CNT proposes reorganization of IWA

781 posts / 0 new
Last post
Juan Conatz's picture
Juan Conatz
Offline
Joined: 29-04-08
Apr 5 2016 14:33
CNT proposes reorganization of IWA

The CNT just put out a statement saying they left the IWA. Most of the issues they say they have probably are familiar to those who have watched threads here, but still caught me off-guard.

http://cnt.es/en/news/cnt-re-foundation-iwa-cnt-es-xi-congress-agreement...

Edited thread title to be more accurate

Jim
Offline
Joined: 30-04-06
Apr 5 2016 15:55

This is a welcome proposal but I don't think it goes far enough in re-imagining how anarcho-syndicalists should organise internationally. The description of the international the CNT would like is no surprise having seen how they have voted in various IWA congresses in the past. The major differences are preventing smaller groups from having a vote and giving sections a number of votes proportional to their membership. Effectively this would increase the influence the CNT has within any international.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Apr 5 2016 16:29

Warning: Be advised that the CNT is effectively split into a number of different parts. With numbers of unions expelled and so forth. It is my undertsanding that the Congress where this statement of view was developed by a "rump" congress not attended by the majority of the organization.

Please be aware of this and folks need to do their homework on the situation. I am sure that those more informed on this matter will probably reply.

no1
Offline
Joined: 3-12-07
Apr 5 2016 16:44

I like how the statement is illustrated with an image that says "En defensa de la AIT", and then there's a guy with a massive hammer smashing everything to bits -

OliverTwister's picture
OliverTwister
Offline
Joined: 10-10-05
Apr 5 2016 17:02
syndicalist wrote:
Warning: Be advised that the CNT is effectively split into a number of different parts. With numbers of unions expelled and so forth. It is my undertsanding that the Congress where this statement of view was developed by a "rump" congress not attended by the majority of the organization.

Please be aware of this and folks need to do their homework on the situation. I am sure that those more informed on this matter will probably reply.

That is a big claim. What is your source?

Mark.
Offline
Joined: 11-02-07
Apr 5 2016 17:37

This is all new to me but looking on alasbarricadas there's a thread about the last congress here. From looking at it very quickly I get the impression there is an effective split but that the congress represented the majority position. I may be wrong about this though and I'd be happy to be corrected. There's also a thread on the split with the IWA but this only has a few posts as yet.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Apr 5 2016 17:56

Its commonly known and discussed in Spain. And threre's been chat amongst english speaking syndicalists about some aspects of the situation. Afterall, the CNT-AIT has its historical place and position within the IWA. So when Spanish comrades sneeze, pretty much everyone knows about this.

On the Congress, aside from what folks have said, anyone knowing the CNT-AIT and taking a look at this photo: http://xicongreso.cnt.es/#/2015/12/08/finaliza-el-xi-congreso-de-cnt/ would have to wonder why the small participation? Candidly, I heard stuff for a long while, but when I saw this photo I started to make some personal and private inquiries.

I guess the problem is that the CNT-AIT is split. It's badly split and it has problems. As someone who is not in the IWA, but who has long relations with the IWA, sections and friends across many borders (and points of view), my major concern is with knowing all the facts, factions and so forth. On one level, I find strange and wierd that "the" CNT-AIT would pull out prior to the december IWA Congress, make the claims (including going to court to gain legal recognition of the IWA/AIT name and initials). It seems liike a factional move and seems to further negate those pro-IWA members still in the CNT-AIT. Anyway, it's factional, the timing is wierd and I will not be shocked or surpirse by other things which may arise in due time.

CNT_Exteriores
Offline
Joined: 4-04-16
Apr 5 2016 18:13

Hi, this is the account of the Foreign Relations group of the CNT. We translated the English statement last night, and I was going to post it today on Libcom, but it looks like you beat me to the punch.

First, one clarification, the position of the CNT is that we have NOT left and are not leaving the IWA. The CNT has found the current state of the IWA to have reached an unworkable position, and we are putting forth this proposal with the hope of re-launching the organization with an updated structure. We invite every current section of the IWA to participate in the conferences and talks we have proposed in good faith and with the intention of creating a more workable organization.

