CNT proposes reorganization of IWA

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.

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.

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 -

syndicalist

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?

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.

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.

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.

"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

[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?

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.

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.

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

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...

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? :-)

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.

syndicalist

"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..

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.

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.

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.

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.

CNT_Exteriores wrote:

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:

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.

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.

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)

syndicalist

"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.

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.

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.

robot wrote:

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?

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.

Lugius

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".

From www.cnt.es;

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.

From www.cnt.es;

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?

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?

From www.cnt.es;

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?

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

Ok, robot, so why was the ASF targetted?

You're talking about who, not why - so how is it nonsense?

Dude, no. I'm pointing out that agreements made at Congress are binding and if you breach them you can expect consequences. Dude, if you're not prepared to abide by agreements then why have them?

If you're at a site meeting and a member of the union and your union votes to go on strike, should you not go on strike? And if you don't go on strike, what should be done?

The reason why the renovado CNT want to leave is because Congress decisions didn'y go their way.

They want an international that they can control free of any scrutiny ("inquisitorial monitoring").

What gives these renovados the right to 're-found' the IWA? Why is it up to them and them alone, dude?

Scab is an enemy of the working class. What was happening in IWA was a typical secretarian conflict over interpretation of the constitution, that and striking have NOTHING to do with each other.

Its not as simple if the binding agreements stop you from communicating with workers and limit your organising ability to the extend where the official rules become a problem for practical application of syndicalist politics.

Lugius, I don't think that "tagetted for elimination" perspective makes any sense and it just distorts the discussion away from the real problems (and we know how such discussions end up, we already are on page 2).

Sharkfinn - it is said that you continue to repeat the story about how FAU's autonomy was breached by the IWA. If you don't like the rules of the IWA, leave it and find organizations that have no problem with breaching decisions and cooperation with other organizations against the will and local specifics of your comrades. We could go on for ages about this and it was disucssed on libcom already. If you are in the FAU, you have all the internal correspondence regarding this as well. Repeating the mantra of the autonomy is just sad and total misunderstanding of the IWA statutes and basic respect to comrades in the IWA. This nice and smooth theater for people outside who don't know much about the key issues is just silly. The manouvers and antiIWA politics of the FAU are in some ways much harming to the IWA sections than the CNT power manouvers, because it affects anarchosyndicalist development in several countries.

Its not as simple if the binding agreements stop you from communicating with workers and limit your organising ability to the extend where the official rules become a problem for practical application of syndicalist politics.

If 'official rules' become a problem, then delete them - or change them - whatever's required. A well-practiced, time-worn method is available to us. Make a proposal and put it to Congress.

I'm making the point that if an agreement is in place, then abide by it.

This is separate to the reason for the suspension as you seem to have conflated this with what constitutes in your mind an unjustified accusation of scabbery.

I made the point in the post that elicited your comment that it is a matter of record that the FAU was suspended not expelled.

It demonstrates that the article that appears on the CNT website is sloppy with facts. Consequently, the article bears further scrutiny with regard to the veracity of the various assertions.

Hope this is cool with you, dude.

If you don't like the rules of the IWA, leave it

Done

just on the principles: the no contact policy is not in the statutes or in the principles it was a congress decision. I don't know which IWA congress defined 'suspension' of an affiliate as part of powers of the secretariat, I thought this was invented ad hoc just for FAU

Well, lots of things have been said, and I'll try to address a few ones.
I don’t know what Lugius is talking about, with that Renovados thingy s/he’s made up. I’ve been hearing about secret plots to destroy CNT and make it dissolve into CGT since I first joined the union in 1998. Only that those who were accused of being part of this plan (by a “radical” faction that later left and disappeared, after stirring a lot of shit) are now the ones accusing the rest of the union. The ironies of life…. However, if there is indeed such a plan, it must be the most inept plan ever, for in this nearly twenty years now, it hasn’t made any inroads. CNT has consistently renewed, in every Congress, its commitment to libertarian communism as its final aim, consistently rejected taking part in elections, consistently turned down any government subsidies, etc. How often and for how long can someone repeat the secret plan lie before events prove them wrong? Is 20 years enough? I suggest this type of arguments be kept in the future for conspiranoia forums, where nothing can ever be proved wrong, no matter what.
Same with the SAC. It’s OK for Lugius to drop his/her personal bogey man around, but we certainly are not into any dealings with them (secret or not), and as Akai has pointed out, they are not in the least one of our motives to take this drastic step.
As for internal divisions within CNT, there’s always been internal divisions within CNT. When I joined, back in the days, some folks would come to the meetings with metal bars to assert their points and bash the “reformists”. Obviously, the only ones benefitting from this state of endless internal strife were the State and the bosses. But let’s be honest, internal divisions are now at the lowest that they’ve ever been. People can call the December Congress a rump, but the vast majority of unions were present, took part in the months long process of discussing proposals beforehand and reviewing the agreements afterwards, etc. The situation in the Cordoba Congress of 2010 was much more tense and conflictive. Only that some of the branches that tried to disrupt that Congress decided to boycott this one now, because they know all too well, that five years down the line, no branch would join them in this. They’re hope was indeed that the December Congress would be poorly attended or otherwise fail (our website and email servers were attacked, suspiciously, the day before the Congress was due to start, but we’re not making any claims or attributing any responsibility on this), and this they keep repeating now, though it’s obviously not true.
CNT is now more united than ever, and this has come through two main things. One is, as I’ve already mentioned, that there’s only a number of years that you can point your finger and shout “reformist” or “secret plan” without sounding foolish. Especially when your own deeds contradict your claims. Secondly, CNT has been growing a lot, in numbers but also in scope. We’ve been developing strategies to effectively build up an alternative union system to gain victories away from the mainstream unions, and in many cases against them. We’ve fought and won some very hard strikes, we’ve forced companies to reverse the latest legal government reforms against workers’ rights by including provisions in their labour agreements, we’ve stopped mass dismissals, etc. It’s a pity that all we’re discussing about our latest Congress is just the IWA move, because there are lots that I think (I hope) will interest revolutionaries all over the world (stay tuned!). People are not stupid. They see these two developments and make their decisions. This doesn’t mean there are no disagreements, of course. I’d be worried if there weren’t. But when five, ten or twenty years ago there were shouting matches now there are intense discussions on particular strategies, on the best way forward, etc. That’s a huge difference.
Going back to the IWA thing…. I tend to agree with Akai that long posts in forums are not the best way to conduct a discussion. But it’s difficult to do so when the secretariat is talking only to a small part of a national section and conveniently disregarding the vast majority of members who disagree with them (as is CNT’s case, if you doubt), when we get thrown out the IWA email lists right after our December Congress, when FAU asks to have some documents forwarded to the sections (as they can’t do it themselves as they’ve been expelled, sorry, “suspended”) and it has to be other national section that does it, as the secretariat ignores their request, etc. Or when the secretariat does not respect CNT’s own internal decision making process and starts sending their opinions on our agreements to other sections before they’re final and before we have had a chance to announce them officially. As has been the case here… It’s OK for Akai to decry that we’ve made our agreement public in this way, when the IWA secretariat was already sending documents to the sections with their very vocal opinions on our agreement in 2015, a few days after the end of our Congress and three months before it was even final, as there is a period in which branches can challenge the agreements. BTW, in this particular case, the voting results in the international strategy paper are down to other differences and not to the decision of re-founding IWA. This particular move carried a surprisingly high approval rate. And please, do not try to present this as a conflict between CNT and the rest of the IWA. You know there is a massive rift within the international, and this secretariat has done a lot to widen it and make the situation a lot worse than it was, instead of trying to resolve it, therefore failing the most basic duties of the role.

In the following weeks CNT will also be releasing the rest of its Congress agreements regarding union strategy, territorial organisation, unemployment, gender, self-management of the economy, libertarian communism, etc. I hope they will be an occasion for more entertaining and inspiring forums.

translated to the simple words for other folks - this is the smooth and nice narrative. be prepared for a lot of such shit in the comming days. all this has been discussed within IWA already, it is documented and the nonsense that CNT repeats now on the international level and externally, is just a theater to be seen in a good light. take for example the nonsense with the congress decision and finalization of the approval process in March. first CNT publishes few days after their congress that they intend to reinvent the IWA and when this is communicated back to them, they go like "oh, what the hell, why do you speak about it, it is not yet ratified". some things will be hard for people to believe, but that's how the power holders in the CNT operate now. the smooth and nice narrative for people who don't know the facts or can't check them...

Guys from the IWA, the reason that the CNT executives did this gross thing of printing their agreements is actually they are hoping to promote stereotypes and manipulate with disinformation. So just coming here and being angry and provoked and going off into many directions is playing into the trap. The people who use lists of nasty words don't know half the facts. In the end they turn out sounding like the platformists with Schmidt, which is a good comparison since we boycott cooperation with anybody chumming up with nazis, Bolsheviks and political parties, which is one of the main threads of the FAU so-called autonomy question.

That aside, for clarity, the XI congress had almost half the participation of the last one, but maybe a quarter of these unions were disenfranchised between the congresses. This means the boycott was from a portion of those left and only amounted to about one third of the unions. So yes two thirds took part and as I said, passed thus proposal at 50 percent.

Although it is off topic the ASF scandal was the systematic failure of the whole IWA, BTW no lion if anyplace was involved on the current boycott. Its like apples and oranges.

So in the past the regulations were poor. Expulsions sometimes happened in irregular and even disgraceful ways. The last attempt at this was in 2011 in Warsaw with the FAU delegate just getting up and insisting that x section wasn't a member because it didn't pay dues.

Well we regulated all this and we have a clear system and stuff like thus shouldn't happen. We are not in favor of non-dues payers playing any role but I guess we will see how consequent people are about it when it turns out that cheating has been going on.

Of course it is all very convenient to leave out thus part, or the part about a certain champion of autonomy embezzling tens of thousands of euros, cause that doesn't fit so neatly into the "good guys in the cnt have won" fantasy that the FAU rearguard entertain themselves with.

O damn, have been provoked again.:) o hell.

CNT_exteriores I don't live in Spain but it's the source of information. Comrades who have family there visit regularly. I'm told that individuals in the CNT and individuals in the CGT with the aim of 're-unification'. Among other things. Is it true that the CNT has copyrighted IWA as a trademark?

And please, do not try to present this as a conflict between CNT and the rest of the IWA

But I am not. I'm questioning the authority of the CNT to decide that the IWA be 're-founded' when it already exists. This is the CNT treating the every section of the IWA with contempt. Looking at the record of Congress the CNT has made proposals not to dissimilar to this:

Dues

Dues paid by member of Chapters of the IWA will be an amount no greater than 0.10 Euros per member per month.

Voting System

Votes weighted according to membership.

100 to 500 1 vote

From 501-1000 2 votes

From 1001-5000 3 votes

From 5001-10000 4 votes

Above 10,000 5 votes

Legalization

Legalization of the International is necessary to defend against wrongful use of the acronym by non-member unions attempting to benefit from the historic name of the IWA without practicing anarcho-syndicalism or revolutionary unionism. The financial accounts of the organization should no longer in the name of individuals and should be in the name of the IWA itself, avoiding the need to rely blindly on the moral integrity of each secretary that manages these funds.

The proposal put by CNT to limit sections to only those who have a hundred members failed twice.

It appears to me that the CNT has decided that they will acheive their designs by other means, in this case, the farce of re-founding the IWA as if it no longer existed. The CNT has decided how the IWA should be. By what mandate beyond the CNT Congress?

For that system of proportional voting to work (as outlined above) each section would have to be sure that each other section actually has the members they claim they have without some mechanism of accountability, or as it has been put in the CNT article, inquisitorial monitoring.

It is easy for an interested individual to pay the membership fees of xo amount of members particularly if there is a lack of inquistorial monitoring going on. Now even easier at the discount rate of EUR0.10

The point of the anarcho-syndicalist method of decision-making is not some bourgeois notion of democracy where the right of individuals is sacrosanct but the aim of dissipating power where all unions have equal rights and responsibilities.

This why the IWA is one section, one vote. It also has the added benefit as acting as a restraint on excessive power. Proportional voting only makes sense if the IWA was a general membership organisation. The IWA is a federation and has been for some time so why is it an issue now? Perhaps because the CNT imagines that it knows what's best for the rest.

The proposal to limit membership to section with at least 100 members does not take into account of the population of the countries where these sections are based. How is it fair or 'democratic' for a section of a country of 1 million population compared to a country of 100 million? Wouldn't it be fairer to have a requirement on a per capita basis?

All of the assertions made against the IWA Secretriat are unsubstantiated as far as I can see. All the allegations in the CNT article are very thin on detail and couched in vague general terms. How about produce some evidence. The CNT has already called for the recall of the IWA Secrtetariat and the decision taken by the IWA rejected it. The CNT shows no respect for IWA decisions and consequently no respect for the other IWA sections but you're right about one thing - people aren't stupid.

The CNT has every right to decide for itself to leave the IWA if it is so disatisfied with the IWA and its decisions. But it has no right to decide for the IWA. The CNT has no right to presume alone what is best for the IWA be that to 're-found' it or otherwise. I mean, it can try, but it would have no legitimacy. Even if someone in the CNT has copyrighted IWA as a trademark as that would be merely asserting property rights by investing the power of the State through its judiciary.

Lugius

From www.cnt.es;

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.

I would guess that this is a reference to NSF, Priama Akcia and ZSP and I'd have expected you to have known they're the groups being referred to if you're in an IWA section.

I think the allegation that they have "very little commitment to union work" is unfair to Priama Akcia and ZSP who've both put a lot of time and energy into union organising.

Akai siad:
"O damn, have been provoked again.smile o hell"

And that´s why you are the worst secretary of all times, a thug troublemaker that destroyed IWA.

You are IWA Secretary, you MUST keep your personnal thoughts to yourself, you been using a position of power in your own interest when you should represent EVERYONE.

And this is another example.

CNT has almost double members than the last congress. STOP calling CNT secretariat "executives" they are just following the orders or our local unions, maybe CNT_Exteriores disagrees with what he says, but he is responsible, he is a good comrade and he do what we, CNT militants have orderred him to do. That is the diference between a working class war serious organization and just a group of anarco-puk friends.

This is Class War! we have no time for your shit.

In other words - this is the bad cop version of the nice and smooth. repeating the same line which was addressed inside the IWA several times and refuted by facts but for some reason power holders in the CNT like to repeat the nonsense all the time. sadly, a lot of rank and file in the CNT believe in this crap.

So, now, if anyone wants to say that the current secretary is in fact the best one in years and helped many sections in practical organising and development (and was proactive in communicating the manouvers of folks like CNT power holders), then it will be taken with suspicion. And if you ask for facts, they will take things out of context (which is the key factor in all this and helps to keep the narrative nice and smooth) and just not respond to (counter)arguments. There will be more examples like this in the starting antiIWA campaing waged by the CNT (Oh, no, they are not against the IWA, haven't you read it? They want only the best for the working class of the world, the nice, fresh and crispy new (legalized) IWA).

There is no such thing as power holders in CNT. In CNT we, the members, are the ones who rule. Seceteriats can not take any decision, it is just our decisions that they develop. Using that languaje only shows your lies, or the lies you´ve been told.

Interesting, so you told your power holders to do the fraud with the bank account money? To not send the IWA membership dues to the IWA? To almost physically attack member of the IWA secretariat at the Porto Congress for showing the official IWA documents that the CNT (now I am not sure if to add power holders:D) did not like to see being shown at the meeting? The list goes on and on. Could you please share with us the democratic procedure of such process from the bottom up? Or nevermind, it is just lies... Nice and smooth.

Good for you who keep yourself anonymous to insult people. It's rather dumb to always answer in the same way and calling people groups of punks etc. it shows a lot about uneducated and people are and how this type of person influences the choices.

