recognizing the legitimate needs wrapped up in that, but directing it to an explicitly class-based perspective. If they meant some sort of cross-class Catalan people this can't be reconciled with the rest of the paragraph: '[it] is only possible if we have a class perspective, and a focus on creating the structures of self-management that help prepare the working classes to construct the society we desire'. The same goes for their use of 'republic' - a term used across the political spectrum as some form of self-government. A republic in this case that is 'social and anarchist' means the free self-managed society, not 'strong union recognition within a self-determined republic state' or anarchism-in-one-country (because, as they say, 'the Catalan problem requires an internationalist and anti-statist solution').

The statement as I read it is taking a critical-constructive approach to the events that have been happening in Catalonia, which is difficult and necessary. It's something that we had to deal with in Scotland, and still do. Nationalism took over the Scottish left: we had not just the usual electoralism but people became genuinely energised and took to the streets, and Independence became the means for social change. We found that abstract, rational critiques which don't relate to people on an emotional and practical level were not going to work. A more useful approach (seen in the From Yes to Action statement by autonomous groups in Scotland) was, certainly not to drop our critique of nationalism which needs to be made, but at the same time to reach out to all w/c people with class-based demands we could work on through self-organisation.

Come on Red Marriott, I'll chew on you like the children to see if that's how you get better.

True to our principles, we understand that our highest priority now is to help the working class understand the power that we have as a class. This will help us seize consciousness of ourselves as a decisive and principal factor. Once again, we need to demonstrate that we have to solve these problems ourselves, or else nobody will.

We need to make sure that our anarcho-syndicalist principles are present in the street, so that they give us credibility and legitimacy among our class, the working class. That is why we won't let any political parties make decisions for us, nor will we let them cover the struggle of the Catalan people in their flags. If we want to be taken seriously, we need to put forward proposals which are credible, possible, and above all useful - in the street, and in the workplaces.

We have to make it clear for the people in Catalonia that the Catalan problem requires an internationalist and anti-statist solution

For us, workplace organizing is a means, not an end. Our goal is the social revolution which will completely overturn the current socioeconomic order. We support the Catalan population in its current demands as a population and a society, insofar as we form a part of this population and this society. Once these goals have been achieved, we will continue working for our ultimate objectives

once again, for the common and the majority of revolutionaries, union and social militants in Spain, people are equal to working classes (proletariat, peasantry and crafts). Not understanding this particularity will lead you to misunderstand the struggles in Spain and its ploblematics, 15M what was it? the Spanish people going out to the street or you prefer the working classes going out into the street.

this program is valid for Catalonia in Spain and abroad. because it only looks at the organization of the working class that lives in Catalonia (what they call the Catalan people). The program reads as a call for strong union recognition as the only possibility for the organised working class to have the capacity (power) to develop all its strength in the workplaces, the neighborhoods and the alternative economy and to try the social revolution.
Seen the comments I like to see that it is a good program.

------
Well, this is something more technical, but yes, libertarian communism, anarchy, are an ultimate form of republic, that is, a democratic, socialist and libertarian society where only the working class exists and the means of production are collectivized/socialized. Or are we monarchists?

About La International in Spain, two examples, I can look more if you want...

En septiembre de 1869 dos representantes del núcleo barcelonés, Rafael Farga Pellicer y el médico Gaspar Sentiñón, acudieron al IV Congreso de la AIT que se celebró en Basilea. ​ El primero fue como representante del Centro Federal de Sociedades Obreras, y el segundo de la sección de la Internacional y de la Alianza. El núcleo madrileño sólo envió un saludo, pues no contaba con dinero suficiente para pagar el viaje. Farga y Sentiñón propusieron que el próximo Congreso se celebrara en Barcelona, «la capital industrial de la República federativa ibérica»,​ y también presentaron un informe sobre la situación en España tras el triunfo de la Revolución de septiembre de 1868 en el que decían:

Aprovechando un movimiento militar, el pueblo ha derribado el trono, que siempre oprime las fuerzas vivas del trabajo. Los efectos bienhechores de la libertad han dado una gran solidaridad y una gran fuerza a las sociedades poco numerosas, que han sabido resistir a este largo período de opresión. Primero fueron constituidas sociedades de todo género, no solamente en los grandes centros obreros, sino también en las localidades de pequeña industria.[…]
La organización del país es tal que, actuando con inteligencia puede dar en poco tiempo resultados extraordinarios para la Internacional. Barcelona es una ciudad de las más importantes para esto, porque ya el número de corporaciones organizadas es de, con 8.080 miembros… El Centro Federal de Sociedades Obreras, constituido después de la "evolución" de septiembre-octubre de 1868, ha logrado organizar y federar algunas de las sociedades obreras en muchos lugares de España. Treinta y cuatro sociedades de Barcelona trabajan en la organización obrera ibérica… Muchas de estas sociedades obreras se han reunido para cooperar con el mismo propósito. Basta comprobar que en España conocemos la existencia de 195 sociedades con más de 25.000 miembros.