Second, as to the current status of the CNT, I think that it is highly inaccurate to say that there is 'an effective split' within the CNT. A small number of unions have been dis-federated from the CNT over the past few years, largely inactive unions who had gone for years without reaching the minimum membership to form a union (which until the last Congress was 5 members). Another small number of member unions chose not to participate in the last congress. The Congress in December was attended by the vast majority of member unions. Counting the membership of the unions that participated in the Congress, the CNT today is larger and more active than the CNT of 2, 5, or 10 years ago. The accords reached in December represent the clear position of the organization.

-edit- To add, a last word about the Congress, the photo posted above (as noted in the A Las Barricadas thread that it comes from), was from the closing act of the last day of the Congress, a Tuesday morning. A large portion of the delegates had already left the night before when the congress business ended, or early that morning. Overall attendance the congress was fairly similar to past congresses.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Apr 5 2016 18:29

"CNT_Exteriores", thank you for explaining your position. But I find it odd that you just joined Libcom yesterday. And that the above link to the article done today. I apologize for finding it odd and seemingly coordinated, and with a title about CNT leaving IWA to form a new one, maybe that is just my own cynicism when dealiing with this stuff at this point.

Look forward to a robust discussion and presentation by all those "in the know".

Edit: photo appears on CNT website and the only photo with a large crowd was the theater show

doug
Offline
Joined: 10-02-12
Apr 5 2016 18:26

[Edit: Posted before CNT_Exteriores's clarification]

This is really surprising.

What the statement argues for, though, sounds reasonable: a re-emphasis on union work in local contexts, in practical anarcho-syndicalism; an end to the culture of ideological purity, and the exaggerated influence of small inactive groups; and a more open, meaningful internationalism, which in my reading could mean working with SAC, the FAU (I didn't realise it had actually been chucked out), even in less formal ways with the IWW and radical base unions?

Quote:
To bring about concrete solutions to these questions, the CNT proposes to begin a process for the re-founding of an anarcho-syndicalist and revolutionary unionist international. To this end we are preparing a series of conferences and contacts with those sections of the IWA interested in a process of re-founding the International, and with other organizations that, while not currently members of the IWA, are interested in participating in the construction of a model for revolutionary unionism at the global level. These conferences and contacts will have as their aim the organization of a congress to re-found a radical unionist international.

Quote:
anyone knowing the CNT-AIT and taking a look at this photo: http://xicongreso.cnt.es/#/2015/12/08/finaliza-el-xi-congreso-de-cnt/ would have to wonder why the small participation?

I think someone on alasbarricadas commented that this was taken after people had left at the end of the conference.

CNT_Exteriores
Offline
Joined: 4-04-16
Apr 5 2016 18:36

Syndicalist, we created this account because from Foreign Affairs we decided after the Congress to form an English language group to improve international communication, particularly of the accords of the Congress. The resolution on the IWA, being of particular international interest, was our first priority. So no, it isn't a coincidence that this account was formed at the same time we released the statement. The intention is to be able to provide clarifying information, not for obscure or nefarious purposes.

I wasn't sure if this was better posted on the forum or submitted as an article - I sent a message to the Libcom administrators this morning, but in the meantime Juan Conatz started this thread. So the title is not what I would have chosen - as I stated, the CNT is not leaving the IWA, we are trying to begin a process to make the IWA more functional as an anarcho-syndicalist Internationl

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 5 2016 18:54

In short - most of the things that cnt now proclaims that they want to do with their new so called iwa are basically already adopted in the iwa. and in fact ignored (or sabotaged, based on how well you know the internal affairs, or how diplomatic one wants to be:))

It reads really funny because some of the things they propose, even the cnt itself is not able to uphold (we could talk about frauds, centralism, sabotaging own unions, disfederating unions because they spoke up against the power manouvers of the personalities that became power holders in the cnt etc. etc. - compared to no such shaddy politics in the rest of the IWA, well perhaps minus cnt camp:)). the image that the cnt has now started to sell to the world is for people who have no background information or are simply... silly...

I would like to believe that people will see through this.

anyway, prepare for exteriores to speak in a very smooth and nice way, throwing shit on the rest of the IWA (mainly the evil small sections formula:) and acting like the saviors that are just misunderstood by others. and much more, you will surely see it for yourselves soon...