Actually yep a your group is calling for kicking most sections out of the iwa and organizing an inorganic split conference. It is beyond appalling to demand or suggest I represent you in that. Fuck off.

MT, all decisions in CNT are horizontal from the bottom up, ALL, that includes ALL.
akai, I am not representing anybody here. Should I put a list with your insults? and that is a luxury you cann´t aford because you ´ve lost that right with your position in IWA. In anarcosyndicalist organizations Secretariats should only say and do what they are ordered to say and do. Your personal opinions leave them for your local group.
You used your position as any capitalists or soviet politician.

Yes, my union, we as horizontal organizacion want to have an international without that 2% of members in small groups that control the IWA over the other 98%.

Call me what ever you want.... but 5 groups of 20 members can not control an international of thounsands.

Actually yep a your group is calling for kicking most sections out of the iwa and organizing an inorganic split conference. It is beyond appalling to demand or suggest I represent you in that. Fuck off.

CNT is not kicking out anyone. They are leaving. If other organisations decide to follow them, that's their decision.

It's fairly clear from the way various posters are talking to each other on this thread that the IWA in its current form is finished. It's a shame to see an organisation which once had hundreds of thousands of workers involved tearing itself apart but I guess the IWA has had much worse thrown at in the past.

Looking at the list of IWA sections, am I right in thinking only four have more than 100 members or have things changed a lot recently? Those being the CNT, FAU, USI and SF.

If the CNT's proposal was implemented in the existing IWA wouldn't it mean AIT-SP, ASI, ASF, CNTF, COB, FORA, KRAS, NSF, Priama Akcia and ZSP were all denied votes?

akai

Actually yep a your group is calling for kicking most sections out of the iwa and organizing an inorganic split conference. It is beyond appalling to demand or suggest I represent you in that. Fuck off.

Maybe they wouldn't have done that if you hadn't tried to kick a section out?

Jim

akai

Actually yep a your group is calling for kicking most sections out of the iwa and organizing an inorganic split conference. It is beyond appalling to demand or suggest I represent you in that. Fuck off.

Maybe they wouldn't have done that if you hadn't tried to kick a section out?

Jim, what do you mean?

With this proposal of the CNT, it is clear that 90% of the affiliation of the AIT will be a renewal of the international.

And this resolution is thanks to the great work of the Secretariat of the IWA that has worked well to disperse the CNT from France, to expel the FAU, to interfere in the Organization and decisions of sections such as the USI and the CNT in Spain.

Akai should get better informants of what happened at the Congress of the CNT in December, as this part of the proposal on internationalism was backed up on the table which worked it in Congress by 80% of the votes of the local unions. What vote to finish in the 50% vs 49% was the choice of whether to start after the Congressional process or wait for the Congress of the IWA in Varsovia. As you can see it was not going to change anything in terms of international commitment acquired by the CNT.

Jim

It's fairly clear from the way various posters are talking to each other on this thread that the IWA in its current form is finished. It's a shame to see an organisation which once had hundreds of thousands of workers involved tearing itself apart but I guess the IWA has had much worse thrown at in the past.

I never understood this point of view - the big, the glorious... Shouldn't we think about content not the form in the first place?

Ragnar

And this resolution is thanks to the great work of the Secretariat of the IWA that has worked well to disperse the CNT from France, to expel the FAU, to interfere in the Organization and decisions of sections such as the USI and the CNT in Spain.

As I said, such nonsense will be heard and repeated in the comming days/weeks/months/years/decades/centuries:) France - CNT asked the IWA to decide on the issue. FAU - FAU have been breaking IWA decisions for years. USI and CNTE - let's see which of the several absurdities the new and shiny working class heroes will choose to address.

In the following weeks CNT will also be releasing the rest of its Congress agreements regarding union strategy, territorial organisation, unemployment, gender, self-management of the economy, libertarian communism, etc. I hope they will be an occasion for more entertaining and inspiring forums.

I hope there is a plan to publish these in English.

It is like MT, with or without Warsaw Congress, unions that make up 90% of the AIT with its members and who financed it are going to change things and there is no way to prevent it. Is with the name of the AIT or other.

Do you know with how much money funded CNT to the AIT? It has four zeros for year... already it is well open bar...

Ragnar

It is like MT, with or without Warsaw Congress, unions that make up 90% of the AIT with its members and who financed it are going to change things and there is no way to prevent it. Is with the name of the AIT or other.

And the anarchopunks bought villas for that money

that what you said your. Do they do it?

Akai will pass in to history as the person who took a growing IWA of thounsands of members and leave it with a handfull of them... but hei! nothing is wrong with her! she does everything right.

MT

Jim

Maybe they wouldn't have done that if you hadn't tried to kick a section out?

Jim, what do you mean?

I think akai needs to accept some responsibility for this situation. While the tensions between the "unions" and the "initiatives" have existed for some time (as Congress minutes show), the breaking point which has created the current situation was the suspension of the FAU. Had that not happened I do not think the CNT would be calling for the IWA to be re-founded.

MT

Jim

It's fairly clear from the way various posters are talking to each other on this thread that the IWA in its current form is finished. It's a shame to see an organisation which once had hundreds of thousands of workers involved tearing itself apart but I guess the IWA has had much worse thrown at in the past.

I never understood this point of view - the big, the glorious... Shouldn't we think about content not the form in the first place?

Well yes, but if we're thinking about content and not form, IWA sections used to organise insurrections, participate in revolutions, were regularly organising strikes and resistance to capital and the state, they were major parts of their respective countries workers movements. Not a lot of that content about these days. Revolutionary unionism is an ever dwindling current in the global workers movement and this needs to be addressed.

[youtube]a5xTAZhNKqc[/youtube]

FAU should have been suspended long time ago and that's a fact. So I do not see much sense in your logic. Should they just do whatever they wanted?
Anyway, if you suggest that the CNT just stood up in solidarity with FAU because the secretariat did something wrong and now we are here, then I have hard time to even believing you really mean it. There were very bad developments in the CNT and FAU for a long time. With the FAU, the process was approved by the sections.

Jim

MT

Jim

It's fairly clear from the way various posters are talking to each other on this thread that the IWA in its current form is finished. It's a shame to see an organisation which once had hundreds of thousands of workers involved tearing itself apart but I guess the IWA has had much worse thrown at in the past.

I never understood this point of view - the big, the glorious... Shouldn't we think about content not the form in the first place?

Well yes, but if we're thinking about content and not form, IWA sections used to organise insurrections, participate in revolutions, were regularly organising strikes and resistance to capital and the state, they were major parts of their respective countries workers movements. Not a lot of that content about these days. Revolutionary unionism is an ever dwindling current in the global workers movement and this needs to be addressed.

Again, I don't understand. The whole working class movement is in bad shape. Why are we talking about insurrections and regular strikes (when was that that the IWA organised them, btw)? Sounds extremely idealistic to me. So, why SF is not organising regular strikes and insurrections? Because of the evil IWA? You know what I mean?

I don't know the full story but was under the impression all the FAU had done wrong was maintain relations with the SAC and Workers Initiative in Poland. I don't think either of these things are sufficient grounds for a section to be expelled from an international.

I'm not suggesting the CNT is acting solely in solidarity with the FAU, but I think it's clear from the statement they've released that they'd rather be in an international with them than most of the eastern European sections of the IWA.

What are the bad developments in the CNT and FAU?

Jim

MT

Jim

Maybe they wouldn't have done that if you hadn't tried to kick a section out?

Jim, what do you mean?

I think akai needs to accept some responsibility for this situation. While the tensions between the "unions" and the "initiatives" have existed for some time (as Congress minutes show), the breaking point which has created the current situation was the suspension of the FAU. Had that not happened I do not think the CNT would be calling for the IWA to be re-founded.

This is a very misleading characterisation of what happened. One IWA section had been systematically ignoring IWA decisions, the IWA then decided this would no longer be tolerated, though the siutation was then left to fester for a few more years. While I have some criticisms of how this was done, the current secretariat was just carrying out a decision of the IWA.

I mean seriously, if a federation falls apart when a mandated officer carries out a decision of that organistaion, then the organisation has failed not the mandated officer.

I hope that once the various hotheads have aired their recriminations on here, that this thread will be used for an honest analysis of what went wrong and how the IWA could function better.

Lets give some information that is important to know.

In the IWA Congress of Porto appear a group that was expelled from CNT because they made accusations with out proves. This group posted a photos in FB:

https://www.facebook.com/cnt.cadiz/photos/a.461930867279486.1073741825.461930827279490/477842055688367/?type=3&theater

Akai knew perfectly this situation and didn't do any thing. Knew it because has inorganic contact with groups in Spain. Is not the only one but is the most public "mistake" of the IWA secretariat. She got very mad when in the congress of Valencia some one ask her to identify her self to be able to go in the building, now we know why.

Is not the only thing of the secretariat, there are lot of more things, like be asked to provide info and contacts in other countries and never give them (when from CNT gave a lot of information and communications of meetings and contacts), and keep secretly the contact that they have.

akai sed: "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"

Ones again Akai doesn't understand what is CNT, doesn't understand that the decisions of CNT in congress are public, Always were and is mandatory for the CNT secretariat to make the public as is doing.

"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"

Didn't happen any thing yet and for you is already inorganic and usurpatory, again the same mistake, and then you are surprised why people say that you are the worst secretariat of IWA ever.

" 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."

Before happens your congress you already know the result, hahahaha.

"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?"

Why do you lie? do you need to lie to defend your positions? how ever, continue with your line, son or late you will have what you wander some years a go and you posted in this forum, CNT USI and FAU out of IWA. good work.

what i do not understand is why she doesn't use the same arguments in the votes of IWA. Maybe because her own interest.

"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. "

Why you lie? why you lie ones again? my town 30.000 people, in 4 years more than 30 members starting from 0. we didn't take the decision to became union, we work being part of a bigger union that let as spend our energy in syndicalist action and formation. in the first months we we had the minimum of 5 people to be union but we didn't want, in the first year we had the number of members to be union with the minimum approved in the last congress, but we prefer to continue being part of the nearest union. So what you say is an other lie about the CNT reality and develop. Ones again you don't understand CNT and continue throwing your rubbish.

yes in a town of 30.000 people in 4 years we build a bigger organization than some sections that call as reformist and give as lessons of democratic organization and develop. And this town doesn't have anarchosindicalis tradition, there was only ones a union for a sort time in 1919 that´s all.

no1

This is a very misleading characterisation of what happened. One IWA section had been systematically ignoring IWA decisions, the IWA then decided this would no longer be tolerated, though the siutation was then left to fester for a few more years. While I have some criticisms of how this was done, the current secretariat was just carrying out a decision of the IWA.

Well as you know I've not been in SF for a couple of years so I'm not entirely up to speed with the developments within the IWA since I left.

I was under the impression there was a fair amount of discussion about a) whether or not IWA decisions were actually being ignored and b) whether or not the mandated officer in question had a mandate to suspend a section. I don't know how the CNT voted on either of these questions but I can guess and I think it's clear what happened with the FAU and within the IWA subsequently was the catalyst for the current situation.

no1

I hope that once the various hotheads have aired their recriminations on here, that this thread will be used for an honest analysis of what went wrong and how the IWA could function better.

Agreed, but it looks like the IWA is splitting?

Another example, from another village by the Pyrenees, of about 33,000 people where the CNT around 100 affiliates that has grown in about 5 years. That the peoples it cannot grow is the mantra they say to those who do not want a great union of workers

Jim

no1

I hope that once the various hotheads have aired their recriminations on here, that this thread will be used for an honest analysis of what went wrong and how the IWA could function better.

Agreed, but it looks like the IWA is splitting?

I can't see very well how this is going to work itself out. I think this conflict is unnecessary and the way it has been presented on here so far isn't going to solve any problems. But the IWA is simply a number of anarcho-syndicalist unions who have decided to work together, and whatever the outcome of the current falling out, those unions will remain as will the aim to work together on an international level.

no1

I can't see very well how this is going to work itself out. I think this conflict is unnecessary and the way it has been presented on here so far isn't going to solve any problems. But the IWA is simply a number of anarcho-syndicalist unions who have decided to work together, and whatever the outcome of the current falling out, those unions will remain as will the aim to work together on an international level.

Well from what the Spanish comrades have said above it looks like CNT, USI and FAU are going to launch a parallel IWA. They will presumably take some of the other IWA sections with them but any other sections which go with them would have to accept not having a vote until they've grown past 100 members. This means there will then be an IWA of "unions" and an IWA of "initiatives" which is based around the IWA's existing eastern European sections.

I can work out where the groups most involved in this dispute are going, but I don't know what SF is going to do and I've got not idea which IWA groups like the FORA, COB, AIT-SP etc. will go with. I imagine a load of groups will end up staying in the existing IWA but I can see the engagement with it deteriorating even further as a result of all this discord. I wouldn't be surprised if sections which participate in the CNT's conference end up being expelled from the existing IWA. That'll definitely happen if they launch a parallel international.

We would like to remind users to follow the forum posting guidlines.

Future posts breaking these guidelines will be unpublished.

Well from what the Spanish comrades have said above it looks like CNT, USI and FAU are going to launch a parallel IWA. They will presumably take some of the other IWA sections with them but any other sections which go with them would have to accept not having a vote until they've grown past 100 members. This means there will then be an IWA of "unions" and an IWA of "initiatives" which is based around the IWA's existing eastern European sections.

I can work out where the groups most involved in this dispute are going, but I don't know what SF is going to do and I've got not idea which IWA groups like the FORA, COB, AIT-SP etc. will go with. I imagine a load of groups will end up staying in the existing IWA but I can see the engagement with it deteriorating even further as a result of all this discord. I wouldn't be surprised if sections which participate in the CNT's conference end up being expelled from the existing IWA. That'll definitely happen if they launch a parallel international.

Is not like you say, this is what CNT approved in the congress, doesn't have to be like this at all. These are only CNT proposals approved in CNT congress, thats all.

Where's that Michael Jackson popcorn eating gif?

melenas

Is not like you say, this is what CNT approved in the congress, doesn't have to be like this at all. These are only CNT proposals approved in CNT congress, thats all.

So what happens depends on the conference for re-founding the IWA which the CNT is organising? I guess there is a chance it won't decide to launch a parallel IWA, but given some of the posts on here already I'll be surprised if that doesn't happen.

Jim

melenas

Is not like you say, this is what CNT approved in the congress, doesn't have to be like this at all. These are only CNT proposals approved in CNT congress, thats all.

So what happens depends on the conference for re-founding the IWA which the CNT is organising?

Obviously, what ever happens mast be decided buy the ones that take part. Time will show as what will happen.

The text say it clear: "As a first step for these conferences, the CNT makes the following proposals as an organizational basis for the new IWA:"

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

Akai and her lies. please Akai tell as where in the CNT statutes says that CNT has paid positions. Is going to be difficult for you because doesn't appear any where. the fact that CNT contract services for example lawyers doesn't mean that has paid positions. Maybe she wants to forget that the statutes of CNT says exactly the opposite.

Did any body saw ever a IWA secretary laying in public about one of the sections of IWA? the worst is that is not the first time.

For example IWA contract internet services to a company, the sections pay lawyers, pay companies to send letters or packages, but ones again for Akai what ever circumstance is useful to throw rubbish.

OliverTwister

In the following weeks CNT will also be releasing the rest of its Congress agreements regarding union strategy, territorial organisation, unemployment, gender, self-management of the economy, libertarian communism, etc. I hope they will be an occasion for more entertaining and inspiring forums.

I hope there is a plan to publish these in English.

There is, but it will take some time as the documents are translated. Our working group for translating to English is small, and we are all also active in our local unions. (And we also have jobs!)