[...]
Entre el 10 y el 18 de septiembre de 1871 se celebró en Valencia «en un ambiente de semiclandestinidad» la proyectada Conferencia reservada o secreta, en la que se adoptó una resolución típicamente bakuninista:

Que la verdadera república democrática federal es la propiedad colectiva, la anarquía y la federación económica, o sea, la libre federación universal de libres asociaciones obreras agrícolas e industriales.

Not sure how '(Scottish) Independence became the means for social change' and there was a good deal of self-delusion in the Autonomous groups post referendum statements interpretation of what lay behind the general public's surge of support for independence as reflected in Left nationalism. The statement itself managed to try and retrieve something positive from what was otherwise a failure of libertarian communist politics to have any significant impact during the referendum and largely avoided any explicit commitment to a reformist political programme in a way that the CNT statement hasn't. To the extent that there are comparisons between the UK and Spain and anarchism that perhaps lies in anarchism's inability to draw a clear distinction between the practice of class and territorial autonomy.
Effective communication between pro-revolutionary groups and the rest of our non-revolutionary class is always problematical but there should be no compromise in either our language or practice with left nationalism and populism.

Spikymike

Not sure how '(Scottish) Independence became the means for social change' and there was a good deal of self-delusion in the Autonomous groups post referendum statements interpretation of what lay behind the general public's surge of support for independence as reflected in Left nationalism.

On the first point I meant for many in the working class who wanted to see reforms in society, as opposed to those who wanted to defend the status quo or nostalgically return to some better imperial version of it. And although the statement is by no means perfect - it was worked out by different groups - those who wrote it weren't deluded about the presence of contradictory and reactionary motives in left nationalism, but wanted to speak to those in the more radical camp of the movement.

The talk about no compromise with problematic language is fine, but I think there's a lot of misunderstanding here. That and quick judgement from those who are politically against either the CNT or any attempt at trying influence and organise people beyond political groups.

I think that it is easier to discuss the criticisms of how the autonomy issue has been treated if we look at the various texts that were issued, not just this one. So it might be useful for those who haven´t seen previous discussions to look back at them.

Further, I always think it is useful to compare demands with the demands of the mainstream unions. In terms of the demands here, most of them could be made by mainstream unions in my country. But when we make demands, even if they coincide with some of the demands that even the mainstream unions have come to support, we try our best to give some deeper meaning and context to distinguish ourselves and to keep it clear that this is the minimum we can expect, not our end goal.

Finally, somebody asked about a difference between legal cases, CNT-CGT and CNT- CNT-AIT now, I think this needs to be a separate text, but the differences are significant. The CNT hasn´t sued to CNT-AIT asking that it persist using the initials CNT, but has made lawsuits mostly based on claims of slander against individual unions of the CNT-AIT, against one libertarian collective and 3 individual persons. These are numerous lawsuits of 50,001 euros each. They attempt to be punitive actions, not simply to stop them from using the name. And I have just found out, if the unions don´t have this money, it becomes the personal responsibility of the named secretaries of those unions and, if they cannot pay, they may be sentenced to jail time. So this is no ordinary suit and, as the asshole lawyer for CNT has said, his job is to finish off the CNT-AIT. Luckily they don´t have much chance, but this is their intention and it shows what kind of people these are who have no problems with using this type of legal coercion or even seeing the imprisonment of libertarian people. But this will be a separate text.

Red Marriott

The quality of the program content is not really the issue, it’s the pinning of it to the tail of a nationalist movement and portraying support for “self-determination” of “the people”/”citizens” etc as a route to realisation of that program – ie, a desired piggy-back for class improvement via cross-class national movements; and dressing all this up as “a revolutionary programme”! If one wanted to avoid such opportunist alliances and really encourage revolution one would have to deliberately use different terms from that of nationalism to clearly make one’s position distinct. All the nonsense about the 1st International and how terms were used then is an irrelevant deceit designed to have the cake and eat it too; deliberately ambiguous terms that the nationalists and leftists can read as they wish so as not alienate popular national sentiment and so to bury any contradictions.

This is a real problem and I think people are misunderstanding the criticism.

I don't like being the person to drag out the dictionary, but in this case it's useful because there are two generally accepted meanings for self-determination. Personal self-determination - to determine things for oneself, and national self-determination (the right of nations to).

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/self-determination

Definition of self-determination
1 : free choice of one's own acts or states without external compulsion
2 : determination by the people of a territorial unit of their own future political status

Compare to autonomy:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autonomy

Compared to autonomy:

1 : the quality or state of being self-governing; especially : the right of self-government The territory was granted autonomy.
2 : self-directing freedom and especially moral independence personal autonomy
3 : a self-governing state

Autonomy is used in a lot more contexts politically than self-determination, although it can still mean devolution and national independence. With 'self-determination' I automatically insert 'national' in front of it, and when someone is trying to use it in another sense, I have to try very hard to read past it or figure out if they're trying to sneak it in somehow.

What I read from the statement is:

"If you want real self-determination, it will have to be from a stateless classless society".