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Apr 5 2016 19:48

Hi people. Before people start making a million speculative statements, one has to understand that this information was only known to a few Sections and people before yesterday and first and foremost it needs to be discussed internally. So it is really quite unfortunately that the CNT has decided to publish what it did, which not only contains major factual errors but puts pressure on us to answer this in forums such as this. ln reality, our comrade was on trial today and we went to the Spanish Embassy to defend our comrade from CNT repressed by the Spanish state, so we are just discussing what response should be from the Secretariat of the lWA (which is held in our organization), as well as from our organization. Not to mention the fact that many points will be on the agenda of the Congress, were we hoped to come to some common positions with other comrades about how to deal with this issue.

But since every minute another comrade is buzzing me about this shit, l will take the liberty to say a few things and make a few corrections.

The first, to Doug - actually, FAU has not been expelled from the lWA. That is an agenda point for the Congress in December. l won't get into the reasons, they are elsewhere here. l think it is really bad for the CNT to publically claim this prior to any decision being made. l certainly cannot predict what the decision would be, but for sure, when the CNT decides to publically call what is essentially a split conference, you know... it is not at all conducive to discussing anything in any productive way.

l would say more, but l will self-censor for the moment.

Personally we would have preferred another development, l mean in our organization. Because we are strictly an anarchosyndicalist one which values action in the working class above all. lt is our reason for being. But we certainly and emphatically will not be joining the CNT split faction and we completely denounce this way of calling for change as inorganic and usurpatory. A large statement on our moral position will be out in about a month. (After our Congress.) We promise that it will be quite to the point.

As a developing union, we have actually been the first one to move into syndicalist activity so quickly in recent years in the lWA. We have said on more than one occasion that we would like to promote this and have made the appropriate motions in the lWA to do so. More to the point, we try to promote syndical education where we can. So, one would wonder if we are opposed to ideas like this, than seem to come from the CNT, and, if so, why.

Of course we are NOT opposed to this. What is problematic however is that, until now, the CNT has not proposed this within the realm of improving the lWA WlTHOUT disenfranchising most of its members. (This disenfranchisement includes us, because although we have enough people to get into the CNT's new federation, we completely disagree with other things, plus the way this is done. Our positions were submitted to every Congress, so our comrades know them and we will probably publish them later, for the sake of debate.) The ZSP has proposed programs of syndical education (and actually makes them) - but this is without the participation of the CNT.

Personally, l am quite angry at this, since my view is that education should come first and there really were a lot of people who wanted it, but the CNT does not participate in the federation. lt prefers to unilaterally put their Secretaries in charge, instead of working together. Which really isn't the best way.

So l am quite sure that there are Sections of the lWA that are damned serious about developing their syndicalist work who just, by virtue of having seen it all, will not be jumping on the bandwagon. Especially since the way of calling for this presumes working outside the organic instances of the lWA.

Had the CNT instead decided to make proposals to improve syndical education and coordination over a period of time - in other words, a productive proposal - things would not have developed this way. lnstead they just come and offer limitations on membership, disenfranchising Section etc.

Yeah, a lot of stuff here that CNT has no business writing about, including false claims. For example, l know that the CNT hasn't paid it dues in a while, but l really wonder about why they are saying that we keep lWA money in personal accounts when they are in organizational accounts. Well, but guess what - l don't think this topic is one for the internet and poses security concerns. The members of CNT will of course get an explanation of this since they don't seem to know and they can expect a nasty comment.

As for Exteriores, etc. l really find what they write to be a lot of BS. l know that they will be pissed off, but frankly speaking, what you've done is so crap, l don't give a fuck what you think.

Oliver, the source of the information is the CNT's own documents which have made quite a big circulation. The 53 unions took part in the Congress, either directly or by indirect delegation. The points passed, were passed by 50% of the CNT (from that participating) - approved by 146 votes, not approved or abstaining by 145 votes. So, 50% was reached BY 1 VOTE.

People can take a minute to think about what that means.

l wonder is Exteriores wants me to print the pie chart? smile

Now l hope that this gives people a little feel for this situation. As we all know, there are plenty who want lWA to split and fail but there is also a lot of good work being done to improve it and build the local organizations. This way the CNT wants to go has already been rejected twice, but not because people are not interested in syndical activity, but there is a basic understanding that in each federative organization, international or local, there are a variety of situations, capabilities and skill sets and development is not equal. The CNT way has been to marginalize their own members, set higher membership requirements, etc. etc. - but none of this really helps out the people in the small towns who are the most largely affected. On a wider level, we see that other international organizations embrace initiatives when they are only a couple of people, let them be members when they are 15 in a country and no harm comes from this. Maybe they develop, maybe not. Well, most of the Sections of the lWA are bigger than this (although we have 2 small sections) ... but instead of embracing people and helping them out, there has been only shit. As a matter of fact, this statement is the first time the lWA has heard that maybe the CNT wants to help people develop - they, as l mentioned, never brought up something like that before and ignore the effects.