It was about time! This is a real proposal in order to build a true anarchosyndicalist International

Well, akai shows herself up once more, and is this the IWA Secretary? What a shame! Lies and more lies... I don't have to remind you made up a term called "suspension" in order to expell the FAU, do I? Why don't you tell us how you never sent the IWA documents to the FAU before the Congress that decided to "suspend" it?

Lugius, I recommend you to go to a psychologist, 'cause the "renovados" stuff is just a fantasy in your mind. I think your Spanish comrades must be these wackos who are constantly seeing reformist ghosts everywhere for 30 years now, aren't they? Hmmm, let's say Cadiz... And the motion for a mininum affiliation isn't coming only from CNT. FAU and USI also agreed something similar for years.

The FAU "suspension", i.e. de facto expulsion, is not the only reason for the CNT to publish this statement and proposal of re-founding the IWA. The comrades in Spain have seen for years the IWA Sec. manoeuvres, how the IWA turns more and more into a tiny-propoaganda-sect organization with no real union activity, without union strategies or trained comrades capable to set union and struggle methodologies. For example, during the IWA Congress in Valencia, comrades had to witness absurd discussions on how "reformist" is that an organization tries to contact other non-IWA organization like IWW, but at the same time there was an IWA sect asking the IWA to call for a global general strike because it was the Bakunin's anniversary (???). There were no voices for a "suspension" to ASI, since the IWA Sec. then wasn't able to explain the accounts and why there were 10 thousand Euros missing. I never saw akai so determined to expell, i mean, "suspend" ASI and the rat/rats who stole that money...

Today the IWA is just a cadaveric structure that isn't able to do more than solidarity actions with flyers and flags. So let's change this situation or we'll still be nobody or insignificant groups with no influence at all. Comments from some people here are evidences that IWA tendency must be changed, or those organizations that want to build a real International together will have to do it on their own way.

The thing is that nobody blocks the activity of the CNT or FAU if in line with the IWA decisions. I doubt we will have an honest answer, but how come that they have not been very active inside the IWA and now they suddenly reinvent the wheel and plan to be active in things of which many have already been agreed in the IWA (but inside the IWA were met with basically no input from the CNT or FAU)? Or the precondition to for example improving international organizing along the sectors is that the section with which you could cooperate has to have at least 100 members? Otherwise you just boycott the decision? Or the precondition is that the IWA has to be a legal body? Or is it too much to ask that you cooperate with a section in a country instead of a group that causes a lod of problems to your section in that country? Again, the list could go on but the answers from for example FAU will be always the same - mostly dishonest and disrespectful. And of course the mantra of the autonomy. Anyway, the FAU issue is resolved - sections made a congress decision and the next congress most probably makes the final decision. We can go on about it forever, but there are congress decisions (which FAU has ignored for years...).

I'm a worker from FAU in Dresden. We have big problems with right-wing movement in our city, as many anarchist workers all over europe. And all over europe the actual crisis goes on and on, the right wing movement gets stronger. For this, we need a strong international of anarchosyndicalist unions NOW. And this international has to be a federation of unions which trust each other, which want to bring our revolution quickly foward. And for me, this also means, we have not to fear to speak with a union which is not so radical as we. We can go to them and say, "hey, whats your tactics in this kind of struggle?" and afterwards we can say "thanks you, by the way, paid people in the union are shit and you have to break with your idea from reformable capitalism, that are our arguments: ..." And sure, there are also unions, were many peoples are assholes, but also that is no reason to speak with the workers on the base and try to show them our ideas.

I know our FAU well, many comrades, from many syndicats. We have the big luck, that we have no big fractions, which hate or tread each other. We discuss in solidarity. And the most of us are sad, to be in a international where we find a secretarian which spy all section out, which want, that anarchosyndicalists speaks with nobody than other anarchosyndicalists, which has forgett that one part of the anarchosyndicalist concept is, that we can make some expierences just if we get bigger. Sorry akai, all the years I watch your steps in the international anarchist movement, I never see a good point in your work. For sure, the FAU is still very weak, but we help hundreds of worker every year, we make a good anarchsyndicalist job in over 30 citys, which includes education in feminst, antiracist and all the other anarchist topics. We grow and we kick the strong reformistic unions in the ass, as we can. We not want to destroy the IWA, because we love our comrades and want to fight for a better life with them. But if we have to kicked out, because there is a decision which not allow it us to get in touch with other unions, there is the question why we should love a federation for which it is more importand if we speak with the bad kids than how we show solidarity to other sections and how our own work looks. May this decision was a little silly? May we had discuss more about that, in a friendly way?

And its also a question, why anyone should stay in a federation, were the experiences and wishes of the most of the members find no ear? Is every little bigger anarchosyndicalist union a reformist-club?

This theater playes far to long. A big "Thank you!" to the whole CNT for this step! Lets bring the things foward!

All this statements are my personal meaning, not of my syndicate, not of the FAU.

because there is a decision which not allow it us to get in touch with other unions,

it is interesting how things can be worded. but let's think about it - you don't like the decisions of the IWA but still are members. so, why don't you leave such a bad relationship? i mean, seriously, can you explain this in a plain and simple way? but let's go deeper - what decision are you having in mind? why the general talk? be honest and open about it and why shuch a decision was made in the first place, so that people know things and not just nice and smooth "hey, we are so badly treated, why you evil people do this to us?"
And as for attacks on akai - if you seriously don't see any good work of the Secretariat in the recent years, I doubt you really follow what is going on in the IWA...

And as for attacks on akai - if you seriously don't see any good work of the Secretariat in the recent years, I doubt you really follow what is going on in the IWA...

By the internal channels, the CNT and the USI, active and passive is has been telling him that so not things are done to the IWA secretariat. So what MT surprise you then CNT proposal?

And as for attacks on akai - if you seriously don't see any good work of the Secretariat in the recent years, I doubt you really follow what is going on in the IWA...

Oh really? Please tell us more about the great work she is bringing about. Show us how the workers are massively organizing themselves in big anarchosyndicalist unions around the world. Please, mention just one conflict in which a nonexistent union methodology of IWA Secretariat really worked, far beyond solidarity flyers and flags in front of an embassy or company.

There are no strategies or guidelines or whatever one considers a "road map" to go forward and achieve anything. Nothing about how to grow and work in different countries with different labour/union realities in order to become mass organizations.

During many years, I've just seen in the IWA crazy people crying about "reformism" or CGT-ghosts invented by the "Lion of the Alhambra" and his brown-nose unions. Fortunately this people in the CNT are insignificant or were thrown out as they deserved, and the CNT is gonna be stronger than ever.

Oh really? Please tell us more about the great work she is bringing about. Show us how the workers are massively organizing themselves in big anarchosyndicalist unions around the world. Please, mention just one conflict in which a nonexistent union methodology of IWA Secretariat really worked, far beyond solidarity flyers and flags in front of an embassy or company.

No need to really comment on this logic...

Just to say, can people not use users real names on these threads. Have edited a few posts above accordingly. Thanks.

l have a lot to say of course, but since l just read to the end, l will just address something to the bar worker. Hi, a few times a week l spend my very little free time with tenants and workers. This is my work in anarchosyndicalism which the people directly involved with can assess. Maybe from your bar you see none of this, so you can read our web page. l am active in most work of my union. Several hundred people participate in our union and our tenants organization and most people from our union did not come from anarchism. They came from this concrete work. Maybe you don't want to see it, so that's OK. Each one is in his own milieu. This is mine and it is what l care about.

About not fearing to speak to unions that are not anarchist, we have no disagreement. lf you would care to do just a little bit of research, you can find a number of our actions supporting such unions (independent ones). You can find out that such unions gave extreme thanks to the ZSP and to me personally for our strong support of their work struggles or for successful cooperation in some concrete struggles. We do this when we have a concrete interest and agreement and work together but with mainstream unions it is sometimes tough. That is like now where we are calling for a strike and Solidarity is denouncing us even better than you are.

l live in Poland and we have an even bigger right-wing problem than you do. Our right-wing problem extends into the anarchist movement. ln any case, the fascist ideology is gaining and, since we are not isolated in any anarchist ghetto, but are deeply involved in a working class movement, we have been fighting off the encroachment on the working class. lt's really funny, you act like you are following things but you don't know about this? Our work is well-known in this country but of course maybe you missed it all. ln any case, on a regular basis, we fight against racism and anti-semitism. Actually anti-semitism is more common. We do this through our regular work in the community.

By contrast, politcal parties and opportunists of different categories seek to use social movements for their interests. This is always an issue, as they graze for people, especially at our events. Now to the facts: there is a lot of problems with both party members and strange opportunists in this city and others and some of them go into the organization lP, and even were the most influential people. Of course you know about this as the info was in FAU. To be concrete: those people work in another tenants organization, which is different of course. We worked together many times, as anybody can tell you, because if we have a common goal or action, we should, despite any differences. During the last years, they decided that their strategy should be to get into government and they started calling people to go into this project. To explain more - part of the people they contacted were of course people they met at our demos and since they know we tell people that politics like this is not the answer, they started with a lot of crap against us. Because, you know, having a common action is one thing, but if you need to use the more general movement in your quest to get elected, you know that the best way to do it is to make some intrigues. But these intrigues are common life with those people and are not the important thing.

First they went into an organization and started to hold street meetings in different Warsaw neighbourhoods with a fascist organization. l found out about this from anti-fascists - and l supported their criticisms. Furthermore, we were very concerned, since they were coming around to our demos, etc., scouting for suckers, that they would be coming around with their fascists. So, after some noise, the first group of fascists bit the dust, after a long argument and many accusations against us as being "sectarians".

After this, and pretending it was some mistakes, they started to make their electoral lists and put two much worse fascists on it. And they were sending people to actions like anti-eviction blockades we organized to collect signatures from people. And of course, they were doing this in the middle of some police drama and l had to stop and explain to people that, well, actually, yeah, those people have a red and black flag and say they are anarchists, but they are putting fascists as candidates and make some discussions.

Me, l work with all different people in movements like this but sorry - over my dead body l am busting my ass to counter fascism in real life and in my neighbourhood and some pseudo-anarchist jackasses are going to do that. And l mean literally NO PASARAN.

l didn't spend much time discussing it on the internet, rather with people who are around. So that they don't vote for fascists by accident because somebody posing as an anarchist recommends that list. My comrades criticised this. Even the main newspaper did this, social democrats and anti-fascists. lnstead of just chucking the ass out of the union, or issuing a disclaimer, comrades of mine were threatened, the Secretary of that union wanted to put my comrade to a firing squad, and of course they called for a boycott of our organization. After a lot of noise with this stuff, and after dozens of statements that clearly show the opposite, finally an organizational explanation that "people didn't know".

OK, an idiot is clearly born every minute. Said fascists' organization at the same were seen making a racist protest to free Janus Walus, anti-communist and racist killer. They also organized a weekend of neo-nazi music festival. While my comrade was denouncing this, the neo-nazi was taunting people as stupid anti-fas at the FB book of said syndicalist and appearing at different public events.

Well, everybody knows it is stupid, even in that organization. But it is the ideology of being "anti-sectarian" and this ideology is behind every querfront strategy and is common in many countries of E. Europe to justify cooperation with the right.

For this reason, we need to fight against such strategies and we do it.

Enter FAU.

We talk to anarchists too, not only people in the society and we say, we need some working class movements, and we need to keep away from a few things: alliances with the right, political parties.

Enter a few people from FAU, known to us and even known well. They disagree and say AAAAA. ZSP, sectarians. They don't do anything. And do public events, endorse others. At the moment this is going on. And of course we explain, as we always tried to do. But you know... we actually don't take crazy populists, would-be politicians, people cooperating with fascists in our union. Because, guess what................ we need to build a radical workers movement that will firmly reject this shit and be able to do it at times like this.

Of course we would be a few times bigger if we filled up on such people. Yeah, then maybe we could impress you cause l guess the work we do, even winning strikes and forcing major changes in national chains just doesn't cut it for the international revolution.

So Bar man, to put you straight, we think that making such decisions when we have such a situation is really bad stuff. Now, if you believe in a querfront strategy, go do it youself in your country. You can be kept accountable by local activists. But you "autonomy" stops when it negatively impacts our movements. lf you want to be super anti-sectarian, well, that's what you get.

Now of course we have our own attempts to create different dialogues locally and sometimes it goes well and is a step in a positive direction. But your colleague's imput usually just tends to build opposite tendencies.

So ask yourself, Mr. antifa, feminist whatever why you intervene in an antifascist issue on the side of people who cannot take a stand on this issue and sent their activists to my fucking neighbourhood with their fascist shit? lf you are an anti-fascist, you fucking stand beside me. lf you don't care, stand behind the bad ideas of some of your friends. But stop with the pretense because l am out there on the line.

lf your personal autonomy to do stupid things like that is more important than supporting a prinicipled anti-fascist organization (not mixing up anti-fascists, maybe some populists working with fascists and all that stuff), you know, you choices are really illogical. Maybe you are misinformed, but l guess you think you know better than me how we should fight fascism in our neighbourhoods.

All that said, certainly there were plenty of chances to discuss what should be our common strategy, but sadly after many years of more or less co-existing, we only hear cries about your autonomy - and not an ounce of understanding.

At the same time, we know who is doing what and we find that all this nonsense comes exactly after FAU delegates unofficially try to talk to CNT ones about them leaving, such a motion goes into the FAU and even your own members assess that some individuals are pushing to get expelled.

lt's all OK. You can do what you want. But if you want to support people who do stuff like this, it's just not acceptable to us. Sorry, Our big revolution will not be with such people.

Large parts of people in the anarchist movement are in something of an ideological crisis. We saw this with a certain SA guy and the reactions. We all saw lots of people take it seriously, some cautiously and we also saw incredible things, cause people get invested in their buddies and they'll sweep anything away if they think it hurts their mission and, if people are not convinced, they can surely make some conspiracy theory about ulterior motives.

Yeah, so, l guess the conspiracy theories used to explain all these things are the following:

ZSP - doesn't allow people to talk to unions (when ZSP has all sorts of actions with other unions and even has had its cooperations with some of the bad guys... when they are not fucking with fascists or threatening)
ZSP- group of punk friends, doesn't know what a union is (heheheheeh)
ZSP- try to smash international

l mean, there are probably a dozen others and the others related to me personally.

Anyway, for your information, we actually talk even to people in that union which is bad, but mostly workers, who often are just there by accident. We had joint meetings, we have them on our forum... because our ideas and practices are better, even if we have fewer people. So we don't care about that and never did. We care about your organizational plans and quite frankly, there are people in your union who really have bad, bad ideas on strategy and morally support this. For years, as long as these were just a few dumb-asses and not officially approved dumb-assism, we didn't care. Lots of people thought you crossed some line, but nothing. So OK. People have spoken.

The CNT statement says in part;

This process of re-founding the IWA will be open and transparent. We will periodically provide information

While complaining;

yet inquisitorially monitor and criticize the activities of others

bar-worker complains of spying;

in solidarity. And the most of us are sad, to be in a international where we find a secretarian which spy all section out, which want, that anarchosyndicalists

Yet, we are assured by CNT_exteriores;

Same with the SAC. It’s OK for Lugius to drop his/her personal bogey man around, but we certainly are not into any dealings with them (secret or not), and

So if it's all open and transparent and there are no 'secret' deals, why all the concern about being monitored and spied on? A number of claims have been made that this section is not what it says it is and claims of the CNT growing and this that and the other. Why should not the IWA Secretariat take steps to ascertain the veracity of information? At the 1996 IWA Congress, the IWA Secretariat was instructed to investigate the situation of the ASF in Australia. The IWA Secretariat duly sent F**** I************* to Sydney and Melbourne during April-May 1997. I don't recall anyone in the ASF expressing a concern that we are going to spied upon or subjected to inquisitorial monitoring. Indeed, the investigation was welcomed as it would clarify the situation.

