French Syndicalists: CNT-AIT, CNT-Vignoles, CSR

105 posts / 0 new
Last post
booeyschewy
Offline
Joined: 18-10-06
Dec 19 2006 18:12
French Syndicalists: CNT-AIT, CNT-Vignoles, CSR

Can someone give me the low down on these groups. How did the split in the CNT occur, how did the CNT-V and CSR split occur? What are the ideologies of the CSR and CNT-F? What is the political orientation of their memberships?

thanks!

WeTheYouth
Offline
Joined: 16-10-03
Dec 19 2006 18:14

Can of worms...

Bubbles's picture
Bubbles
Offline
Joined: 4-12-06
Dec 19 2006 18:32
WeTheYouth wrote:
Can of worms...

I welcome the worms!

pgh2a
Offline
Joined: 9-12-06
Dec 20 2006 00:02

It's funny you should ask about the CSR, as I was just reading something on them.

I'm not clear that they did split from the CNT-F (or CNT-Vignoles as they are sometimes called). This is different from the CNT-AIT in France. There was a split between those two unions.

My understanding is that the CSR has good relations with the CNT-F, at least amongst their individual members.

booeyschewy
Offline
Joined: 18-10-06
Dec 20 2006 01:03

I could be wrong, but I did think CSR was a split, but this is all second hand and maybe bad translation second hand. I don't mean it to be a can of worms at all, I just kind of want to know the history (without grandstanding if possible).

Specifically I'm interested to the extent that political ideology played. For instance is the membership of all these groups anarchist and the splits along different lines, or were there other groups organized (i.e. a sectarian split), or some third such option.

I'm especially interested in CSR since so little is known about them.

Catch 22
Offline
Joined: 1-04-06
Dec 20 2006 01:08

I thought the CSR combined with Spanish exiles to create the CNT-F? At least that's what wikipedia intimates.

magidd
Offline
Joined: 23-09-06
Dec 20 2006 01:38

5 yers ago leader of French trotskists (LSR) ALen Krivin visited Moskaw. I met him in the sort of left meting and he ask me to help him during the mitings with some russian socialist. I like this guy (personaly like, not politickly) and agree to help him.
So i ask what is political relationshipse with Vignoles? He say: o very good we have alot of friends there.
Than i ask what is CNT-AIT? He say- there are extremly bad relationships...

Battlescarred
Offline
Joined: 27-02-06
Dec 20 2006 09:20

It's Alain Krivine and it's the LCR (Ligue Communiste Revolutionnaire- part of the United Secretariat of the Fourth International).
So you believe everything a Trot tells you????

Battlescarred
Offline
Joined: 27-02-06
Dec 20 2006 09:22

As far as I recall, there was a 3-way split in the CNT-AIT in France aabout 3 years or so ago. I think the CSR was a result of this split. Can't remember what happened to third fragment

Battlescarred
Offline
Joined: 27-02-06
Dec 20 2006 09:46

It should be remembered that there was a split in the French CNT in 1977. A tiny section known as the CNT Tour d'Auvergne )after the name of the street where it had its offices in Paris) had differences over the evolving Spanish situation- death of Franco, transition to bourgeois democracy) These differences were overcome in March this year when Tour d'Auvergne reunited with CNT-AIT

Battlescarred
Offline
Joined: 27-02-06
Dec 20 2006 09:57

Sorry, people seem to be still confusing the Cercle syndicaliste Lutte de classe with the CSR. The former vanished in 1939, the latter is a recent development

the button's picture
the button
Offline
Joined: 7-07-04
Dec 20 2006 09:58

Yeah, I'm always doing that.

wink

Battlescarred
Offline
Joined: 27-02-06
Dec 20 2006 10:23

Sorry, all the twists and turns are confusing, and that includes to me. The CSR is NOT a result of a split in the CNT-AIT. There are about 30 people in the CSR, mostly in the CGT and a few in the CNT Vignoles. They were all originally in the CNT Vignoles and represent a revolutionary syndicalist outlook, rather than an anarcho-syndicalist one. It is claimed by some that they were the real force behind the split in 1992 in an attempt to transform the CNT into a revolutionary syndicalist organisation rather than an anarchosyndicalist one. Blimey, there are as many splits in the French libertarian movement as there are in Trotskyism!!!!

Salvoechea
Offline
Joined: 17-05-04
Dec 20 2006 10:48

CNT split in 1977, was also know as CNT-2UR, it has just merged into CNT-AIT/IWA a couple of months ago.