Now l also hope that people understand that l cannot sit here endlessly and comment because l have other things to do and also you know, it is a fucking nightmare. CNT has done a really crap thing of publishing this before the Congress in a public way. lt seems like the intention is to increase public interest in a split project as a way to pressure Sections of the lWA to reconsider what they have already rejected.

l am sure there are plenty who would want to make a big deal of this and maybe get off on it, but it is no good for the process.

So to sum up, a warning: this idea is not approved by the lWA, what is being proposed is against the statutes of the lWA and not organic, the CNT has no right to organize any conference in the lWA name, only the sum of the Sections can do it, CNT is using incorrect arguments to make their case and all this hype was in fact passed by just 50% of the CNT. Also l can point out that the CNT is not in good standing and actually, my Section is against the Sections not in good standing having any vote in the lWA process. Most serious organizations we know have rules about it... including the CNT! So it's really hard to know why they think that organizations like ours, who are in good standing and, last time the CNT paid, we actually had almost twice as many paid members - why we even should be listening to their proposals. But we have no problem discussing with them as a courtesy.

Ed's picture
Ed
Offline
Joined: 1-10-03
Apr 5 2016 19:54
syndicalist wrote:
"CNT_Exteriores", thank you for explaining your position. But I find it odd that you just joined Libcom yesterday. And that the above link to the article done today. I apologize for finding it odd and seemingly coordinated, and with a title about CNT leaving IWA to form a new one, maybe that is just my own cynicism when dealiing with this stuff at this point.

Just to confirm, the CNT_Exteriores account is registered with a cnt.es email address so seems official (just to clear up any concerns about online shit-stirrers)..

About the wider issue I think I'll wait a bit to digest the info, see what's being said etc. My main feeling though is that the worst case scenario here is where this split (if it does become a proper split) leads to another faction of syndicalists who won't work with other syndicalists i.e. CNT-faction of IWA won't work with non-CNT faction OR non-IWA syndicalists..

Let's see, I suppose..

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Apr 5 2016 20:18

Just a comment on the graphic, it actually comes from some people in the CNT who actually defended the lWA, and continue to defend it. We all acted in solidarity with each other against repression and this is still the case... at least we know that those who don't agree with this detournment are still reliable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2TFjqrfG2w

l don't think Ed the question should be as you pose it, although shit can happen and unfortunately has tended to.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Apr 5 2016 20:22

Ed. I didn't doubt it came from Spain and is legit in that respect
Strictly the timing of opening the account, the publication here and it just
Feels weirdly coordinated.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Apr 5 2016 20:53

Just to say this seems very unfortunate. I'm not involved in the IWA all CNT, but I would describe myself as a supporter of both, so I do hope people can work out a way through it.

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 5 2016 22:30

Steven., this attitude leads many times only to much worse developments. If people who are affected by such situations just stand by and passively hope for something better while others actively push for moves that in the end show up as quite authoritarian. This is of course not aimed at you, as you are not in the IWA. It is just my observation of events and goes beyond the IWA.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Apr 6 2016 02:14

CNT_Exteriores wrote:

Quote:
First, one clarification, the position of the CNT is that we have NOT left and are not leaving the IWA. The CNT has found the current state of the IWA to have reached an unworkable position, and we are putting forth this proposal with the hope of re-launching the organization with an updated structure. We invite every current section of the IWA to participate in the conferences and talks we have proposed in good faith and with the intention of creating a more workable organization.

This is not the full story. Consequently, CNT_Extiriores is practicing a form of censorship by omission. Let's be clear - what's happening inside the CNT today is the advent of Los Renovados Nuevos.

For some time, these renovados have been conducting secret talks with some in CGT with a view to re-uniting and forming a new international with the SAC.