I can understand concern about being spied upon by the FBI or the NSW Police but the IWA Secretariat? Does not the IWA Secretariat have a duty of care to see all sections informed with accurate reliable information?

Yepa writes:

And that´s why you are the worst secretary of all times, a thug troublemaker that destroyed IWA.

melemas writes:

and then you are surprised why people say that you are the worst secretariat of IWA ever.

Militant-proletariat writes:

Oh really? Please tell us more about the great work she is bringing about. Show us how the workers are massively organizing themselves in big anarchosyndicalist unions around the world. Please, mention just one conflict in which a nonexistent union methodology of IWA Secretariat really worked, far beyond solidarity flyers and flags in front of an embassy or company.

So don't believe anything Akai says because she is the worst Secretary ever and is spying and an inquisitor and a thug. Demonise your critic to devalue and dismiss the substance of the critique. Or, if you like, don't play the ball, go the biff.

My own view is that Akai is the best Secretary the IWA has had in thirty years. Before Rata became Secretary, it was difficult to know what was going bon anywhere else in the IWA. Ocasionally, an envelope arrived with Congress minutes and reports from Plenaries.

When Rata became Secretary the flow of information expanded greatly and this continued with Akai - this partly due to changed communications technology.

Since Akai became Secretary there has been a serious attempt to begin to organise in Asia holding public events in Hong Kong and Taipei (more recently, the ASF are developing contacts in Singapore, Java and East Borneo).

This is in marked contrast to previous IWA Secretariats which seem to have no interest outside of Europe.

In the last 20 years the IWA has grown and expanded into Eastern Europe but apparently not good enough as they are not fully fledged unions. Are these unions meant to appear out of nowhere without any outside help? Are they meant to create anarcho-syndicalist unions by osmosis alone?

This CNT, it seems to me, wants to renovate the IWA into a Europe-only union. At least that is consistent with the CNT attitude to efforts outside of Europe to build anarcho-syndicalist unions.

I consider that Akai has done more to expand the IWA outside of the Europe ghetto than any other IWA Secretary.

The effort she made to come to Australia to help boost our efforts to grow the ASF was enormous and she worked hard from the moment she stepped off the plane (and we worked her hard with seven events in 10 days). In November 2015, the ASF were just three affiliates and today the ASF are seven. The tour generated an enormous amount of interest and the ASF is experiencing its greatest rate of growth for 25 years.

It's clear to me that the CNT doesn't want to expand beyond its small circle of friends in western Europe. Everytime the Secretariat has been outside of Spain the CNT has had a problem.

I suggest the CNT doesn't really want to expand the IWA beyond what it can't control. It doesn't really want an international IWA as it has the potential to threaten its pre-emininent position.

Let the CNT found Eurocentric Workers Association if they wish but the IWA will continue to grow in places outside western Europe.

The something ridiculous about boasting having thousands of members in a country of 48 million.

The numerical qualification for membership proposed to the IWA (twice) and rejected (twice) is designed to keep most current sections out. Particularly, those with overly inquisitive Secretaries.

The complainants mentioned above would have us believe that the problems that the IWA has, problems so great as to justify a 're-founding' (an attempt to defacto expel all other sections that don't meet the CNT's definition) is attributable to a single individual.

What utter rubbish. It attributes to Akai power that neither she or any other Secretary does not have. If the Secretary was as bad as these complainants are making out, there is a simple solution; the section to which that Secretary is a member is responsible.

The CNT leaders know this which is why they proposed the recall of the Secretary last year which is their right as an affiliated section. The proposal was rejected by the IWA in accordance with the due process.

Let's assume it's true that Akai is the WORST Secretary EVER! This is justification for an attempt by the CNT to split the IWA into the 'worthy' and the 'not worthy'?

A single individual is never the problem. It is always the practice that is the issue.

Jim writes:

think akai needs to accept some responsibility for this situation. While the tensions between the "unions" and the "initiatives" have existed for some time (as Congress minutes show), the breaking point which has created the current situation was the suspension of the FAU. Had that not happened I do not think the CNT would be calling for the IWA to be re-founded

This is grossly unfair to Akai as she did nothing other than carry out the tasks mandated at previous Congresses. If there is anyone responsible for the IWA Secretariat it is the IWA Congress that made the decision to have the ZSP responsible for the IWA Secretariat.

What would you have her do?

Building the IWA in the most populous counties in the world

1. China 1,367,485,388
2. India 1,251,695,584
3. United States 321,368,864
4. Indonesia 255,993,674
5. Brazil 204,259,812
6. Pakistan 199,085,847
7. Nigeria 181,562,056
8. Bangladesh 168,957,745
9. Russia 142,423,773
10. Japan 126,919,659

Which of these countries has an IWA section?

Of the countries that currently have IWA sections, how do they rank on a per capita basis?

Lugius

1. China 1,367,485,388
2. India 1,251,695,584
3. United States 321,368,864
4. Indonesia 255,993,674
5. Brazil 204,259,812
6. Pakistan 199,085,847
7. Nigeria 181,562,056
8. Bangladesh 168,957,745
9. Russia 142,423,773
10. Japan 126,919,659

Which of these countries has an IWA section?

Russia and Brazil. Obviously the IWA sections there are so prominent that you don't even have heard of them so far. The United States used to have one, but they got eliminated by the Alhambra and their friends. Ok, they have the IWW there with a per capita representation that exceeds that of many IWA sections. But I know, those guys are "enemies" to quite a couple of IWA sections. Too less anarcho, too much syndicalist propably. Bangladesh might have had a section in the past, if it would have been an international of revolutionary syndicalists unions more than one of anarcho-buddies.

I don't know quite what to make of this dispute frankly. I was a member of WSA from its founding in 1984 to 1994 (I later rejoined in 2002), and I was a WSA delegate to the IWA Congress at Bourdioux in 1988. At that Congress WSA opposed the "no contact" rule.

The whole process of expulsion of WSA, which apparently was engineered by "the lion of the Alhambra" and backed up by that guy in Belgrade when he was IWA secretary, left me with an impression of an organization that had degenerated into sectarian behavior of the worst sort.

During the '80s-90s period, I did get the impression of the IWA as a very Eurocentric organization which had no clue about the sorts of organizing conditions we faced in USA. So I agree in principle with Lugius that the IWA does need an outward focus on developing contacts & organizations in other countries. WSA helped with this somewhat, developing the contacts in '90s with the group that became the Nigerian affiliate (tho it became inactive & disbanded later), and we have contact with a new organization developing in Mexico.

But I also think the emphasis on extreme ideological purity of some groups really gets in the way of an outward focus. Again, I think that is another expression of the Eurocentricity in thinking of many militants in Europe.

syndicalistcat

But I also think the emphasis on extreme ideological purity of some groups really gets in the way of an outward focus. Again, I think that is another expression of the Eurocentricity in thinking of many militants in Europe.

Could you expand a bit on what you mean by extreme ideological purity?

People critical of the IWA usually bring this up together with the 'no contact rule' as an expression of supposed sectarian madness - but the present conflict is perhaps instructive. The current conflict in the IWA has a lot to do with the FAU developing its own international relations in contravention of IWA decisions, and more specifically in Poland cooperating with a union that is a rival organisation of the Polish IWA section. Now, you may agree with the FAU that this cooperation is justified in the name of solidarity with members of the IP, or you may agree with the ZSP that the IP's electoralism and pacts with fascists are a threat to the workers movement. But I think the underlying issue is that an organisation such as the IWA cannot function if its member sections are allowed to consistently disregard federal decisions, and for member sections to do things that undermine their sister sections. Is this what you call "extreme ideological purity"?

It's certainly quite retarded to blame single individuals for complex problems involving entire organizations over decades. I guess this level of debate is not worth going into.

However, the substance of this latest CNT project is sadly even less brilliant. It seeks "growth" by depriving growing sections of their votes, as if this could magically lead to mass unionization in countries that did not have a radical tradition of this kind. Even in Spain the effect of this is quite opposite, as shown by the massive shedding of sections in the CNT itself since this centralization process started.

Somehow, someone can honestly think that creating members on paper (in effect buying votes) and depriving sections that do not create paper membership of voting rights will build a grassroots organization that is not bureaucratic. This is really sad.

Yes, yes.... Akai what a great Secretary, constantly trying to use her position for his personal targets, constantly disrespeting IWA members online(as she said I am being provoked , if you get provoked so easily you are not the person to hold that position) and in internal communications, She was telling direct lies of IWA members in internet on regular basics. Yes, she did some things ok, she could have been a very good IWA secretary, but her mistakes, are so, so big that directly she has destroyed IWA, the duty of a secretary is to cold down internal conflicts so sections can take decissions with a clear mind, but she is expert in adding gasoline to fire.

We can continue with this for ages, but one thing is cristal clear, 90% of IWA members, the ones part of the big groups, are leaving, we do not feel conformable in a sectarian, paranoid organization.

Maybe their are not the only ones to blame, or not the full of it, you just wanted to believe a 5% of CNT and their lies, and you repeated their lies. If CNT pays a fee to a labour lawers firm to help us with the big and complicated conflicts that afect docens or hundres of workers, you believe that we have them under an imagination payroll (?!?!)... and you repeat it. And many other lies like this.

So I hope this is not a surprise, now 90% of IWA members (problably much more I did not make numbers) are leaving IWA... and she keeps with the same actitude, not interestest at all in keeping us in IWA.... so bye bye, we leave and we´ll never come back. you can keep our money (because these 3 organizations put 99% of IWA´s money).

More nonsense from the peanut gallery.

Yes, some Sections of the lWA are trying to reform it by pushing on proposals rejected twice by every single Section that is not in the Western European core and even by most in it. By disenfranchising the lWA of every single voice outside of Western Europe (even ZSP, which has more than the magic number but rejects these ideas), they think this is not Eurocentrism.

OK, I wasn't around for the Bangladesh vote but talked about it to both the lWA delegate to there and the SAC delegate (many years ago). The lWA maintains contacts with these people but the report showed that this is a professionalized union of women members without voice and mostly male management. So, it didn't seem to people exactly like what they wanted.

Of course we had two processes about who to have contacts with, what to do, who to talk to: in 2011, to a lesser extent and a whole topic on it in 2012. Let me explain literally what happened: the FAU did not come or send any opinion on anything, CNT had no votes or official delegation, USI said no word.

At a point where people are going on the internet and complaining about "groups of friends" this sounds very nice for haters and trolls jacking off on this, but the reality is that, again, the people who are complaining actually refused to discuss or be part of shaping things. The prefer to complain, do their own thing and then complain again that people did one thing and not another.

This is just a fact. And this is one reason why all this huffy puffy BS is BS for me. I was there.

That said, Robot, we used to be quite friendly and I always wanted to talk to you with respect, but you know, we are sitting here thinking of the irony of it all: you are sitting in what - a 3 person local organization? A five person organization? And you are on the internet all indignant about "groups of friends".

no1

People critical of the IWA usually bring this up together with the 'no contact rule' as an expression of supposed sectarian madness - but the present conflict is perhaps instructive.

If you think the FAU and IP working together/talking to each other helps advance our class interests, then the decisions the IWA have reached meet the very definition of sectarian. Particularly if those decisions have been reached to prevent ZSP from being undermined. This is arguably putting the interests of an IWA section ahead of those of the class.

Did the IWA form a commission to investigate the claims ZSP were making about FAU and the IP? It's strange that a commission was formed and thousands of hours spent investigating both sides of the French split before anything was done, yet FAU were suspended by a member of ZSP without any prior discussion within the broader IWA.

no1

But I think the underlying issue is that an organisation such as the IWA cannot function if its member sections are allowed to consistently disregard federal decisions, and for member sections to do things that undermine their sister sections. Is this what you call "extreme ideological purity"?

The underlying issue is the way IWA decisions are reached, having one section one vote means sections which have a handful of members have the same voting power as revolutionary unions with thousands of members. If the decision making structure the CNT is advocating was adopted by the IWA I can think of numerous decisions made over the years which would have been made differently, I imagine this is the main reason why they're leaving/re-founding the IWA.

zaczek, what centralization process??? where is the massive shedding of sections??? YOU LIE.

I can tell you exactly why every single case of local unions kicked away were for.

-Poison a demo with a weed cake, making our members (some with children) to get stoned in the highway back home at 120KM/h (many of them met in the hospital, they didn´t know what was going on). (Galicia)
-Creating fake votes to control the regional secretariaries (levante)
-Make false accusations of other unions, that had been proved false (andalucia)

And even like this the members out were not even 6% of CNT.

And I know all these because we, the local unions decided from botton up. we voted, we have´ve show proof, we had hear both sides and we took a decision (always almost with 80% of votes).

So stop spreading lies, there is no centralization process, there is no paid members, CNT is now stronger that in the last 40 years, hundres of workplace sections, several of them of around 100 memebers, our membres are twice the members in 2010. Everytime there is a general strike we have to deal with docens of members arrested, thounsands of euros in fines for sabotages and riots... We are really puting our lives on this, we accept comrades to help each other, but we are not here to waste time in stupid games. If IWA is not useful for us we leave IWA, that was costing us a fortune every year.

Lets continue analizing the coments of Akai:

¨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.¨

First of all Akai should explain from were she toke the wrong idea that this was approve by 50% of the participant in the congress, something that is a totally lie, she could go to the congress, ZSP was invite, and see it with her on eyes, but she didn't want to go. But now came to forums to lie about CNT decision. Greate work for a Secretary of IWA.

about the payments why you doesn't explain that CNT made a proposal in a congress to reduce the amount to pay by militant but because your section and some more where already paying a reduce quantity you bote against because this could men that you will pay more, even CNT explain that didn't want to grow the amount that were paying that sections (one of them not even was paying). At the end the situation is that CNT has to continue putting several tens of thousands € every year when other continue with the reduce payment. then when CNT has a economical issue because an accident, all are problems to ask to reduce the quantity.

"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."

Yes, in organizational accounts that are not property of IWA. Lets continue, why you don´t explain that was approve by IWA congress to be the vice-secretariat of IWA in Spain, that CNT didn't choose the person or persons you wonted and choose the person that the unions of CNT thought was better for that position. That you had the mandatory obligation to provide to the vice-secretariat all the information about this accounts give access to them and also access to the mails and server of IWA. this was approve to don´t have again the same issue IWA suffer when a secretariat was imprisoned and IWA stay for a long time with out internal coordination. You not even got in contact with the Vice-secretariat approve by IWA congress. And you had more than one year to do it.

so we have not only a secretariat of IWA that lies about the sections in public forums, also we have a secretariat that doesn't follow the mandatory decisions taken by sections in IWA congress.

¨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¨

Lets explain to people something about your accusations. as i told CNT provide to all IWA sections complete information about the contact made and the develop of them in different countries. maybe the reason is that a lot of people in CNT got fed up is because when they ask for information they never receive it. maybe some people provide to you info thinking that you are a comrade and later see that you manipulate this info to attack to a section. In that point CNT members start to think that there are some people like you that are not comrades, that you only take care of your interest for your own profit instead of working for the common interest. Maybe the fact that every time CNT was traveling to other countries to get in contact with other organizations your first reaction was to attack this work and then ask for information. Maybe CNT members loose the confidence in you when they see that you make inorganic contact with members of sections that provide to you lies (you call it information) and then you send this leis to other sections, making a meddling to the internal decision process of sections. and this you do it with the official IWA mail (maybe is that the reason you didnt want the vice'secretariat to have access to the accounts).

"Guys from the IWA, the reason that the CNT executives did this gross thing of printing their agreements is actually they are hoping to promote stereotypes and manipulate with disinformation."

It is funny to see that the IWA executive attack CNT permanent secretariat when they only made what CNT unions mandated them to do.