It's the bit in the preamble that is most telling for me though:

CNT

We support the Catalan population in its current demands as a population and a society, insofar as we form a part of this population and this society. Once these goals have been achieved, we will continue working for our ultimate objectives.

The 'once these goals have been achieved' absolutely leaves things open for a 'civic nationalism' which sees the new Catalan state as a stage on the way towards that society, possibly a better starting point to develop 'self management' from. Even if the authors of the statement don't think this, even if some of the rest of the statement contradicts it, you can read these sections and see support for secession. You could say that it's just accepting the reality of some kind of devolved administration or complete independence as an inevitability, but then why support something inevitable?

It would be possible to talk about the repression by the central government, say that you think people should attend popular assemblies etc., without needing to take a binary stance on the demand itself.

This is yet another case where even pro-national liberation people like Fanon and especially someone like Eusi Kwayana who had to deal very concretely with the failures of independence movements, often have more pointed concrete criticisms of the dynamics of national liberation struggle than most modern anarchist statements (whether soft-on or anti-). Concepts like comprador, neo-colonialism etc. don't point to an alternative, but they try to explain what happened, rather than dealing in abstractions. And the anti-colonial movements in Africa 40-60 years ago were dealing with incredibly repressive colonial state apparatus which class movements could not fail to come into direct conflict with - concretely very different from Catalonia relative to the rest of Spain.

If your criticisms of national liberation are less robust than those from people who are pro-national liberation, then something is wrong.

Sorry, a lot if the postings are long and I've not read them all in depth.

I ask this out if curiosity only. On the Catalan stuff, recognizing it was published by Catalan folks,
what was the internal process in coming up with your points on this?
Were there open assemblies where proposals were discussed? Other forms of
open membership discussion of say an elected commission's recommendations?
I guess, I'm curious as the process in which positions came about.
Also curious how these compare, if at all, with previous and historical
provincial (Catalonia) anarchosyndicalist perspectives?

If these have been discussed earlier, apologies. Just point me to the
proper posting

Re. Ragnar & doug above; Yes, I myself have referred to the CNT’s abstract anti-statism in contrasting it to their concrete support for “The Catalan population's aspiration towards self-determination and social justice” (I guess in Ragnarese “population” really means “working class” and always has done). Quoting it again doesn’t challenge anything I said.

NEWSFLASH;
amazing revelation: the concrete actions of unions & parties are often in contradiction to their abstract program.

Eg; I’m sure the CNT’s goal of ‘anti-statist revolution’ remained their program even as they sat in government in 1936 and as the leaders helped crush the May 37 uprising against Stalinist counter-revolution. One of the mainstream UK unions would on Mayday dust off a 19thC ancient banner proclaiming “abolish the wages system” (can’t remember which one, NUR?) but always acted in a completely opposite way. The ‘revolutionary’ anti-state/self-management abstraction tries to deflect criticism from the concrete reformism of the pro-independence stance. No one has answered how ‘supporting the aspiration for self-determination for a new state’ contributes anything to an anti-state revolution. Opportunism or worse. They define the role of the working class as “citizen” allies and constituents within a wider bourgeois nationalist movement, using the same bourgeois terms; anti-statism is postponed in practice until after the CNT has helped the nationalist agenda and its illusions by muting any radical critique of nationalism for fear of swimming against the tide. So they regularly talk of the working class as a constituent of a wider “people’s aspiration” for nationalist state building. They appear unable to grasp that a relevant anti-statist position could inform present practice - except by tail-ending nationalism. The working class as a lobbying constituent of The Nation - the CNT’s ‘One Nation syndicalism’.

And that’s their road to ‘revolution’; at most, a revolution in the national borders of state territory & reshuffling the ruling class. Salvoechea earlier put it quite clearly;

Anarchist have an opportunity to be part of a democratic revolution. We need to push for a socialist revolution, of course, after winning some struggles before.

Yes, part of a bourgeois democratic people’s state revolution.

Again;

"...all historical experience shows that an alliance concluded between two different parties always benefits the more backward - the more advanced party is inevitably weakened because the alliance diminishes and distorts its programme and destroys its moral strength and self-confidence; whereas when a backward party lies, it always finds itself closer than ever to its own truth ... I have no hesitation in saying that all the Marxist flirtations with bourgeois radicalism - reformist or revolutionary - can have no other outcome than the demoralization and disorganization of the nascent power of the proletariat, and therefore the further consolidation of the power of the bourgeoisie." (Bakunin, 1870s.)

Mike Harman

It's the bit in the preamble that is most telling for me though:

CNT

We support the Catalan population in its current demands as a population and a society, insofar as we form a part of this population and this society. Once these goals have been achieved, we will continue working for our ultimate objectives.

The 'once these goals have been achieved' absolutely leaves things open for a 'civic nationalism' which sees the new Catalan state as a stage on the way towards that society, possibly a better starting point to develop 'self management' from.

Agreed. This is a weak part of the statement. I'm not sure what the Catalan population's 'current demands' are. This could allow for implicit support for the nationalist parties. Deferment of objectives is also problematic. The promise of Independence is great at putting social struggles on hold. It's possible this part reveals a spectrum of views within the CNT unions. It'd be interesting to find out more.