For some time the renovado faction in the CNT have wanted to dominate the IWA and bend it to their will, treating the IWA just as an international auxilliary of CNT. But they don't want to deal with other sections as equals and have made various attempts to rig the vote at IWA Congresses in their favour. This explains their dubious machinations to change the status of the WSA and the ASF to friends section thus eliminating to votes they couldn't control.

More recently, the renovados have tried to change the qualification for IWA sections on the basis of minimum number of members, first 125 then at the last IWA Congress 100. Both times it was rejected. Not prepared to abide by IWA Congress decisions the renovados are attempting to claim ownership of the IWA by pretending to 're-found' it.

The Renovados currently claiming to be the CNT have refused to pay dues and so have left. Here they practice a double standard because if a CNT affiliate does not pay its dues, they are considered to be no longer affiliated. So this part of the CNT has left the IWA and are now trying to fool everyone they they have a claim to re-found the IWA. The CNT does not own the IWA, it is not the property of CNT.

Re-founding the IWA only makes sense if the IWA no longer existed.

CNT_Exteriores writes:

Quote:
Second, as to the current status of the CNT, I think that it is highly inaccurate to say that there is 'an effective split' within the CNT. A small number of unions have been dis-federated from the CNT over the past few years, largely inactive unions who had gone for years without reaching the minimum membership to form a union (which until the last Congress was 5 members). Another small number of member unions chose not to participate in the last congress. The Congress in December was attended by the vast majority of member unions. Counting the membership of the unions that participated in the Congress, the CNT today is larger and more active than the CNT of 2, 5, or 10 years ago. The accords reached in December represent the clear position of the organization.

A significant number of CNT affiliates did not participate in the XI Congress because they boycotted it. Some affilaites have been expelled for asking questions about corruption and vote-rigging. Apparently, the proposal to make it cheaper to pay IWA dues is meant to facillitate this vote-rigging and it will cost less to claim for members you don't have. This explains why they do not want visits from the IWA Secretariat. It is potentially a great scandal.

This was the purpose of the proposed changes to the admission of new sections. It is an appeal to the bourgeois notion of 'democracy' for the purpose of making it easier for the CNT to control the IWA. It favoured unfairly those sections whose countries have large populations - if the proposal was serious it would have been made on a per capita basis. But it is not about democracy it is about control.

There have been elements in the CNT for at least thirty years who are not interested in growing the IWA beyond how the IWA can be used for their own purposes. They have viewed the recent growth of the IWA (particularly beyond Europe) with alarm as the more sections that are admitted, the harder for the CNT to control. This why the WSA and the ASF was targetted for 'elimination'.

But worst of all, the Renovado CNT elements who have appeared to have captured the CNT bureacracy are intent on professionalising and legalising the CNT and joining with like-minded unions like the SAC and the CGT. That they wish to compromise with the State is their right if that's what they want to do but the CNT does not speak for the IWA. Only an IWA Congress does that.

In my view, the attempt by these Renovados to nobble the IWA must fought at all costs. If they want to pursue reformist unionism dressed up as anarcho-syndicalism they are practising a fraud. The CNT has no legitimate claim to be 're-founding' the IWA.

The IWA will continue without the renovados.

syndicalistcat's picture
syndicalistcat
Offline
Joined: 2-11-06
Apr 6 2016 04:38

Uh. I think you don't understand the situ re WSA at all Lugius. We were actually expelled at the 2004 congress of the IWA. It was those tiny groups new CNT initiative wants to eliminate who backed our expulsion. It was the FAU & USI (groups who present initiative want to retain in IWA) who voted against our expulsion. Recently WSA...entirely on its own intitiative...has made a proposal to be accepted as a Friends group. This is due to relatively small size of WSA at present (less than 30 members), and its history as a dual organizational group (promoting libertarian unionism apart from WSA itself).

I'm still a member of the WSA East Bay group but I'm not much involved in broader WSA affairs these days so I am not in any position to speak for the group. I think some members may read this as a positive development while others are worried about the close division of opinion in the CNT.

altemark's picture
altemark
Offline
Joined: 22-07-07
Apr 6 2016 04:36
Quote:
But worst of all, the Renovado CNT elements who have appeared to have captured the CNT bureacracy are intent on professionalising and legalising the CNT and joining with like-minded unions like the SAC and the CGT.

I'm not very familiar with the current internal situation of the Spanish CNT, split or non-split.