And how you cal when you lie about CNT reality? only in this forum you put more than 5 lies about CNT, some of them very easy to prove them.

"That aside, for clarity, the XI congress had almost half the participation of the last one, but maybe a quarter of these unions were disenfranchised between the congresses. This means the boycott was from a portion of those left and only amounted to about one third of the unions. So yes two thirds took part and as I said, passed thus proposal at 50 percent."

Lets answer to this manipulation. First of all you say "disenfranchised" speaking about expeled unions because for example they give votes in regional meetings when they doesn't have them by the CNT statutes? or when they make accusations with out proves as made cadiz? or when they never pay any money? please try to have a common criteria, don´t change it when you speak about your self and when you speak about others.
Is funny that first you make a accusation, and then you say that maybe...
the boikot was followed by less than 10% of the unions. from the X congress to the IX congress local federations like Sevilla and Granada pas from 4 and 3 unions to 1 and 1 to reduce the burocracy and spend the energy in the actions and develop of the unions. so only here disappear 5 unions (there are other local federations that made the same). between expelled unions and the ones that leave CNT we can speak about 20 unions that represent around 200 people (to compare and have abtter idea of this number of people, between the unions of bilbao, barakaldo and vitoria had grow more than 200 members from the X congress). some other unions had join with others near to have less bureaucracy, and other unions didn't take part in the congress because there were focus in their local work.

I´m going to ask you something. Why do you lie so much about CNT? Why do you try so hard to manipulate the information about CNT? what are you trying?

Actually yep a your group is calling for kicking most sections out of the iwa and organizing an inorganic split conference. It is beyond appalling to demand or suggest I represent you in that. Fuck off.

Again depend what you speak about you use different words. For example, you say that FAU is not expel, is suspend, but FAU doesn't have access to the information and doesn't have right to vote. CNT proposal give complete access to the information and to take part in all the international live, and only put a limit of minimum members to be a section with right of vote. is not the first time you do it, since the first time that CNT made this proposal, you were not in IWA, you use the same way of speaking to refer to it. Of course then are other the ones that manipulate, and of course you have to finish the comment with your typical and famous bad words, like when you insult the CNT delegation in Porto congress.

I have to remember that in CNT there are groups in towns and cites that are part of bigger unions, that are not unions with vote but that have more members that 50% of IWA sections, they have the right to be union (more than the minimum approve) but understand that is better to wait till they are stronger to make this step. This is a mater of responsibility, if you are a small grope that is trying to develop you should understand in your own that is better to spend your energy to learn and grow, not to loose the time giving lessons of purity to sections of thousands of members.

Maybe the people should know that, CNT, since the 80´s didn't have more members than now, we have a clear syndicalist strategy and we are wining very strong conflicts. We have hundreds of workers assembles in companies, some of them of more than 100 members. This are facts that I don´t know why some people doesn't speak about them and try to give a negative view about CNT reality.

So are there any political differences between the CNT and the "Eastern European sections", or is this a strictly organizational issue? (I'm aware of the criticisms towards IP, SAC etc., so I'm not asking about that.)

jura

So are there any political differences between the CNT and the "Eastern European sections", or is this a strictly organizational issue? (I'm aware of the criticisms towards IP, SAC etc., so I'm not asking about that.)

There are differences between the Troika (CNT, USI, FAU) and the rest. The Troika favors proportional voting and depriving smaller sections of voting rights. The rest of the sections don't and have rejected this repeatedly in the only legitimate forum for such decisions inside the IWA, which is the IWA congress. The Troika knows they can't have their way in an organic fashion, so they came up with this putsch idea. Let's see how it works for them.

This strategy is a complete non-starter and leads to the inflation of paper membership in order to boost the number of votes in the pathetic struggle for control. It also provides no incentives for new groups to form and develop and indeed the centralist-minded don't care about this. The only effect is bureaucratization, centralization and in effect just creating mainstream unions. Not really what anarcho-syndicalism is about.

In my point of view, the main problem is how understand the organization each section. For example some sections admit that there is no problem if the secretariat monitors the sections, and other sections says that anarchosindicalist is the opposite, the assemblies monitors the secretaries. some sections think that is normal that a secretary try to interfere in internal process of taking decision of the sections and other sections think that the sections are independent and no one can put his nose in their internal issues. some sections thinks that pay a company to transport a package is reformist and against IWA aims and other think that is something normal that has be done always. Some sections think that if a secretariat doesn't justify thousands of € in expenses its ok and approve it, other doesn't think is this right and that should be consequences. Some sections think that pay a lawyer is to have pay positions (is the last slander that some sections invent) and is reformist, other thinks that this was something done during the whole history of IWA (first international till today). Some sections think that can have contact with other groups because conflicts with respect to local comrades other think that if you are near fiscally to bishop you became catholic. some sections defend that the sections have to be of anarchy people other says the opposite (about this there is a text defending this idea in IWA website).

zaczek

jura

So are there any political differences between the CNT and the "Eastern European sections", or is this a strictly organizational issue? (I'm aware of the criticisms towards IP, SAC etc., so I'm not asking about that.)

There are differences between the Troika (CNT, USI, FAU) and the rest. The Troika favors proportional voting and depriving smaller sections of voting rights. The rest of the sections don't and have rejected this repeatedly in the only legitimate forum for such decisions inside the IWA, which is the IWA congress. The Troika knows they can't have their way in an organic fashion, so they came up with this putsch idea. Let's see how it works for them.

This strategy is a complete non-starter and leads to the inflation of paper membership in order to boost the number of votes in the pathetic struggle for control. It also provides no incentives for new groups to form and develop and indeed the centralist-minded don't care about this. The only effect is bureaucratization, centralization and in effect just creating mainstream unions. Not really what anarcho-syndicalism is about.

Again a Lie, remember that FORA vote to remove the IWA secretariat.
the centralization happens when a secretariat try to monitor the sections, when a secretariat put point for congress and suspends sections on their own. the centralization comes when a secretariat discriminate the decisions of some sections by their own point of view with understanding that they are nobody to decided witch decision of a section is taken in the good way, the centralization comes when a secretary doesn't put on practice the mandatory decisions taken by IWA congress.the centralization comes when a secretariat keep contacts with members of a section backwards to the section, and has meetings with local groups backwards to the section.

Oh Zaczek, please light CNT with what anarcho-syndicalism is about...

I personally prefer in IWA 1 vote per local union, because why a city like Warsaw has 50 times more votes that a city like Barcelona? or even 1 vote per member! The problem with this is that CNT with more than 100 local unions will have almost all votes.... so my comrades are so kind and gentle that could accept some unfairness, but definitely not 100 members in 6 countries controling 70% of votes of thounsands.

jura

So are there any political differences between the CNT and the "Eastern European sections", or is this a strictly organizational issue? (I'm aware of the criticisms towards IP, SAC etc., so I'm not asking about that.)

I think the differences are more in terms of practice than in theory.

Yepa

I personally prefer in IWA 1 vote per local union, because why a city like Warsaw has 50 times more votes that a city like Barcelona? or even 1 vote per member!

Both of these would make more sense than the CNT's proposal. Even if it led to the CNT local unions wielding more influence in the IWA, it would be more democratic than the current decision making structure and the one which the CNT is proposing.

To be honest, I don't really see the need for different sections in different states. The IWW has a better structure than the IWA for organising across borders. Having a section in the British state, the Spanish state etc. which then federate is at 19th century model for organising.

Melenas, as much as you like to discuss about IWA internals here, the question was about the political differences. And it is clear as anything that the political difference is about proportional voting (favored by Troika) and equal section voting (favored by everyone else). The Troika is blind to the differences between countries where the anarchosyndicalist tradition either never existed or was terminally broken by the II WW and the stalinist period, and countries where this tradition was not broken. A difference that has a profound impact on the possibilities to develop organizations of size.

Quite a stupid blindness, I would say.

Lugius

This CNT, it seems to me, wants to renovate the IWA into a Europe-only union. At least that is consistent with the CNT attitude to efforts outside of Europe to build anarcho-syndicalist unions.
[...]
It's clear to me that the CNT doesn't want to expand beyond its small circle of friends in western Europe.

The discussion I've seen in Spanish, now and in the past, doesn't suggest this at all, more that many people in the CNT see the IWA in its current form as an obstacle to building links with unions outside Europe. I don't see them wanting to create a Europe-only IWA. Whether this will in fact be the effect of their actions is another question.

Jim

Yepa

I personally prefer in IWA 1 vote per local union, because why a city like Warsaw has 50 times more votes that a city like Barcelona? or even 1 vote per member!

Both of these would make more sense than the CNT's proposal. Even if it led to the CNT local unions wielding more influence in the IWA, it would be more democratic than the current decision making structure and the one which the CNT is proposing.

To be honest, I don't really see the need for different sections in different states. The IWW has a better structure than the IWA for organising across borders. Having a section in the British state, the Spanish state etc. which then federate is at 19th century model for organising.

In my point of view, if all the sections are workers unions with more than 500 members, i´m sure we will not be speaking about the proportionality of vote. the problem comes when there is so big difference and when such small groups control the international.have no sense that 4 sections that has mach more than 90% of the militants of IWA are relegate and accuse systematically with lies.

Of course now can came the discussion about what is and what is not a union and how much effort they make, Everybody make a big effort and even in a town of 30.000 people a group of 30 people is not a union, is a good base to work but is not a union, and i say this because i toke part in the develop of a group like this and i can see the big differences with local unions of hundreds of workers that were near to as.

Melenas, I am glad you admit this finally. This is about control. You want the bigger sections to have control.

Right now, you have to take into account the voice of smaller sections in countries removed from the historic core of the anarchosyndicalist tradition. The putsch is an attempt to gain control and disregard the voice of everyone else, a voice that has been expressed at IWA congresses on many occasions.

zaczek

Melenas, as much as you like to discuss about IWA internals here, the question was about the political differences. And it is clear as anything that the political difference is about proportional voting (favored by Troika) and equal section voting (favored by everyone else). The Troika is blind to the differences between countries where the anarchosyndicalist tradition either never existed or was terminally broken by the II WW and the stalinist period, and countries where this tradition was not broken. A difference that has a profound impact on the possibilities to develop organizations of size.

Quite a stupid blindness, I would say.

really if you are not able to see the difference between political difference and organization difference, there is no discussion. A proportional voting is structural, is about how to organizes. till now i had take part in to different sections of IWA, CNT and other very small. a aprt of that also i toke part in other organization in other country also an small organization. i see perfectly that there are differences between countries and cultural situation and legal situations, but this is not solve by one section one vote, because that is not the problem, the problem is that the small sections are not unions, are not able to understand the issue and the needs of big sections, but doesn't loose time to call them reformist and give them lessons of how to organised.

a Part of that, if you travel a bit maybe you are able to understand that in side of the European Union you can have very similar strategy because all the countries had signed some lows that affect to workers rights and base on them you can make a great work.but for this you need first to know about syndicalist action that is farther more complex that go with a flag to the entrance of a company.

I´m agree about the Stalinist that broke the libertarian tradition, now a days we suffer the Stalinist tradition in IWA.

melenas

a Part of that, if you travel a bit maybe you are able to understand that in side of the European Union you can have very similar strategy because all the countries had signed some lows that affect to workers rights and base on them you can make a great work.

Really? Like we didn't know that the laws that have been imposed on Spain and Portugal have been tested 20 years before in Poland and other Eastern European countries. Of course this doesn't even answer what I wrote about the differences between political traditions in different countries.

melenas

but for this you need first to know about syndicalist action that is farther more complex that go with a flag to the entrance of a company.

A fine example of the disdainful attitude that the Troika has presented for quite some time now. And complete ignorance of the results that the supposedly "non-unions" have managed to achieve (such as successful wildcat strikes, or forcing the employers to employ our union members, etc) Of course you wouldn't bother to learn about those things, because all you care about is your own turf.

melenas

I´m agree about the Stalinist that broke the libertarian tradition, now a days we suffer the Stalinist tradition in IWA.

So in order to fight the imagined "stalinism" (which is how you call organic decisions of Sections of the IWA) you want to introduce more centralization and power. Again, this is really pathetic.

zaczek

melenas

a Part of that, if you travel a bit maybe you are able to understand that in side of the European Union you can have very similar strategy because all the countries had signed some lows that affect to workers rights and base on them you can make a great work.

Really? Like we didn't know that the laws that have been imposed on Spain and Portugal have been tested 20 years before in Poland and other Eastern European countries. Of course this doesn't even answer what I wrote about the differences between political traditions in different countries.

You didn't understand any thing ones again. There is something call European laws about working rights and main human rights, i´m not speaking about local laws. farther more there are international lows signed by EU countries that obligate them to follow. but however continue in your way, insulting and with out understanding any thing.

zaczek

melenas

but for this you need first to know about syndicalist action that is farther more complex that go with a flag to the entrance of a company.

A fine example of the disdainful attitude that the Troika has presented for quite some time now. And complete ignorance of the results that the supposedly "non-unions" have managed to achieve (such as successful wildcat strikes, or forcing the employers to employ our union members, etc) Of course you wouldn't bother to learn about those things, because all you care about is your own turf.

What you call Troika, is doing what you say long time a go, i don´t know why for you is Troika-reformist if do it CNT, and if you do it is wildcat strike.
zaczek

melenas

I´m agree about the Stalinist that broke the libertarian tradition, now a days we suffer the Stalinist tradition in IWA.

So in order to fight the imagined "stalinism" (which is how you call organic decisions of Sections of the IWA) you want to introduce more centralization and power. Again, this is really pathetic.

[/quote]

Do not manipulate, Stalinist is to monitor sections by the secretariat, and all the things that i describe in previous comments and are happening now a days in IWA. could be nice if the secretary put on practices the decisions and pass all the info to the vice-secretariat no? or the secretary only have to put on practice the mandatory decisions of congress that she likes?

So in order to fight the imagined "stalinism" (which is how you call organic decisions of Sections of the IWA) you want to introduce more centralization and power. Again, this is really pathetic.

Our point is exactly the oposite.
Right now the decision making process is in hands of very very small groups of individuals, leaving thounsands with no voice. When we have a proposal of bring back the decission making process to the thounsands, and leave the small groups with their real weight (almost irrelevant, beacuse that what they are, and that´s a fact, even us are almost irrelvant), you accused us of centralist.... ridiculous, out of common sense. You are the centralist, and the authoritarian. that´s anti-anarchist. who are you¿? the choosen ones? why 1 vote of a cleaner in Spain worths 500 times less of one in Russia??? don´t you see any unfairness there??? And it is even worst, that little groups that control IWA are giving lesson to the big ones, with constant insults, and telling them waht they have to do.... people with almost no experience in workplaces, with no arrested members every year, with no constant walks to courhouses for labour conflicts... we are fighting the law, the state and the capitalism, we are not going to accept lessons from people that suffer almost no repression, I can respect EZLN, YPG... even if I am not agree with them... I know I can learn from them... but from you I learn nothing, but we are keen to teach.
And about anarcho-syndicalism tradition I would like to remember you that we were smashed by fascism years before WWII, our members were killed or sent into exile till late 70s.

All this ofcourse is just my opinion as CNT member, for CNT official opinion better ask CNT_Exteriores for sure more polite and diplomatic than me

Yepa, you can pretend all you want the problem of inflated paper-only membership doesn't exist, but there is enough evidence of it and enough people in Spain are openly talking about it. You can't defederate them all to silence them, hard as you might try.

You can also pretend that every decision of the CNT executives has been consulted with the proverbial "1 cleaner of Spain" but enough people have said it is a lie. So, no, this is not about giving a voice to the "1 cleaner of Spain", but a way to put more numbers and more power behind the decisions of a caste of bureaucrats that has developed from the proportional voting process.