Ragnar,

The programme advertises itself as a "revolutionary unionist programme".

Where in this 10 point programme does it advocate the global abolition of wage labour? Surley it one of the ultimate demands of revoutionary unionism that has always been a minimum demand?

What does the "CNT Catalonia" hope to achieve with this programme? It strikes me as tending towards reformism and outside the "movements" of traditional revolutiontionary working class demands. Do you think the current working class retreat and general disorientation necessitates a watered down programme by "revolitionaries" inorder to reach the 'disorientated' working class to subvert the multitude of right wing populist journalisms that presently dominate the class?

I guess what I am asking is if this is an opportunistc programme that seeks to capitalise on what has transpired to be a cross class "bourgeois nationalist" movement for "self-determination" or a real attempt to re-forge anarcho-syndicalism as a genuinely working-class inspired weapon to abolish capitalism as a system of global exploitation?

OliverTwister

Awesome Dude

Ragnar,

The programme advertises itself as a "revolutionary unionist programme".

Where in this 10 point programme does it advocate the global abolition of wage labour? Surley it one of the ultimate demands of revoutionary unionism that has always been a minimum demand?

What does the "CNT Catalonia" hope to achieve with this programme? It strikes me as tending towards reformism and outside the "movements" of traditional revolutiontionary working class demands. Do you think the current working class retreat and general disorientation necessitates a watered down programme by "revolitionaries" inorder to reach the 'disorientated' working class to subvert the multitude of right wing populist journalisms that presently dominate the class?

I guess what I am asking is if this is an opportunistc programme that seeks to capitalise on what has transpired to be a cross class "bourgeois nationalist" movement for "self-determination" or a real attempt to re-forge anarcho-syndicalism as a genuinely working-class inspired weapon to abolish capitalism as a system of global exploitation?

What would you advocate as a program in the current situation there?

The fact is I am not "there" and I am not and have never been a member of CNT Catalonia. Abstract 10 point programmes issued from the sidelines is a waste of time. That however doesn't stop me or others having an interested observers opinion of the programmes issued by comrades in the "thick of it".

akai

Finally, somebody asked about a difference between legal cases, CNT-CGT and CNT- CNT-AIT now, I think this needs to be a separate text, but the differences are significant. The CNT hasn´t sued to CNT-AIT asking that it persist using the initials CNT, but has made lawsuits mostly based on claims of slander against individual unions of the CNT-AIT, against one libertarian collective and 3 individual persons. These are numerous lawsuits of 50,001 euros each. They attempt to be punitive actions, not simply to stop them from using the name. And I have just found out, if the unions don´t have this money, it becomes the personal responsibility of the named secretaries of those unions and, if they cannot pay, they may be sentenced to jail time. So this is no ordinary suit and, as the asshole lawyer for CNT has said, his job is to finish off the CNT-AIT. Luckily they don´t have much chance, but this is their intention and it shows what kind of people these are who have no problems with using this type of legal coercion or even seeing the imprisonment of libertarian people. But this will be a separate text.

Stop your bullshits, CNT asked to different unions to stop to use CNT name and places and asked to give back the keys of the buildings several times, also try to recover the buildings but were reoccupated by the expelled unions, so all you say are your typical lies and bullshits.

why don't you explain that if happens any thing in any building that is property of CNT is CNT the legal responsible and the CNT general secretary the one that can go to jail? why don't you explain what had happened in Elda with the accident and how much money has to pay CNT and where are the responsible of the accident and if they assume any responsibility? why don't you explain that the CNT general secretary had to go to the court to answer about bullshits of unions of the IWA Spanish section because they use CNT name with out being part of CNT?

continue with your campaign of lies, but be calm, in CNT everybody knows that you were helping this people when CNT was a section of IWA. For less than what you were doing you expelled FAU. That is your libertarian level.

You came to Spain on 30 of April to say this:

"AIT expulsó a la CNT de sus filas y le negó el derecho de llevar sus iniciales."
"AIT expelled the CNT from its ranks and denied it the right to carry its initials."

Why you dont say this:

"CNT expulsó a unos sindicatos de sus filas y le negó el derecho de llevar sus iniciales."
"CNT expelled some unions from their ranks and denied him the right to carry his initials."

In Spain why say about what you do "Haz lo que digo y no lo que hago"

Happily CNT slowly is reorganizing the workers in several places and we will she how new stronger unions appear in places where you try to destroy CNT.

There's absolutely no bullshit in what I am saying. It's your lies that will be uncovered and it's not going to happen in a kangaroo court of a few of your buddies.

akai

There's absolutely no bullshit in what I am saying. It's your lies that will be uncovered and it's not going to happen in a kangaroo court of a few of your buddies.

You were translating texts of the expelled unions when CNT was an IWA section. Everybody knows this, we have the minutes of the expelled unions where they make reference to your translations.

You speak bout the money received by the government by FAL but you don't say any thing about who was the general secretary of CNT in that moment and who was the responsable of FAL in that moment. Both are with you in IWA.