Just wanted to add a note: To my mind SAC could hardly be said to be very 'professionalized', given that for the federations 6 500 members - all too few of these, of course - there are only 5 paid positions. And since early 2016, only 3 of these positions are filled. The appointments of Coordinator of Workplace Organizers (the position that replaced the previous system of having 4-5 regional ombudsmen) and Secretary-general are out on referendum, but there are few, if any candidates thus far it seems ... still, the local unions continue to function as they should, fully reliant on the non-paid work of regular members).

I would add that I have not heard any SAC member express interest in forming a new international, not with the CNT, or any other organization, for many years now. Last I heard of things like this was in the late 90's? Early 00's? when the SAC congress carried a motion to put out feelers to the IWA/AIT to re-affiliate (I don't think it's correspondence was answered though, but someone could correct me on that. That is what I heard at least). Most SAC members are at best interested in supporting concrete projects like vio.me and other initiatives of autogestion, or at offering solidarity in the form of actions or industrial action in order to support syndicalist or anarcho-syndicalist workplace sections in any conflicts abroad. But the knowledge on what is going on internationally is mostly very limited, as is the interest (unfortunately, something that can be seen by the rather weak local participation in the latest international congres in Gävle)

robot's picture
robot
Offline
Joined: 27-09-06
Apr 6 2016 05:11
syndicalist wrote:
"CNT_Exteriores", thank you for explaining your position. But I find it odd that you just joined Libcom yesterday.

Hi syndicalist, without going too much into details: What CNT_Exteriores wrote about the CNT is pretty much correct. The latest congress was attended by the vast majority of syndicates. Some syndicates (mostly the same that dominated CNTs international politics when the WSA was kicked off the IWA with the dirty tricks you will remember) tried to organize a boycot but this attempt completly failed.

As always the CNT congress results had to be ratified by the syndicates. This happened in march, thus the decisions concerning the IWA (as well as the other congress topics) are effective from now and the CNT published them last week.

s.nappalos
Offline
Joined: 29-01-10
Apr 6 2016 05:12

I can't speak to the process or internal debates in the CNT, and have only read the public discussions in Spanish. I will say though that for North Americans 2016 is turning out to be a singular year in terms of possibilities. Young people are pushing to build new anarchosyndicalist unions and projects through WSA's Anarcho-syndicalist Initiative. IWW aligned prisoner unions are organizing strikes, one of which is happening now in Texas. At least parts of the CNT have opened a door for us to think more about where we stand and how we could correct some long standing failures within North America to coordinate internationally on a sustained and strategic basis, to figure out specific concrete things we can do on the most pressing issues connected to our long term objectives, and how we can effectively take advantage of this context that's developed that's more friendly to us than in decades. Internal politics of IWA (whether CNT was right or wrong) aside, the responsibility is all of ours to really take up the challenges that have emerged in recent years and try to push really push forward.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Apr 6 2016 05:26

The simple fact remains: The CNT Renovados can not re-found the IWA when the IWA exists. The CNT Renovados may enter into any other agreement with the SAC or whovever else and found whatever international and call it whatever but the IWA remains.

The IWA now has an opportunity to build a new Spanish section with whatever remains of those who were dis-affiliated for essentially asking questions about vote-rigging and corruption and those affiliates who boycotted the XI Congress.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Apr 6 2016 05:29

robot wrote:

Quote:
Some syndicates (mostly the same that dominated CNTs international politics when the WSA was kicked off the IWA with the dirty tricks you will remember) tried to organize a boycot but this attempt completly failed.

Which syndicates?

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Apr 6 2016 05:32

To be fair, SAC is larger than CNT and has less then half the paid positions.

Also, l would make it clear that l have no desire to bring SAC into this or imply that this is the main motivation of the CNT. l won't comment on any other section of the lWA who may be the one more interested. ln any case, SAC's ideas have sometimes been very foolish, like when they gave a shitload of money to non-existent anarchosyndicalists in Russia which promptly got stolen on them (l was the translator at the inquiry). lt was a pretty crap thing, the type of things that get by the eyes of the SAC rank and file. l only mention this since l hope that they (and others) will avoid further foolish adventures because what CNT is saying actually is breaking our statutes of the lWA and if they try to do as they claim, they are in for lots of problems.