I know CNT very well, there is no such a thing a votes on paper.... I know for example a case of a union of 120 members in a city of 100.000 acussed of fake members, and I know the members and I know it is 100% a LIE, members are 100% real,
Just imagine, for 1 second that you´ve been told lies, You will see, we will leave IWA, and maybe some expelled unions of CNT will join your IWA corpse, you will see how many of them are... but then it will be too late.

jura

So are there any political differences between the CNT and the "Eastern European sections", or is this a strictly organizational issue? (I'm aware of the criticisms towards IP, SAC etc., so I'm not asking about that.)

I'd say, looking from outside, that there are political differences internationally that also reflect political differences between majority and minority factions in the CNT.

zaczek

Yepa, you can pretend all you want the problem of inflated paper-only membership doesn't exist, but there is enough evidence of it and enough people in Spain are openly talking about it. You can't defederate them all to silence them, hard as you might try.

That a clear lie. exactly what happens in CNT historically is the opposite, the unions pay for less member than what they have. Thats the problem when you inform your self throw FB or a friend of a cousin that her uncle live in the same building that a member of CNT, that at the end you say big lies.

That is whats happens when you put your nose in issues of others, that for CNT members you look like someone that doesn´t know a shit about CNT and is attacking the union instead of focusing in develop his organization. Is exactly what we are saying all this years.

zaczek

You can also pretend that every decision of the CNT executives has been consulted with the proverbial "1 cleaner of Spain" but enough people have said it is a lie. So, no, this is not about giving a voice to the "1 cleaner of Spain", but a way to put more numbers and more power behind the decisions of a caste of bureaucrats that has developed from the proportional voting process.

And you continue in the same line, more lies about CNT. perfect, what i start to think is that there is real ideological problem in IWA. because this way of acting and this arguments look like are your every day way of working.

Something funny, CNT doesn't say any thing about other way of taking decisions, obviously, is not CNT issue and is a basic idea of autonomy, but here (IWA) everybody is monitoring CNT organic work, giving lessons and dispersing what ever bullshit the read in FB. And this is not today, this are years of continuous interference in internal questions of CNT and not only with CNT.

Thanks zaczek to make so clear example of what is the IWA issue about.

Now. I can get some laughs at trolls telling my friend was was fired more than once for union activity and is his spent the last seven or eight years fighting charges and suits for activity that people in the IWA don't know this stuff. This is reaaly gross. At least we know about people repressed in Spain and show solidarity where we can . This is all very typical of the problem.

We didn't make a big deal about it since its normal that thus goes on but those who read Polish can find the article from the mainstream press on our FB.

akai

Now. I can get some laughs at trolls telling my friend was was fired more than once for union activity and is his spent the last seven or eight years fighting charges and suits for activity that people in the IWA don't know this stuff. This is reaaly gross. At least we know about people repressed in Spain and show solidarity where we can . This is all very typical of the problem.

We didn't make a big deal about it since its normal that thus goes on but those who read Polish can find the article from the mainstream press on our FB.

Did you find out where says that CNT have payment positions as you said?

try to don´t lie about CNT this could bee a nice first step.

Now. I can get some laughs at trolls telling my friend was was fired more than once for union activity and is his spent the last seven or eight years fighting charges and suits for activity that people in the IWA don't know this stuff. This is reaaly gross. At least we know about people repressed in Spain and show solidarity where we can . This is all very typical of the problem.

We didn't make a big deal about it since its normal that thus goes on but those who read Polish can find the article from the mainstream press on our FB.

We have hundres of cases, don´t you understand that you or us are not better? we just play at another scale, we have 300 ZSPs inside CNT, what happens to you hapens to us 300 more times.

You just keep posting as you had no responsibility with your position. IWA General Secretary is a big thing, too big for you. You will never see a CNT General Secretary going down to the forums muds, that´s the diference, thats a luxury somebody representing thounsands can´t afford, you can´t get provoked, you must say 100% accurate information and being totally resonable, you must say only the decisions your organiation has taken by consensus, even if you are not agree, it must look like yes. Thats comes with the position, and it is something you don´t understand. You are too pasionate, you defend what you think is right at any cost, even at IWA´s cpst, but you are mistaken, you are not cautious and you have no self-criticism at all. You have been told an history of good guys and bad guys when reallity is far away from that, when facts show a diferent thing.
You are the worst secretary of all times, with Rata the thief permission, he is second.

So it's a size thing. Very freudian and telling about this entire situation.

It's funny that someone here thinks I cannot trust what I have seen with my own eyes and trust people I have met and discussed with and I have to trust an anonymous poster on a libcom forum.

zaczek

So it's a size thing. Very freudian and telling about this entire situation.

It's funny that someone here thinks I cannot trust what I have seen with my own eyes and trust people I have met and discussed with and I have to trust an anonymous poster on a libcom forum.

Perfect, i told you, continue with your lies about CNT, but then don´t be surprised if in CNT the people thinks what thinks about your attitude and the attitude of complete sections of IWA.

if your are not able to see the difference between a small organization some dozens of workers and a local union of hundreds ...

but please don´t say to as that most democratic organization is one where less than 10% of the members has the control, because everybody know how is call when a minority decided over a huge majority.

Yes, yes zaczek I also have a cousin that says that homeopathy and reiki works for him and there is no scientific proof that can convice him that that´s just a way to cheat idiots.

Sure, everybody knows that the most democratic organization is one in which 3/4 of the sections have no voting rights. ;)

I think all points have been made clear... I would like to said if was a pleasure, but it wasn´t. We leave IWA, so all happy, CNT happy, ZSP & IWA secretary are happy, they don´t care that 90% of the members leave so all happy!!! hope we don´t meet again!

There is no please CNT think about it twice, or come on you should stay... nothing... just the comon crap.... so Bye bye.

There is no please CNT think about it twice, or come on you should stay... nothing... just the comon crap.... so Bye bye.

this is very indicative of the mindset of many people in CNT. of their self-perception and self-importance. it dates way back than this current situation.

No problem, the situation now is quite clear. CNT has sent an open proposal to build together a new IWA. If akai, the Big Leader, and her lackeys know better the situation in Spain and want to believe what their comrades say, please go with all the expelled groups and take your IWA corpse for yourselves. Nobody is forced to be with us. We'll go on with our work in order to build a strong International with stable unions.

There are two clear blocks: one wants to grow and become a real reference for the working class around the world, without purity or stuff like that, by doing unionism and developing strategies and methodologies against the complex capitalist structure; the other one wants to grow somehow by picketing or going around with flags, but only with an anarcho-card validated by the Glorious Committee of the Anarchist Purity, otherwise you're not welcome and you're a reformist who likely look for becoming a full-paid secretary.

Yes, let us analyze the CNT executive mindset. The executives say: "Ok, we give you this proposal: You will have no voting rights, we will decide everything, but you should be happy you are with us, even though we don't care about you and we sabotage anything you were trying to do."

So, no. We will not say "please stay". Luckily, there are enough sections in Spain that have been defederated by the CNT bureaucracy for not obeying their authoritarian line, so a new legitimate CNT-AIT section will be back in no time, while you will be toying with an authoritarian CGT type of project. Good luck with that.

Oooh Zaczek it makes me so happy to know the big surprise you will find when you realize how little are the groups expelled for not paying or for being less than 5 members for years.... that´s the best think of all and keeps a smile in my face while typing.

You really believed a lot of lies

zaczek

Melenas, as much as you like to discuss about IWA internals here, the question was about the political differences. And it is clear as anything that the political difference is about proportional voting (favored by Troika) and equal section voting (favored by everyone else). The Troika is blind to the differences between countries where the anarchosyndicalist tradition either never existed or was terminally broken by the II WW and the stalinist period, and countries where this tradition was not broken. A difference that has a profound impact on the possibilities to develop organizations of size.

Quite a stupid blindness, I would say.

Do you know who Franco was? Hitler? Don't be a victim. The whole working class was smashed after the WWII, so this is not a excuse to justify that some IWA groups are tiny. CNT, USI and FAU have been growing for few years, why is that? Just think about it, maybe the silly anarcho-pure view was a burden and counter-productive.

Yepa: Freud, again. Keep on beating it...

militant-proletarian

Do you know who Franco was? Hitler? Don't be a victim. The whole working class was smashed after the WWII, so this is not a excuse to justify that some IWA groups are tiny. CNT, USI and FAU have been growing for few years, why is that? Just think about it, maybe the silly anarcho-pure view was a burden and counter-productive.

So you haven't heard about this Western Europe/Eastern Europe Iron Curtain kind of thing?

Zaczek as an anarchist I follow scientific proof, and Freud is a pseudo-scientism. Freud is a fraud, you should update your sources, all of them.

zaczek

Sure, everybody knows that the most democratic organization is one in which 3/4 of the sections have no voting rights. ;)

You can join 7 or 8 sections and have one vote.

when I first join CNT i thought that in other countries the sections were strong and that we were thousands and thousands of people. what was my surprise when i start to learn about the sections and i see the reality. Was hard, was hard to she that the IWA was only in internet, that groups of a few dozens, in the best situation, were saying what we are reading here now. However you leave clear your position, vertical control of section by secretariats and continuous interference in the internal work of other sections.

good luck.

PD: CNT didn´t leave IWA, so don´t forget that all the lies you publish here (you, AKAI secretari of IWA and others) is about a organic section of IWA.

zaczek

militant-proletarian

Do you know who Franco was? Hitler? Don't be a victim. The whole working class was smashed after the WWII, so this is not a excuse to justify that some IWA groups are tiny. CNT, USI and FAU have been growing for few years, why is that? Just think about it, maybe the silly anarcho-pure view was a burden and counter-productive.

So you haven't heard about this Western Europe/Eastern Europe Iron Curtain kind of thing?

Spain is the second country in the world with more people buried in mass grave only behind Camboya.

but please do not try to make a competition about repression, it was only a note to make you see that spain had had a strong repression that look like some people forgot it.

zaczek

Yes, let us analyze the CNT executive mindset. The executives say: "Ok, we give you this proposal: You will have no voting rights, we will decide everything, but you should be happy you are with us, even though we don't care about you and we sabotage anything you were trying to do."

So, no. We will not say "please stay". Luckily, there are enough sections in Spain that have been defederated by the CNT bureaucracy for not obeying their authoritarian line, so a new legitimate CNT-AIT section will be back in no time, while you will be toying with an authoritarian CGT type of project. Good luck with that.

jajajajaja

is true they lie you a lot, good luck.

zaczek

militant-proletarian

Do you know who Franco was? Hitler? Don't be a victim. The whole working class was smashed after the WWII, so this is not a excuse to justify that some IWA groups are tiny. CNT, USI and FAU have been growing for few years, why is that? Just think about it, maybe the silly anarcho-pure view was a burden and counter-productive.

So you haven't heard about this Western Europe/Eastern Europe Iron Curtain kind of thing?

Maybe you can't read, Franco ruled for 40 years until the end of 70's, but the CNT really started to grow since the end of 2000's. So I'm not saying it's easy to grow, but something is wrong when you cannot get members. If we're not able to get stronger with more members for years, surely it's our fault and gotta change the strategy. "Why the workers don't join our union? We're so cool... The workers are pretty declassed... we know the truth, wank wank..." is the same old story that I've heard for decades.

PS: As the comrade said, it's not a competition about repression. So please keep your childish comments for yourself

Militant-proletarian:

Yes, and the social history of a country does not matter. :D It does not matter that Spain has a history of a social revolution and Poland only has a history of nationalist uprisings. It has no impact whatsoever. No impact at all that all strains of left or worker ideas have been discredited in public imagination because of stalinist history. And no impact whatsoever that anticapitalism was seen as opposition in Western Europe and as part of the system in Eastern Europe.
Your ignorance is really impressive!

So what to do? Go for the masses and jump on the nationalist bandwagon? Nope, we can't do it. But some people will do it and I'm sure you will support them.

zaczek

Militant-proletarian:

So what to do? Go for the masses and jump on the nationalist bandwagon? Nope, we can't do it. But some people will do it and I'm sure you will support them.

Do not confuse your wishes with the reality.

And don´t forget that you are already giving support to lies. here and now.

What a circus.

Jim, you seen quite inspired by this topic. While l don't agree with some things you write, you have asked questions l will answer.

You ask about whether or not a commission was set up in the FAU situation and wonder why or why not. Without going into all the details, the situation with FAU related to their international plans from their Congress. Other issues were there prior to that, there was some correspondence, etc. and some situations flared up after the lWA Congress, when delegates were angry that CNT reform did not pass and some started making plans, discussing leaving, etc. The main documents to be considered thus came from FAU themselves and also their decisions from their last Congress are there for all to read and consider. We are certain that these are authentic documents and have been submitted by them and are transparent.

Other documents, for example a report saying what the situation in Poland is, was compiled from online sources of said other organization which could be verified by all. The documents and even the translation was verified by FAU so they do not doubt the authenticity.

Since l think nobody doubts the authenticity of these things, the question was not to gather information and check facts, but to look at the facts and positions presented and interpret.

Commissions should serve another situation: for example, in the case you mentioned, we are asked by one side of the split to do this and present the material for assessment.

So l hope that explanation was clear enough.

About your theory that the lWA will split into unions and not unions – you may have your definition of a union that does not agree with mine, but l do not think this is exactly the divide. My union is a union which will not be in that split faction. Other organizations which have some union activity, albeit it sometimes modest, or sometimes they want to call themselves an „initiative”, may do this or that – l don't know. But you can see which way it will probably go.

I can say more about unions and union activity another time. I am not avoiding discussions but actually, it is a busy time for my union and l am not gonna jerk real working struggles around to spend hours discussing „the class” or whatever.

To answer one of your questions, Jim: currently there are 5 or 6 sections with more than 100 people, although l say 5 or 6 because the status is not clear for the last – we are waiting on their latest dues and l think they will be under 100 this time. That said, from these, not all have paid for their members. For 2 years now my section is the largest dues paying section – since our contributions exceeded both CNTE and USl put together. That's not because they are smaller than us.

Dues problems with the CNTE go back since 2010. lt is not related to the FAU situation, it is related to the ideas of CNTE. Recently they are not in good standing – in other words, they haven't paid their dues for a couple of years. It is not the first time, but in the past, unions of the CNTE managed to get the Treasurer to pass their money on.

In some organizations, including the CNTE, the Treasurer or Secretary is allowed, after the elapse of a certain time, to remove an organization from the list of entitlement to vote.

In the lWA, this was not regulated exactly before. The ZSP was quite distraught at some lack of regulations and proposed that the Secretary not be able to set dues discounts – but it should be done by Sections and that if any organizations are not in good standing, that the disaffiliation not be autonomatic, but go to Congress. The question of the affiliation is automatically put on the Congress agenda.

We think this is not only very normal in any organization but also fairer. Enough of that, the fact is, the question of CNT's affiliation comes up on the agenda in December – and the dues issue, as l said, comes from 2010, although they eventually paid a number of times.

For a reality check – a Section (CNT) which hasn't paid dues, before that lowered their dues, is coming to a Congress where their affiliation – a very serious matter – should be discussed. At the same time, they are coming to the same Congress which should discuss their situation with a proposal. That proposal is addressed to the other Sections, which are in good standing and generally adhere to the rules and it is like this: you should not be in the new lWA if you do not agree with us. It doesn't matter if you are a union or not – it matters if you agree with our vision. If you don't agree, too bad, we are making a refoundation with those what agree. (Doesn't matter if any of them are in bad standing either.)

So, that is basically the gist of it.