You don't say any thing about the fact that the person that was general secretary of CNT from 2007 to 2010 that now is with you in IWA toke they money of CNT to buy a building putting the building to his name with an other 2 people, basically put the money in his pocket.

You don't say that the union of this person was taken to the court by a worker of the union because the union didn't defense the worker against the company. The worker won in the court and that union was punish to pay some thousands euros to the worker, that union ask to the rest of the unions for the money because they didn't have it, and we, all the regional, put the money even this union wasn't paying to CNT anything more than one year and was making boikot to CNT.

Also you don't explain that with the negligence of Elda (now a dais member of IWA with you) die a historical member of CNT, that the responsables of this negligence never accept any responsibility and that was CNT the one that have to face all the legal consequences and payments to the family.

You are a totally lie, nothing that came from you can be trusted.

Aha. Even if there are some truths to what you say, (before you twist it) it doesn't make what I say a lie. That's illogical.

As for translating texts, not a crime, especially as CNT for several years before it was finally expelled had been breaking the statutes. As everybody knows, the CNT went into all the mail accounts of unions it wanted to expel and dig up "crimes". Many of the CNT unions only found out that you guys didn't pay the dues because they decided they had to go past the secretaries that didn't provide financial reports for 4 years to them and ask the IWA directly. That kind of stuff seemed like a necessary last resort to people, because of failure to comply with the mandates of the CNT and its statutes by the Treasurer and General Secretary. And as for people who asked for this information, you didn't expel them.

But, as I said elsewhere, since you want to bring everything to court, that's where it will be discussed and it can decide whether or not I or anybody else is telling lies. And despite my distrust of courts, I am sure that they will look at everything more thoroughly than the few folks left on this forum.

akai

As everybody knows, the CNT went into all the mail accounts of unions it wanted to expel and dig up "crimes".

Lie. For example, this lie was repeated several times to explain how could CNT know that you where giving support to the unions expelled against a section of IWA and how could CNT get the minutes of the meetings of that unions. If you are so stupid that you send the information to whoever, then do not try to justify your stupidity saying lies that CNT went to the mails, and speaking about crimes.

akai

Many of the CNT unions only found out that you guys didn't pay the dues because they decided they had to go past the secretaries that didn't provide financial reports for 4 years to them and ask the IWA directly. That kind of stuff seemed like a necessary last resort to people, because of failure to comply with the mandates of the CNT and its statutes by the Treasurer and General Secretary. And as for people who asked for this information, you didn't expel them.

Lie. If the unions didn't know was because didn't want to know, the acounts were review in every pleno confederal by the delegates of the regional, So if any union has any questions could offer him self to go to the pleno or could ask to the delegates of his regional. The problem came when you do not take part in the meetings and you don't have interest in them. I knew perfectly about this because I ask. If there are unions that instead to ask to their delegates they ask to you is their problem.

akai

But, as I said elsewhere, since you want to bring everything to court, that's where it will be discussed and it can decide whether or not I or anybody else is telling lies. And despite my distrust of courts, I am sure that they will look at everything more thoroughly than the few folks left on this forum.

Yes, they will ask you, so you were giving support to a group in a country where there is a IWA section with out the permission of that section, something that go against IWA statutes. also they will ask you were says in IWA statutes any thing about suspensions of sections.

As I said, popcorn.

Awesome Dude

I guess what I am asking is if this is an opportunistc programme that seeks to capitalise on what has transpired to be a cross class "bourgeois nationalist" movement for "self-determination" or a real attempt to re-forge anarcho-syndicalism as a genuinely working-class inspired weapon to abolish capitalism as a system of global exploitation?

There is an anarcho-nationalist current among some Spanish ‘anarchists’ and the CNT statements appear to be carefully worded so as to appear all things to all people, ie, so as to not alienate anarcho-nationalist allies and others. Implying that Catalan national independence can be compatible with, continuous with and a positive stage progressing towards working class/syndicalist goals.

Sorry Awesome Dude for delay in answer to you. I hope that this help it

It is best understood when explaining the cultural context that exists in Spain. CNT has an association for the history of wanting the abolition of salary and social classes, associated with anarchism, with the radicalism of the left and with the social revolution. So we do not need to do maximal programs, all or nothing, all the time.
The CNT has more agreements, campaigns, social-cultural acts and grassroots work that embrace programs like this. It also has a fairly profiled program for when we are back in a revolutionary period, which does not exist today in Europe, in which case we live a period of regression or progress of reactionary policies.

I do not think that the working class is disoriented, I think it is clear that they want better wages, housing, quality public services (health, education, transport ...), etc ... The point is how they think it is better to get it , there is a good percentage of workers who think that this could be achieved by ending the monarchy, or with independence. I am very sure that ending the monarchy (regime of 78 ') would open a period of change and rupture of Francoist hegemony culture on many issues. The current policies of the PP and the Francoist cultural scene are generating movements of contestation, be it the feminist movement that grows strongly in Spain, or the fight of the pensioners, as well as the territorial tensions for not wanting to fit the identity and language diversity of the country .