But going back to the main topic, our organization is most interested in concrete work. On the international level though, concrete work starts with being able to work collectively and in solidarity. Because of the unfortunate attitudes of certain folks in the lWA, cooperation with part of the CNT has been blocked. You know, the ones who make disparaging comments all the time and just try to plan our rehabilitation without speaking to us, That's not all the CNT but the ones who speak officially for them. On the other hand, the situation we have as equals with other Sections of the lWA, including ones the CNT want to toss, is very productive and comradely and we actually think that, despite the fact that they are not like mega present all over, they contribute very concretely and valuably. So it should be very clear that we do not intend to support any marginalization of these people in our organization. And, if the CNT wants to continue discussing their plans and publically disparaging our comrades, there is no problem to concretely discuss what kind of proposals such organizations make inside the lWA, which often are just very concrete proposals to improve the functioning. CNT has committed a gross manipulation in its categorization of Sections and has shown grave disrespect. At least we know who in the CNT is behind this and who rejects it. But as l said, since CNT decided this way, it will be only fair to respond.

robot's picture
robot
Offline
Joined: 27-09-06
Apr 6 2016 05:37
Lugius wrote:
They have viewed the recent growth of the IWA (particularly beyond Europe) with alarm as the more sections that are admitted, the harder for the CNT to control. This why the WSA and the ASF was targetted for 'elimination'.

Sorry, but this is nonsense. The WSA was "targetted for 'elimination' with the active participation of the the "lion of the Alhambra", the then IWA secretary general. And the last thing that professor emeritus who headed a workers international was, was a "renovador".

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Apr 6 2016 05:38

From www.cnt.es;

Quote:
Sadly, we have found sections in the current IWA to have very little commitment to union work in their local context. Rather, they exert enormous efforts to monitor the activities of other sections, larger or smaller, that do make this area a priority. Consequently, over the past few years, the IWA has become inoperative as a vehicle to promote anarcho-syndicalism and revolutionary unionism at an international level.

Where is the evidence to support these claims? Not one reference cited or example given.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Apr 6 2016 05:46

From www.cnt.es;

Quote:
We insist, so that it can be clear, that this is not an issue of the size of the sections. All of us are far smaller than we would like to be and than we should be. But there is an enormous difference between the sections that dedicate their efforts to increase their presence or relevance in their regions, experiment with new strategies, initiate and develop labor conflicts, and have an impact, small as it may be, in their immediate context, and those that go for years without union activities yet inquisitorially monitor and criticize the activities of others, lest in their eagerness to build a viable anarcho-syndicalist alternative commit some sin against the purity of the IWA.

Again, who what where and when?

If the size of sections is not an issue then why propose a minimum requirement?

Quote:
inquisitorially monitor

Would asking for proof of membership claimed, the very basis for determining who gets to vote be fairly described as 'Inquisitorially monitoring'?

The CNT Renovados fear scrutiny, the very same scrutiny they to which they subject others. How come?

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Apr 6 2016 05:55

From www.cnt.es;

Quote:
For some time, due to these contradictions, the IWA has experienced a considerable internal crisis that erupted with the expulsion of the German section, the FAU. This decision, made unilaterally by the current general secretary on completely unjustifiable motives, was ratified later in a special Congress in Oporto in 2014. At this congress it became clear that due to the peculiar structure of the decision-making within the IWA, a small group of sections, despite their scant presence in their own territories and total lack of orientation towards union activity, could impose their criteria upon the rest of the international. Since this congress, all attempts to address the situation have failed, due to the unwillingness of the current secretary to engage in dialogue (a basic duty of the office) and the complicity of a number of sections that only exist on the internet.

This is an outright lie. The FAU were rightly suspended (not expelled) for breaching previous agreements. As would be the case in any workers organisation. If the union decides to go on strike and you breach that agreement - what do you think should be done?

Ask;

What 'unjustifiable motives'?

Which 'small group of sections'?

Which sections 'only exist on the internet'?

How credible is it to complain about 'inquisatorial monitoring' and then claim that the current Secretary is unwilling to "engage in dialogue"?

Which is it?

Sharkfinn
Offline
Joined: 7-11-13
Apr 6 2016 06:28

Dude, did you just accuse FAU for being a scab for having international contacts with workers without approval of the regional? I think this is exactly the kind of stuff that made CNT leave