CNT feels justified in that and in 2010 sent their ideas which basically amount to if you pay more, you should have more voting weight. So of course Sections can think about philosophies of „democracy” or „libertarian communism” or postulates like „from each according to his needs”. Folks being not in the lWA can have fun discussing this and the implications of withholding dues as a method of protesting decisions, etc. But it is for us to decide whether we want to be a normal federation working in accordance with mutually agreed principles or some pathology where issues like this have become more commonplace.

However another thread in this was that when all CNT members pay their dues, part is automatically allocated to the lWA and the Treasurer needs to send this: this is a statutory obligation. And there were some years that unions of the CNT paid and were astounded to find out that the Treasurer did not send the money. So we receive complaints about this, not from any expelled unions, but the unions of the CNT. We could spend a lot of time making an investigation, but one fact is clear – the dues weren't paid.

It doesn't take any big investigation or commission, because it is again enough to read CNT's own organic documents and decisions and to decide about this at the Congress.

What else can l answer? Yes, the eternal questions of „bans” always come up. Members of the lWA who haven't familiarized themselves with a certain report can get it. There we see something interesting: FAU is told, by CNTE and USl that they will not be supported in the lWA if they have relations with CGT or USl-Roma.

Now, my assumption is that this is one of these behind the scenes agreements, you know, but the CNT trolls keep telling us that this doesn't happen and that the executives are actually delegates doing what thousands of cleaners have told them to do. So, maybe CNT decided that, maybe not. I will make no judgment.

Before some troll starts yelling about the lies, l am saying what is in the report and, given the accompanying docs and other things from FAU, l don't doubt this account, which was very thorough. But all affiliates can judge themselves.

FAU proudly tells us that they have never had relations with that other Spanish union … because CNT is its sister section.

OK, so some in the lWA are sister sections and are respected, some not. There is one attitude towards some, one towards others. It one case relations are vital for the class... but if we are talking of many times more workers, it is a matter of solidarity and friendship.

No probs, we are not big enough or sexy enough to earn this respect :-) We should remember this is all for the greater good of the class and, well, we cannot put any Sections above the good of the class, if l understand what Jim says. I really disagree with this, in fact l find it nonsensical, especially given the facts, but later for that.

The lWA agreements don't talk about bans, but about working through the affiliates when making contacts, etc., in that country. Which would mean, for example, that you discuss it and with respect for the local situation, you find some way. Because, l don't know if people read what l said, but you know, many people in our organization have all sorts of contact with people in that. You know, we do not „ban” our own people. But our own people know which people are OK and which people are not and which situations can be OK and which can help.

Now, to peel away the layer of pretense, little of this has to do with class or revolution but more of a great imagination.

This great imagination is mostly a lot of hot air though. And we see the consequences. One of the CNT trolls just was talking about how he thought the lWA was like billions of workers and he is just so angry it is not and he is disappointed. I am afraid this comes from this big cock syndrome that is so persuasive which people doing a lot of bragging about their size and little reality. But... lWA doesn't do this, this is only a problem of lack of reliable information on the local levels.

I am disgusted that for the last 6 years l have to hear people insult my comrades who are not as developed in that way. (Cause some of them are very developed in others.) I have been suffering these windbags for a long time. Now personally, and every single comrade who has talked more to me will know, l am very NOT into anarchosyndicalism being a theoretical movement. For this reason, l always talk to people and really, when l think any organization could do something better to develop practical activity, l say what and how and l like to show how it could be possible. But this „you are not a union”, „you are insignificant stuff”... just ugly. And often pretentious.

This is another long story, but besides the very differing ideas on some organizational issues, it looks clear that there are very differing ideas on some other issues and this is a deep divide.

Now you can hear anonymous trolls tell you it is all a lie.

zaczek

Militant-proletarian:

Yes, and the social history of a country does not matter. :D It does not matter that Spain has a history of a social revolution and Poland only has a history of nationalist uprisings. It has no impact whatsoever. No impact at all that all strains of left or worker ideas have been discredited in public imagination because of stalinist history. And no impact whatsoever that anticapitalism was seen as opposition in Western Europe and as part of the system in Eastern Europe.
Your ignorance is really impressive!

So what to do? Go for the masses and jump on the nationalist bandwagon? Nope, we can't do it. But some people will do it and I'm sure you will support them.

Yeah, right, I don't know why CNT is not making the Revolution now, as it seems revolutionary tradition is a natural thing that's in every Spaniard's veins. As a comrade said once, it seems that Bakunin was from Albacete. You know, in Spain most of people have no fucking clue about the CNT, social revolution or old battles, as there was something called dictatorship that killed or erased almost everything about this "tradition". The rest of your comments are just victim-like bullshit. I'm not talking about magic formulae for affiliation and of course I'm not so closed-minded to think that CNT is visionary and know how to do things. That's the CNT proposal, something to work TOGETHER, but you are on the defensive, 'cause you're no able to see far beyond what your leader says.

If we are an "union" or union wannabee with 5 members for 30 years, we're certainly doing something wrong. That's was the breaking that CNT faced only 7/8 years ago: are we an union which wants to fight against the capitalist structure by means of anarchosyndicalism? Or are we still sitting here discussing about commas in a document or looking for reformism anywhere (this is what your friends in Spain were actually doing for 20 years)?

So where's SolFed in all this?

I hope this doesn't end up with IWA sections tearing themselves apart over which IWA to go with, along the lines of the fall out from the original CNT split.

Historically, the CNT has a way of falling for reformism and recovering back again, so this is just one of their phases :-)

jura

So where's SolFed in all this?

At the last SolFed conference a comrade said the IWA situation feels a bit like walking in on your friend's family feud - everyone is angry and shouting at each other but you don't really understand what it's all about.

Mark.

I hope this doesn't end up with IWA sections tearing themselves apart over which IWA to go with, along the lines of the fall out from the original CNT split.

CNT split has nothing to do with this crap. Here we have an organization controlled by a minority which thinks this is a political maneuver agaist their anarcho-egoes. They are so "humble" that instead of fighting for getting more members and strengthening their sections, they prefer to go on with their mini social clubs waving flags and singing revolutionary songs. For fuck's sake, they are supposed to be unions, but they are nothing more than a bunch of jerks wanking off while thinking about the glorious era of social revolution.

CNT split has nothing to do with this crap.

Yes, fair enough. I was just wondering whether one inadvertent effect of all this may be internal strife in IWA sections that aren't clearly aligned with one side or the other. I witnessed this kind of thing after the CNT split and that's why it came to mind.

The truth is that is sad to rich this point, if some think that for CNT members was easy to take this decision, is wrong. Is hard to see how a section that has less than 8 years as member of IWA spend so much eford laying about other sections. However, as I said time will saw as what will happen.

Of course tomorrow I will answer akai new lies and manipulations. Interesting how she omit the main part of the info to try to throw rubbish to other IWA sections, great responsibility is demostrating this secretary.

Asked comradely and respectfully, can you please expand on this, eithetr in a PM or here. I'm not sure how this relates to the US at all

Appreciate it.

[quote=s.nappalos]. 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. quote]

Robot, I hear what you are saying about the past. Aside from the Australian ASF, the FAU stood by the WSA in 1999/2000. Not the CNT or anyone else in the IWA. I do not care to relive those memories and negative experiances here. But I am appreciative of comradeship of the FAU.

While I have long and fond memories of a number of FAUistas (going back to the 1970s), sometimes friends disagree.

Suffice it to say the IWA has had very serious problems for a long time and I think there is probably enough blame to pass around to all. Afterall, the CNT-AIT has always had a large role and place in the history of the IWA, by virtue of its size and historical place, for better or worse. And for decades comrades have agreed to go along with much of what it proposed. Sometimes to the negative of some of the Section's own internal politics. But those internal IWA agreements were reached in good faith and after internal debate and discussion and understandings.

My main "reaction" to the linked document is it seems to by-pass the internal sanctity of previous debates and discussions that I am more familiar with. It is a declaration of intent,
not of debate.

Having always been a member of a small section, I think maybe I have a different view of what its like to be in a small affiliate.

Perhaps my own feelings are colored by our participation in the "second wave" of post-WW 2 IWA growth. When the CNT was still underground, the USI barely exisiting and the bulk of other sections heavily made up of exiles nearing retiriring age. It was up to our small and scattered organizations of comardes in our late teens, and twenties, to carry out the hard task of rebuilding international anarchosyndicalism. We did not tire organizing pickets in support of CNT prisoners in Carbachel prison, of fighting against the garroting of Puig. we were excited, we were full of fire and inspired by the principles of the IWA, respect for the elders who were still holding the anarchosyndicalist torch alight. Our small groups begain the process of rebuilding and or building new organizations in England, France, Germany, Norway, the US and standing in solidarity with the FORA, the rebuilding USI, the underground Bulgarians and Spanish comrades. Our numbers small, our groups scattered, our membership young and generally inexperianced. But we fought on. Some sections were able to grow larger than others, some split some remained small but stable. nearlly all, large and small engaged in practical work of various sorts. And when an IWA Section needed solidarity,we stood in solidarity. And, yes, international solidarity picket lines mattered.

I can not speak about the smaller Sections that have been enagegd since the end of the 1990s and forward. What I can say that our Section, the WSA took expanding the IWA into the devloping south serious. It was at our iniative that contact was first dveeloped with the Bangladesh garment workers. Our initiative in opeining up and developing relations with the
Nigerian Awareness League.

These were not big section iniaitives,and my point being that small sections, can and will play constructive roles. Just because a local organization might numerically small, does not mean they do not or can not paly a constructive role. And, as with our comrades in larger sections and unions, we also take pride in our work.

Anyway, I was just going to write a small, short note. I guess this was somewhat a walk down memory lane,

Life is a circle, everything comes full circle, even within the life of our movement. So I will end with something the late CNTista construction worker and former IWA Secty. (Gorron) once told this then young and eager militiant: "We do things togther, not alone. We discuss internally, work together as brothers [sic]." Indeed, wise words.

no1:

Could you expand a bit on what you mean by extreme ideological purity?

I'm not going to answer that question because I don't want to get in a pissing match with anyone. Enough of that already here.

Well, this is odd but nice that syndicalist, although we disagree with some things about the lWA issue, very nicely puts in words what the majority of people in most lWA Sections feel.

l can add that l have been around for a long time too and literally l remember FAU just after it started. Well, that happens. Things grow or they don't. A lot of organizations that also once tried to do something disappeared. We once had Sections in Nigeria, Japan...

lnside the organizations that yell about small groups of friends, we have local groups which are quite tiny and do not carry on union activity. Robot, l checked that at last Congress your local group is still just 3 people, but you still participate vocally in the FAU. So l really wonder how that works, if you think you can play no productive role? Of course not.

And another thing, syndicalist talks about the CNT role as being "for better or for worse", but my opinion is that, despite the fact that they have considerable syndical activity, it has lately been the former. All this comes, ironically, at a time when there is more syndical activity in the lWA outside the bigger Sections than ever. Which should be seen as a positive development. But the more that goes on, we somewhere here more and more about how dare newer organizations play roles, etc. So, there is a large feeling among parts of the lWA that the CNT sees the organization as its and does not want to talk or listen to others as much as it wants to be able to decide all.

Frankly, we have had no real support from CNT in our syndical activity and have had to learn ourselves. l think that, whatever issues we may or may not have in our development, this has all been beneficial to us, because we learn to make our own way and can better determine strategies appropriate to all our realities.

Finally, there are many other issues here, but l am deeply disappointed in the fact that people chose to talk about these issues in this way and it shows a lot about what is really going on. The CNTExteriores person, well, she has been more active addressing libcom readership than she has been in talking to the rest of the lWA. l could discuss more about that but will let it go. As l said, and these are not "lies" like Melenas the troll says, we tried to bring important issues to the appropriate instances which are lWA plenaries and Congresses, which is the place to talk about these things and, very concretely, we set up an important discussion about our international policy, (2012) who we should be cooperating with, etc. etc. but as l said, the CNT did not delegate anybody or have decisions, for like a year and a half it did not even have an international secretary delegated, the FAU did not come or send any opinions on the topic, USl was there but didn't say a word. Later, organizations like CNT set about with their own plans.

This is non-functional.

This debate is here, and not sent by "exteriores" to the lWA for several reasons. First, it is meant for people like Juan Conatz and people outside the lWA to get excited at and applaud as another way for CNT to act in a powerful, pressure-exerting manner, not in a dialogue with the rest of the Sections. The vast majority of people in the lWA don't come here to discuss.

This type of forum is also very convenient for trolls like Melenas or Yepa who for years enjoy the comfort of such activity without writing their names. By contrast, in the lWA procedure, it is the Sections which send their opinions, not anonymous people. And the discussion is the discussion of the Sections - who are the ones who are bound by confederative agreements.

The lWA have had some basic confederative agreements for a long time and the issue of them is for lWA to discuss. The fact that this discussion is here is because, frankly, there are more people here from outside the lWA and even outside anarchosyndicalism than there are in the lWA and the CNT needs the people who don't like the lWA's modus operandi for moral support so they can go back and say "look! people support us!".

When they brought ideas to the lWA on the other hand, they got rejection and they cannot stand it because, being big, they are convinced they are right and everybody is wrong.

We can speak a lot as to unions now (but l have to go to work). :-) lt is clear that there is an issue with syndical work in the lWA and it goes better for some than for others. But as l have said elsewhere, this is not connected to voting because even if the lWA was a CNT dictatorship where they decided everything alone and the rest were just vassals, that would not do anything to improve the syndical activity in the places it needs. The reason is also because in all the years l have been, we haven't had the initiatives of syndical sections to act in a supportive mentoring way to promote syndical education.

Akai you wrote direct lies (is not the first time i told you other times, ones you erase a comment with one of your lies in this forum) about an IWA section in the forum, i tell to you and you call me Troll. Good way of working, ones again when someone doesn't say amen to you, you insult to him.

No trolling, no sock-puppeting
From Wikipedia: "a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion." Trolling is not allowed, and may lead to posts being deleted, users warned and persistent offenders banned.

I think you do not understand that you are the secretary of IWA that you represent to ALL the sections and that you cant be laying about a section. I never saw so irresponsible attitude.

Often people experience a bit of schadenfreude when we witness those in rival organisations tear themselves apart in an internecine dispute. I can't say i am experiencing that right now.

I find it tragic that when the working class are being subjected to new and intensive repression we turn in upon ourselves, blaming each other for what is a class impotence. I see it in my own party...the obsession with dotting the i and crossing the t , discussing ourselves more than we engage with fellow workers (an exaggeration - we have much more mundane reasons for our current relative inactivity)

I really have no idea what the root disagreements are about but in the interest of our class, i hope it is speedily resolved in a constructive and not a destructive manner and the IWA emerges the stronger. A split is only to be chosen if there are no other options, and i doubt very much that is the case.

Having had my say, i bow out of this thread.

In regard to the "sect" problem in the current IWA and the CNT's remedy in this discussion
see a critical review of Fighting for Ourselves: Anarcho-Syndicalism and the Class Struggle, on
Rebel Worker Vol.33 No.220 July-Aug 2014 on web site www.rebelworker.org
or do google search A-infos Rebel Worker Review of Fighting for Ourselves: Anarcho-Syndicalism and the Class Struggle and on the internet A-infos Rebel Worker Vol.35 No.1 Mar-April 2016
Review of "Living Anarchism: Jose Peirats and the Spanish Anarcho-Syndicalist Movement" by Chris Ealham. Published by AK Press. These reviews throw some light on this complex sect problem which is such a part of the so called anarchist/syndicalist milieus in particularly the Anglo world and elsewhere.

Just to say we're discussing this in Bristol solfed. I don't know what more to say.

The big issue of all this is that if the "big" groups of IWA leave, IWA will become very similar to all those radical left troskist XIIX internationals with 4 freaks per country, irrelevant, and that looks like a deal already done.
CNT has taken a decision, we all know that after FAU, USI would be next, and then CNT. CNT just didn´t want to wait for a long and painfull process.
For some of us it was a traumatic decission to take, but we saw no other option. I think all was more about feeling disrespected by this Secretariat, than any other thing.... no body want to stay in a place were you are being mistreated.