Returning to the program, perhaps you understand better if you know more about Spanish labor legislation but ok, it is a program for our industrial sections in companies and at a territorial level local branches can work, seek sympathy and alliances with other unions or social organizations. Going forward and achieving the objectives of the program that are medium term brings us closer to a prerevolutionary context. Why do I say this? would facilitate more grassroots action in unionism in general, which reinforces our years of work in companies and our union strategy, would facilitate the implementation and affiliation of more labor sectors, also in the process would give us a position of more power to pressure and control in companies and municipalities (on which the budgets of public services depend). It would advance in the joint work of anarcho-syndicalism and cooperativism, which helps to generate a social community that rehearses how the working class can direct and manage the future society. It also tackles the multiemployment, making room for more hiring of unemployed workers, but with an important detail, through employment exchanges directed by the union.
In general, it is a program that helps us to advance positions to be big and to be able to seriously raise a social revolution.

The anarcho-nationalist, that some people is speaking about, always existed, was the Spanish anarcho-nationalist that defense the unity of Spain, they criticizes others because they use other language that is not Spanish and were against the free federation of collectivities, all should be under Spanish borders and nationalist way of thinking. Thankfully that positions are desapearing and anarchist in Spain are developing to an anti-nationalist positions base on, we mas make the revolution where ever is possible not attending to artificial borders invent by all the nationalist.

Revolutionary organizations try to make steps in the revolutionary way wherever is possible and with the tools we have. If the program was presented in all Spain (already is done because is base in our public agreements) nobody could be speaking now about anarchonationalist when the truth is that our agreements are only for Spain.

RM is on the money here.

But there are several associated issues and questions. The first of course being how certain movements are perceived and then used in the "recruiting for the revolution" process. Since this is essentially a recruiting process, some do not want to go into what they later pretend are "nuances". This of course wears down the analysis and politics of said organizations/ movements.

Second one can talk about the continuing lure of nationalism among both the left and anarchist movements. Here I would venture to put a lot of the current adherents rather into the left group, since that's where many of them actually come from. But it is not exclusive to it. The autonomy arguments are weak but find support in the less ideologicaly strident sectors of CNT-R. (I will use that denomination for them.)

This is nothing new and I would recommend reading the book about Pierats to get a good idea of what this looked like in practice after the organization resurfaced in the late 70s.

Finally, there is the issue of the influence of these sectors on the CNT-R currently. Besides the Catalan nationalists, there are the Basques and currently the largest union is in that area and holds the Secretariat. As one can expect, the nationalistic tendencies often hold other views which are problematic, as bad politics seldom rest on single problematic areas.

The anarchs-nationalist, that some people is speaking about, always existed,

What a shame.

melenas

The anarcho nationalist some people is speaking about always existed, was the Spanish anarcho nationalist that defence be unity of Spain, they criticizes to others because they use other language that is not Spanish and were against the free federation of collectivities, all should be under Spanish borders and nationalist way of thinking. Thankfully that positions are desapearing and anarchist in Spain are developing to an anti-nationalist positions

No - I'm not referring to those nationalists defending the unity of present Spain - and it's not very convincing to try to use them to dismiss the existence of an anarcho-nationalism closer to home. I'm referring to the local Catalan anarcho-nationalists that your CNT secretary refers to;
CNT Foreign Relations Secretary

... my understanding is that there are different attitudes towards independence among the anarchists. While groups like Embat share a similar analysis to ours (with countless differences, no doubt), others have taken a decided anarcho-nationalist position and support independence outright. The fact is that we have found common ground with some anarchist organisations, to the extent that they featured in our call for the general strike in Catalonia on the 3rd of October and in our joint propaganda. [...]
Some anarchists argue for independence saying that the smaller the state, the easier it is to fight against it. Sure! That’s why San Marino and Monaco (or the Vatican City, for that matter) are long stablished libertarian communist societies. Jokes aside, it’s difficult to see how smaller states that are the outcome of a long communal struggle for independence are going to be less homogeneous and easier to crack than larger colonialist centralised ones.
- CNT Foreign Relations Secretary Miguel Perez
http://meydangazetesi.org/gundem/2017/11/interview-with-anarchist-union-cnt-on-catalonia-referandum/

He's not personally sympathetic to their views but is at least honest and/or informed enough to admit they exist.

akai

Finally, there is the issue of the influence of these sectors on the CNT-R currently. Besides the Catalan nationalists, there are the Basques and currently the largest union is in that area and holds the Secretariat. As one can expect, the nationalistic tendencies often hold other views which are problematic, as bad politics seldom rest on single problematic areas.

Mrs Split (I will use this name since 3 splits at your back is something to be proud of), your affirmation cant be more wrong. I´m sure you never spend not even a minute in a CNT assemble in basque country, never listen a CNT meeting of First of may in Bilbao . You don´t know any thing about CNT basque militants but you are able to use your prejudices and nonsense claims to continue your erratic speech.