Battlescarred
Offline
Joined: 27-02-06
Dec 20 2006 12:11

That's what I already said. CNT-2UR was also known as CNT Tour d'Auvergne

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Dec 20 2006 15:02

I can't help feeling this all goes to show the fragility of the whole anarcho-syndicalist project. Organising a union means the inevitability of having to confont compromises.

WeTheYouth
Offline
Joined: 16-10-03
Dec 20 2006 15:06
knightrose wrote:
I can't help feeling this all goes to show the fragility of the whole anarcho-syndicalist project. Organising a union means the inevitability of having to confont compromises.

I dont think its fair to say fragility of our project, its just being able to overcome a multitude of problems we are currently facing and right now there are many ways comrades are trying to overcome these, and this is causing differences in tactics between sections and unions which will be resolved eventually.

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Dec 20 2006 15:10

I'll try and make this short and also try not to get involved in the debate, but this whole discussion (on all the IWA related threads) isn't very comradely and I think it's doing you guys a disservice. If it were me, I'd have let it quietly drop a while back. You'll notice, for example, that although i started the AF/WSM thread, I've kept my trap shut for some time as it's degenerated into a load of total bollocks. You should remmeber that this is a public forum and anything you say makes you a hostage to fortune.

WeTheYouth
Offline
Joined: 16-10-03
Dec 20 2006 15:13
knightrose wrote:
I'll try and make this short and also try not to get involved in the debate, but this whole discussion (on all the IWA related threads) isn't very comradely and I think it's doing you guys a disservice. If it were me, I'd have let it quietly drop a while back. You'll notice, for example, that although i started the AF/WSM thread, I've kept my trap shut for some time as it's degenerated into a load of total bollocks. You should remmeber that this is a public forum and anything you say makes you a hostage to fortune.

I agree somewhat, and i have said before. debate on such issues need to be open and constructive between all sections of our movement.

magidd
Offline
Joined: 23-09-06
Dec 20 2006 15:30
Quote:
Organising a union means the inevitability of having to confont compromises.

I don't understand what do you exactly mean.

WeTheYouth
Offline
Joined: 16-10-03
Dec 20 2006 15:34
magidd wrote:
Quote:
Organising a union means the inevitability of having to confont compromises.

I don't understand what do you exactly mean.

Well we have to reach compromises as that is part of the nature of the class struggle achieving small victories at workplaces and preparing for the social revolution.

Quote:
3. - Revolutionary unionism has a two-fold function: to carry on the day-to-day revolutionary struggle for the economic, social and intellectual advancement of the working class within the limits of present-day society, and to educate the masses so that they will be ready to independently manage the processes of production and distribution when the time comes to take possession of all the elements of social life.

http://www.iwa-ait.org/statutes.html

WeTheYouth
Offline
Joined: 16-10-03
Dec 20 2006 15:34

Sorry double post.

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Dec 20 2006 16:14
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:

Organising a union means the inevitability of having to confont compromises.

I don't understand what do you exactly mean.

I meant that any union inevitably ends up in a position where it has to negotiate with the bosses. Or it ends up where non-revolutionary workers want to join it because it is best at winning gains.

magidd
Offline
Joined: 23-09-06
Dec 20 2006 17:43

It's Alain Krivine and it's the LCR (Ligue Communiste Revolutionnaire- part of the United Secretariat of the Fourth International).
So you believe everything a Trot tells you????

Comment
No. But what was the reason for him to lie to me in this situation? He did not know even i am from AIT. But even if he know what's the problem? I think he said troof.

magidd
Offline
Joined: 23-09-06
Dec 20 2006 17:57
Quote:
I meant that any union inevitably ends up in a position where it has to negotiate with the bosses.

Comment
No!
1) We don't want negotiate with boss. We are working at the factory in undegraund. We make pamphlet (and spreade that among workers) named "Partisan's Class Resistense". We thing active resistens must be undegraund and somtimes (not nessesary) violent.
2) Workers assembles can met with boss. But only for declaration of what people want. If he disagree workers go to strike. Untill boss do what they want they don't go back to work. Mat be you'll be suprised but it was the politics of CNT strikes in the begining of 30s. They did not negotiate with boss.
3) Assemblea can make compromise if it wants but we against compromises in generaly.

Quote:
Or it ends up where non-revolutionary workers want to join it because it is best at winning gains.