Because one day you read a book, you cant came here to speak about something you don´t know. Your speech is the typical Spanish nationalist speech we are tired to listen in the mass media, in which you can see that the only nationalist that exist for them is the basque and Catalan and never the Spanish. You accuse anarchist of basque country and cataluña of being nationalist, but you don´t accuse Spanish anarchist of the same, because as media do, to be Spanish for you is not nationalist, is normal.

Red Marriott

melenas

The anarcho nationalist some people is speaking about always existed, was the Spanish anarcho nationalist that defence be unity of Spain, they criticizes to others because they use other language that is not Spanish and were against the free federation of collectivities, all should be under Spanish borders and nationalist way of thinking. Thankfully that positions are desapearing and anarchist in Spain are developing to an anti-nationalist positions

No - I'm not referring to those nationalists defending the unity of present Spain - and it's not very convincing to try to use them to dismiss the existence of an anarcho-nationalism closer to home. I'm referring to the local Catalan anarcho-nationalists that your CNT secretary refers to;
CNT Foreign Relations Secretary

... my understanding is that there are different attitudes towards independence among the anarchists. While groups like Embat share a similar analysis to ours (with countless differences, no doubt), others have taken a decided anarcho-nationalist position and support independence outright. The fact is that we have found common ground with some anarchist organisations, to the extent that they featured in our call for the general strike in Catalonia on the 3rd of October and in our joint propaganda. [...]
Some anarchists argue for independence saying that the smaller the state, the easier it is to fight against it. Sure! That’s why San Marino and Monaco (or the Vatican City, for that matter) are long stablished libertarian communist societies. Jokes aside, it’s difficult to see how smaller states that are the outcome of a long communal struggle for independence are going to be less homogeneous and easier to crack than larger colonialist centralised ones.
- CNT Foreign Relations Secretary Miguel Perez
http://meydangazetesi.org/gundem/2017/11/interview-with-anarchist-union-cnt-on-catalonia-referandum/

He's not personally sympathetic to their views but is at least honest and/or informed enough to admit they exist.

Ok, nice, but you don´t understand what I mean, The Spanish anarcho-nationalims seen as "normal" and not identifying it as what it is, is much more bigger that 2 groups that en general have very limited influence in anarchy movement. The big step that is making the anarchist in Spain is to speak about how to create real independence (libertarian communism economical and social organization) with without worrying if is in cuenca, lekeitio or Sant Esteve de les Roures. That the importance of this program, that is base in CNT congresses agreements and that can be use wherever the people ask them selves, how can we face the situation and how can we manage our lives?

The reaction of the people in general remind me to the reaction of the Spanish Communist Party, they say that they are not nationalist and the next thing they do is to speak about Spanish Federation. The spanish anarcho-nationalist have a similar speech changing Spanish federation to iberian federation, to dont look like so much "fachas".

syndicalist

The anarchs-nationalist, that some people is speaking about, always existed,

What a shame.

Yes, it is.

I thought that was only Spain where you could see that, but not, when you travel to other countries you find people that are as nationalist as the ones you can see in catalunya or in Spain, but because they don´t have any mirror to look them self on, they do not realize.

They do not realize their nationalist attitudes because is the normal behavior around them, because is the general speech and they grow up with it, nationalist is not only to carry with you a flag. Anarchist are not vaccinated against the social behavior that is around them.

Anarchist are not vaccinated against the social behavior that is around them.

....they should be if they are anarchists.

If it had any real guts and clarity it would come out and openly break with the nationalists and criticise their bourgeois role and statist goals. But that would lose the CNT some popularity so they play the populist game instead, hoping to get a seat at the nationalist table or within its future regime.

With which nationalist? Spanish? Catalans? Again speaking about Catalan nationalist and forgetting Spanish nationalist. Again you are not able to focus in the program that is for the working class, again the same speech. That is what I mean, the real anti-nationalist is the program, because is for the working class to selfmanage the production, you can take it a apply it wherever. Look like the trees doesn't let you see the forest.

So a union has a program aimed at improving workers’ conditions via union recognition? That is unremarkable, hardly new and normally barely worthy of mention here; but that it is presented as the CNT’s orientation and contribution to a nationalist movement is its specific context and significance. The quality of the program content is not really the issue, it’s the pinning of it to the tail of a nationalist movement and portraying support for “self-determination” of “the people”/”citizens” etc as a route to realisation of that program – ie, a desired piggy-back for class improvement via cross-class national movements; and dressing all this up as “a revolutionary programme”! If one wanted to avoid such opportunist alliances and really encourage revolution one would have to deliberately use different terms from that of nationalism to clearly make one’s position distinct. All the nonsense about the 1st International and how terms were used then is an irrelevant deceit designed to have the cake and eat it too; deliberately ambiguous terms that the nationalists and leftists can read as they wish so as not alienate popular national sentiment and so to bury any contradictions.

One of the biggest mistakes of academicleftist is that they read word by word and analyze each one, instead to read a text and take what it says.

I didn't know that the main thing we have to do is to distinct our selves instead to propagate "La Idea" and put it in practice.

The multi-class national entity known as “The Catalan population’s aspiration towards self-determination”, if realised, would enthrone and strengthen the local ruling class whose function is to deny “social justice” (in any meaningful way that that term can be understood) by the continued enforcement & maintenance of class society. And this is the 'hegemonic thinking' the CNT wants to promote? The program reads as a call for strong union recognition within a self-determined republic state. Or does the 'anarchist' CNT still not grasp that a republic is a state form? And that neither socialism nor anarchism are possible in one country/nation/republic?

Regardless of any other of his possible failings and Ragnar’s cynical attempted use of them to dismiss all he says, Amoros’s critique of the present situation is either helpful in understanding the present situation or not. It rings far more true & coherent than what I’ve heard from the CNT.

If you are not able to understand that what says CNT is that the only republic that CNT wants is the one base in libertarian communism is your problem, the fact that you loose your self in translation and you are not able to understand that CNT is using self determination as a real meaning not as UNO statement. If you are not able to understand that all the program and speech goes in the way that the only independence is the Libertarian Federalism, is your problem.

There is something that maybe in general people is not able to understand, most of the program is the update of CNT agreements from the 20´s and 30´s.
CNT has several agreements along that years about how to get the power needed to be able to make the revolution. This agreements were in the way of controlling the hirings of workers by the companies.

Point 1 and 2. historical points of CNT is in all the congresses.

Point 3. there are several agreements of CNT along the 20´s and 30´s in this way, there is no a confederal quantity but yes a fight in this way.

Point 6 (and 5) of the program, base on actual agreement of CNT about this issue base on all the agreements of CNT during the 20´s and 30´s

Point 8, Historical proposal of CNT, I think there is no need to explain it.

Point 10. Again control from the union about energy and housing. Now body remember the "tenants union" of CNT?

This program is totally based in the historical agreements of CNT to grow, and get the necessary strength to be able to make the revolution. However person that ever spend some minutes to read all the agreements can understand it. But of course, is easier speak about populism than make a real analysis of the program and see what results he gave in the past.

syndicalist

Anarchist are not vaccinated against the social behavior that is around them.

....they should be if they are anarchists.

Yes, but we are only people as the rest, not perfect, but at least in theory more open mind and ready to make self-criticisms.

That would be hilarious if it weren't so insidious.

My comments are about the content of the CNT program posted here. Firstly melenas claimed that the anarcho-nationalists were all Spanish nationalists; then, when it was shown that the CNT Secretary contradicted this claim, you express resentment that people don’t also criticise Spanish nationalism. But the existence of that is not a tit-for-tat excuse nor a validation for Catalan or other nationalism so I see its mention here as an attempted distraction. I assume you’re not claiming that anyone who criticises what the CNT calls “the Catalan population's aspiration towards self-determination” is a Spanish nationalist?

There is an opportunism in the CNT statements, wanting to accommodate – with vague ambiguities – both nationalist and non-nationalist currents. If the CNTistas here had been honest they’d have admitted these currents exist within both the CNT and the wider Spanish anarchist scene. The “fine line” the CNT secretary talks of negotiating is a compromise between these currents so as to not alienate either from the organisation (nor pro-independence sentiments in the wider society). This is reflected in the ambiguous language used. It’s the bureaucratic opportunism of seeking quantitative growth at the expense of quality and clarity of content.

I’m sure the CNT sometimes contributes something to improvement of working class conditions, as other unions do. But the CNT apparently also shares the bureaucratic opportunism and fear of internal disagreement of other unions. If the CNT, with its long historical experience, can’t now have a clear and unambiguous distance from nationalism then it only adds to the misrepresentation & distortion of what anti-statism is and what the content of a revolutionary struggle for it would be; it lines up alongside the statist anarcho-reformism of anarcho-Corbynism, Rojava PKK cheerleaders, anarcho-Chavez/Maduroism etc. As I said earlier; the CNT statements are “Implying that national independence can be compatible with, continuous with and a positive stage progressing towards working class/syndicalist goals.”

The CNT see an opportunity to recruit & gain influence by riding the tail of a nationalist movement and trying to gloss over the difference between statist & anti-statist concepts of terms like “self-determination”, “independence” etc. You can try to gloss over it all you like and tell me I don’t understand and that the CNT is solidly “anti-nationalist” – despite the CNT statements repeatedly talking approvingly of ‘the Catalan population’s aspiration’ for a new state. Here’s a pro-independence article published in CNT paper Solidaridad Obrera a few months ago;

What is being called the “Catalan Republic” is within our reach. ...
... the approval of independence that is showing itself to be the lever that permits us to open the cracks in the Regime of 78. A mythico-politico potential of the masses that the red-black internationalism does not now have. ...
... The opportunity is also in the self organizing capacity that is coming out in all parts, of agreement with the transformational fraction of the independence organizations, ...
... What do we want? We want to change everything with independence. We want a broad and true participation in all the things that directly affect us. We want to be able to live well. ...
... We want, with independence, to change everything from the root. ...
... What should become clear in the process of creating the “Catalan Republic” is that this is not going to happen without a permanent movement or without the Defense Committees ...
https://comradekitten.blogspot.co.uk/2017/10/lets-change-everything-from-roots.html