Comment
They can't becouse we will not admit to them. And this is the main point of IWA-AIT. It is written in statuts that IWA-AIT is strugling for libertarian communism and revolution. No one section todey has right to accept for not revolutionary not libertarian-communist worker.

magidd
Offline
Joined: 23-09-06
Dec 20 2006 18:09

Well we have to reach compromises as that is part of the nature of the class struggle achieving small victories at workplaces and preparing for the social revolution.

Quote:
3. - Revolutionary unionism has a two-fold function: to carry on the day-to-day revolutionary struggle for the economic, social and intellectual advancement of the working class within the limits of present-day society, and to educate the masses so that they will be ready to independently manage the processes of production and distribution when the time comes to take possession of all the elements of social life.
http://www.iwa-ait.org/statutes.html

Comment
So where is written that we have to make compromises with boss?

Quote:
Well we have to reach compromises as that is part of the nature of the class struggle achieving small victories at workplaces and preparing for the social revolution.

Comment
Where is written we have to compromise with boss about sallary or anything?!
Yes we strugling for sallery. This is compromise with reality if you want. Becouse untill we live in capitalist world there is no over points for many of workers (and for us) to get real expiriense of self-organisation and life withaut loo as to be involved into strugle for better conditions of life. But we need that only becouse we have to withdroo from capitalism. So this strugle must be straight-out. Only straight-out class strugle can give us expiriense wich is importent for preparation of revolution and libertarian-communist life.

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Dec 20 2006 18:28

magidd - the constitution of a number of UK unions contain clauses about abolishing capitalism.

What you are describing is very similar to our (AF) idea of workplace resistance groups.

booeyschewy
Offline
Joined: 18-10-06
Dec 20 2006 18:56

So I gather from people's responses that CNT-Vignoles is an anarchosyndicalist union, whereas CSR isn't. What about the ideologies of its membership, is CNT-F also anarchist heavy, are there organized communist and socialist elements within? What about CSR? I know that unions in Europe are different than in the US in that they often split along political party lines and have a much more organized left presence within. I'm trying to figure out if these sorts of issues have any presence within the CNT splits of France.

ps CSR is the Revolutionary Syndicalist Current

magidd
Offline
Joined: 23-09-06
Dec 20 2006 19:35
Quote:
magidd - the constitution of a number of UK unions contain clauses about abolishing capitalism.

Comment
Fuck trade-unions. We made intresting resech about unions and about 3 STAGES OF THE PROLETARIAN STRUGGLE.
The smal vertion of this text exists in English. Trade-unions are resalt of dergadation of workers movement. First wave of proletarian strugle in your country was revolutionary insurrectionists- like luddits and some over radical groopes. First groopes of proletarian resistens in Russia were the same. That's becouse capitalism to us much later then to British impaier.
Modern trade-unions are not workers organisation at all. They are capitalist corporations who sell labor power to bosses. They olso have bosses who control profits, collective money and ifrastructure, and give oders to workers.
Plese read this
http://libcom.org/forums/thought/3-stages-of-the-proletarian-struggle

Quote:
What you are describing is very similar to our (AF) idea of workplace resistance groups.

Comment
Grate! What is your mail? We wood like to ask you some qewstions we are intresting in AF taktik and ideas.
And have you read this?
http://libcom.org/forums/thought/russia-ifa-section-discussion

Felix Frost's picture
Felix Frost
Offline
Joined: 30-12-05
Dec 20 2006 21:20
booeyschewy wrote:
So I gather from people's responses that CNT-Vignoles is an anarchosyndicalist union, whereas CSR isn't. What about the ideologies of its membership, is CNT-F also anarchist heavy, are there organized communist and socialist elements within? What about CSR?

CNT-Vignolles is officially "revolutionary syndicalist" and not "anarcho-syndicalist" although I don't know if this makes much of a practical difference. There is an article about them here.

I think CSR are mostly Marxists, but I don't know too much about them. CNT-AIT does call itself anarcho-syndicalist, but they are also influenced by council communism.

Somebody mentioned a recent split in the CNT-AIT. Would this be the GARAS (Groupement d'Actions et de Reflexions Anarcho-Syndicaliste)? Does anyone know more about them, or what the split was about?

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Dec 20 2006 22:16
Quote:
Modern trade-unions are not workers organisation at all. They are capitalist corporations who sell labor power to bosses. They olso have bosses who control profits, collective money and ifrastructure, and give oders to workers.

Agreed.
And yes I have read the thread about ADA. We discussed it at the last CRIFA (the IFA 6 monthly meetings).
My email is manchester[at]af-north.org

But you are wrong about SF. They are revolutionary comrades. In Manchester they are some of the best I know.