Once that was said... just getting back to normal live.... time CNT Local unions are going to spend in this will be very little. Decission has been taken, and honestly most of people doesn´t care much about IWA, for most members this is not a big deal, we all focus local, usually local unions doesn´t want to know much even about their own country federations, and most members see all this as stupid burocracy written by people with too much time to waste. Live will go on, new partnerships will appear and everybody should focus local. If you follow all this internal debates too much you finish totally feed up.

It doesn't seem like this is controversial at all on ALasBarricadas.

Well, if what Yepa so respectfully calls "sects" and "trots" are the ones who actually provided us with solidarity, we are perfectly fine sticking with them. Meanwhile, the self-aggrandizing folks never had time for trifles like actually helping someone out. So no tears will be shed.

Dues problems with the CNTE go back since 2010. lt is not related to the FAU situation, it is related to the ideas of CNTE. Recently they are not in good standing – in other words, they haven't paid their dues for a couple of years. It is not the first time, but in the past, unions of the CNTE managed to get the Treasurer to pass their money on.

Thats is half of the story, as secretary of IWA you have access to the payments of the sections and you can see that CNT was nearly the only one paying every month, the rest were paying ones every 2 years or when there was a IWA congress or plenary. CNT only made the same as the rest, but ones again you forget the part that you are not interested to explain.

Also you dont explain why CNT ask to reduce the quantity to pay. maybe the people should know that because there was an accident in a building of CNT en Elda (near Valencia) a historical member of CNT was nearly to die because the irresponsibility of the members of Elda union that continue using a building with structural problems that had to be sealed. the Man try to take the elevator but there wasn't and felt down inside. This accident that appear in all the region capitalist media destroying the image of CNT. of course this is in the court because the historical member of CNT didnt recover totally and now is very probable that CNT have to pay more than half million €
because this issue CNT had to cut a lot of expenses, because CNT-Elda even they were the responsible of this issue they where legally clean and also they never admitted any responsibility.

News Accident Historical CNT member in Elda

More recent news bout other issue in Elda

CNT ask for this reduce, but some sections and the IWA secretary started to put impediments, and at the end CNT decided to leave this issue to be decided by CNT congress.

the situation of USI is similar, USI has big economical problems because repression in the courts. Ask to pay less during a period and again the same issues as CNT.

When ever any body has a issue about payments, everybody understand them, but look like CNT and USI cant have economical issues.

In some organizations, including the CNTE, the Treasurer or Secretary is allowed, after the elapse of a certain time, to remove an organization from the list of entitlement to vote.

Maybe in other organizations is a decision of the secretary, in CNT is mandatory, the secretaries have to do what is approve by congress.

For a reality check – a Section (CNT) which hasn't paid dues, before that lowered their dues, is coming to a Congress where their affiliation – a very serious matter – should be discussed. At the same time, they are coming to the same Congress which should discuss their situation with a proposal. That proposal is addressed to the other Sections, which are in good standing and generally adhere to the rules and it is like this: you should not be in the new lWA if you do not agree with us. It doesn't matter if you are a union or not – it matters if you agree with our vision. If you don't agree, too bad, we are making a refoundation with those what agree. (Doesn't matter if any of them are in bad standing either.)

this had so easy solution... understand CNT problem and that´s all.

Now, my assumption is that this is one of these behind the scenes agreements, you know, but the CNT trolls keep telling us that this doesn't happen and that the executives are actually delegates doing what thousands of cleaners have told them to do. So, maybe CNT decided that, maybe not. I will make no judgment.

This is one of the big problems of IWA, every body thinks that have the right to put the nose in CNT agreements and say what is and what is not. Why you don´t explain to the people when you decided in your own witch CNT decisions you will attend and witch no? yes, we had to read that you do not attend a CNT decision because was taken in a way you don´t like. Since when an IWA secretary has the right to discriminate decisions according to their own opinion?

But has a easy solution, call trolls to the ones that remind you the way you act and that´s all.

Before some troll starts yelling about the lies, l am saying what is in the report and, given the accompanying docs and other things from FAU, l don't doubt this account, which was very thorough. But all affiliates can judge themselves.

Also all im saying is register, I remind you because maybe you want to call me again troll.

FAU proudly tells us that they have never had relations with that other Spanish union … because CNT is its sister section.

OK, so some in the lWA are sister sections and are respected, some not. There is one attitude towards some, one towards others. It one case relations are vital for the class... but if we are talking of many times more workers, it is a matter of solidarity and friendship.

Sadly you cant say the same, you had had contact and meetings with organizations in Spain that are not CNT, and you were asked about it in the last congress, but like always, no answer. Yes the same congress where there was a group of people usurping CNT and IWA name and you did nothing.

This great imagination is mostly a lot of hot air though. And we see the consequences. One of the CNT trolls just was talking about how he thought the lWA was like billions of workers and he is just so angry it is not and he is disappointed. I am afraid this comes from this big cock syndrome that is so persuasive which people doing a lot of bragging about their size and little reality. But... lWA doesn't do this, this is only a problem of lack of reliable information on the local levels.

Yes maybe is very funny for you when you realize that some sections lie about the number of members they have. Nice for you that you like the people to lie you.

As l said, and these are not "lies" like Melenas the troll says, we tried to bring important issues to the appropriate instances which are lWA plenaries and Congresses, which is the place to talk about these things and, very concretely, we set up an important discussion about our international policy, (2012) who we should be cooperating with, etc. etc. but as l said, the CNT did not delegate anybody or have decisions, for like a year and a half it did not even have an international secretary delegated, the FAU did not come or send any opinions on the topic, USl was there but didn't say a word. Later, organizations like CNT set about with their own plans.

I told you clearly witch are your lies, and your answer is to call me troll, you are funny. For example you try to use the fact that some unions didn't came to CNT congress to attack CNT and lie about the support that have the decisions. but when CNT because a matter of time can´t take a decision for a IWA meeting and at least send someone to be there, you use it again to attack CNT. you don´t have solution, what ever happens always give you the chance to throw rubbish. i Never see you saying anything about IWA decisions depending in how many sections take part in the meeting.

This debate is here, and not sent by "exteriores" to the lWA for several reasons. First, it is meant for people like Juan Conatz and people outside the lWA to get excited at and applaud as another way for CNT to act in a powerful, pressure-exerting manner, not in a dialogue with the rest of the Sections. The vast majority of people in the lWA don't come here to discuss.

You lie again, as i told you several times all CNT decisions of congress are public. this was send to the sections already. Let me repeat it again for you, maybe this time you are able to understand it, IS MANDATORY TO PUBLISH CNT CONGRESS AGREEMENTS. you can find all congress agreements in CNT website, after every congress.

This type of forum is also very convenient for trolls like Melenas or Yepa who for years enjoy the comfort of such activity without writing their names. By contrast, in the lWA procedure, it is the Sections which send their opinions, not anonymous people. And the discussion is the discussion of the Sections - who are the ones who are bound by confederative agreements.

The lWA have had some basic confederative agreements for a long time and the issue of them is for lWA to discuss. The fact that this discussion is here is because, frankly, there are more people here from outside the lWA and even outside anarchosyndicalism than there are in the lWA and the CNT needs the people who don't like the lWA's modus operandi for moral support so they can go back and say "look! people support us!".

This forum is perfect for you, you can say what ever you want about a section of IWA being the Secretary of IWA and nothing happens, you are not able to understand that the main part of the discussion is people of CNT giving answer to your lies and the accusations of reformist of one member of your union. we told you several times to stop to publish bullshits about CNT and you continue, now don´t come making your self the victim, because you are the responsible of this sow.

When they brought ideas to the lWA on the other hand, they got rejection and they cannot stand it because, being big, they are convinced they are right and everybody is wrong.

Is not a mater of size, is something several times explained, but doesn't mater, you are in possession of absolute truth, maybe if you were able to understand that maybe you are not always right, now we could be in other situation. is very easy for you to say CNT, FORA, USI, FAU are very bad and end of discussion. you do not stop not even a second to think that if more than 90% of IWA militants are really uncomfortable is because there is something that maybe is not going good, and you as secretary could have some responsibility.

I want to remember to Akai and all the rest that CNT is a IWA section with all the rights, and the congress didn't take a decision to leave IWA.

zaczek

Well, if what Yepa so respectfully calls "sects" and "trots" are the ones who actually provided us with solidarity, we are perfectly fine sticking with them. Meanwhile, the self-aggrandizing folks never had time for trifles like actually helping someone out. So no tears will be shed.

Really, good luck, one of the unions that you are speaking about is the one of Elda, that create the issue of CNT payments. other one had Akay a discussion with them some years a go and was very funny because they were not able to understand what Akai was saying and didn't finish very good the discussion. all for you.

akai

Now, my assumption is that this is one of these behind the scenes agreements, you know, but the CNT trolls keep telling us that this doesn't happen and that the executives are actually delegates doing what thousands of cleaners have told them to do. So, maybe CNT decided that, maybe not. I will make no judgment.

This is a clear comment that shows how admin: no flaming you're. As a IWA Sec. you should know you're supposed to be impartial, but you clearly take a position against the CNT majority and for few local unions which were expelled because they didn't respect the CNT statutes or have tried to boycott the organization work, among other things more serious. As a commissar you're doing a great job, congratulations. With this CNT proposal I thought you could change a little bit your sectarian views, but years and years acting for example like a Stasi agent in Germany, spying what the FAU (especially Berlin) does or not, determined to find whatever to expel the FAU, that is something you're used and you live for. As the comrade Yepa, I'll smile from ear to ear when you try to re-build the IWA with your taliban friends. You'll check that only a tiny bunch of no flaming will follow you.

Fine. Be insulting as much as you want. We'll see where it gets you.

Cheers

Hello,

I will try to read some parts of the CNT-E statement (the subject of this topic) and try to understand it.

In the second sentence, there is mentioned:

We believe that it is necessary to explain our position on the drift of our international, so that this internal situation can be made publically known in order to openly and quickly begin the process of its re-foundation.

I am surprised that CNT wants to re-found existing, running and functional organization, which regularly meet, which regularly brings decisions and which has functional mandated Secretariat, working groups and communication canals.
This is for me really strange.
Since I am around IWA I have seen that the only way how to change things in IWA is to raise a point to IWA agenda. I am sure, that this process is important to follow because this process is transparent.

However, CNT in their statement says:

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.
As a first step for these conferences, the CNT makes the following proposals as an organizational basis for the new IWA:

From this I clearly see, that CNT-E is trying to create new process (series of conferences and contacts which will lead to "congress") - out of the current process (agenda with clear points to be discussed which leads to Plenary or IWA Congress).

As a reason why CNT-E tries to do re-foundation via this new process is that the current one CNT-E understands as follows:

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.

I think I understand frustration of people from CNT-E, once per some time at the congress, these small sections together reject some of the CNT-E proposals prepared for Congress, especially those related to proportional voting.

I am also sometimes not satisfied when IWA reachs other decision than my organization wish or rejects our point on which we worked hard. But this is life in the international where historically 1 Section has 1 vote.

I am sure CNT-E knows very well, that if small sections will vote for proportional voting, they could just pack and go home, as all the decisions will be decided by CNT-E afterwards.
I am not in the position to say, that CNT-E (if proportional voting will become reality) will not be fair and wise to decide for the growth of IWA and anarchosyndicalism for sure, but I can see this as a big risk.

How could be better that one organization from one country might decide about for example 8 other organizaton from 8 different countries (with different culture, laws, economical and political situation, history of class struggle)? Where is the prouf that for example 3000 members of CNT-E (or 1 milion it does not really matter) will perfectly know what is important for for example 300 members from other sections?
What could prevent in this kind of situation that CNT-E will not kick-out whatever Section they do not like? Etc.

There is no answer to these questions.

To summary my conlusions about the CNT-E statement:

1. re-foundation is not possible as the IWA is normally functional
2. how the re-foundation should be done is unknown for current IWA processes
3. one of the main aim of CNT-E is proportional voting to be approved in re-founded IWA - this is against the current IWA statuses where 1 Section has 1 vote

Thanks.

Daniel

daniel dreveny

I think I understand frustration of people from CNT-E, once per some time at the congress, these small sections together reject some of the CNT-E proposals prepared for Congress, especially those related to proportional voting.

It's not a spoiled brat throwing a tantrum. For last years the CNT, USI and FAU have been trying to bring forth a serious union methodology beyond borders in order to have a real international capable of implementing an union activity and defending ourselves. The response from the minority is always the same: FAU and CNT seem to be reformist, then we are against them whatever they propose. The reason against is totally distorted: "democracy". Well it's funny because when voting system is on the table, number of affilitiation is not important, but for member dues number is important. So where is the bloody equality when some tiny sections controlled everything. If you aren't willing to build a strong international with us, so piss off! End of story.

I am also sometimes not satisfied when IWA reachs other decision than my organization wish or rejects our point on which we worked hard. But this is life in the international where historically 1 Section has 1 vote.

This is system was logic when the IWA had sections with thousands of members in their respective countries, where they had more or less influence. Today what we have... Nothing. Even the CNT is insignificant, but its strategy in Spain is giving positive results. The CNT is able to stop dismissals and mass dismissals, or able to force employers to reinstate fired workers. Do you think this is magic? No, since Cordoba congress everything has changed, because there are people who developed an union strategy and methodology that works. How do you pretend to bring about a big conflict with lawyers and other means against, for example, a labour force adjustment plan or other complex legal stuff if this is certainly reformism for the IWA minority? With flags and flyers, then a picture with faces covered? IWA Secretariat position is clear, they support a bunch of functional illiterates who were controlling the CNT for 20 years as if it was a social club, but fortunately who were kicked out.

If you live in happy fantasy with a "functional" IWA like that, so go on. We will continue anyway with you or without you.

So tell me Proletarian, how has this strategy been working out for you? Relying on court cases almost exclusively, signing up people without caring if they ever show up at a meeting again, pushing the numbers up that way. Any major wins using this bright new and shiny methodology? Clearly not. This is a way of building a mainstream union, so why not join the bigger verdi, since principles don't matter anymore and that would be "less sectarian" and give you bigger SIZE.

I will not start to comment the CNT proposal concerning the IWA because I do not feel this to be my business. Nor will I put my hands into this sometimes bizarr flame-war. Yet I would like to add some aspects concerning the background that eventually led to the CNT proposal.

In my understanding what is happening in and to the IWA now is the result of an error the IWA comitted about 25 years ago when the IWA decided to chose the minority faction of a split in the French IWA section and hence to kick-off the vast majority of its French members. At the time this was a close run with many of the sections cowardly abstaining.

That decision on the French split from my point of view was a turning point after more than two decades of positive development for the IWA in the 70th and 80th.

- It disposed the IWA of one of its most agile and fastes growing sections.

- It eventually disposed the IWA that until then from its beginning had been an international of anarcho-syndicalist AND revolutionary syndicalist organizations of its revolutionary syndicalist origins.

- It was the beginning of constant attacks against the autonomy of the sections by several attempts to cut their strategical and tactical liberty and to impose limitations on them that where considered „truely anarcho-syndicalist“ by a majority of sections.

- It came along with severe faction fightings within the Spanish CNT. As a result the then IWA secretary was forced by his own section to resign because he was too much in favour of the revolutiontary syndicalist CNT-F faction. He was then replaced by obedient followers of the dominant Granada / SOV Madrid faction within the CNT. Even worse, later that faction imposed G.R. as secretary general of the IWA. While many in Spain where quite happy that he found a new playground, for the IWA he turned into a catalyzer for aggravating every potential and actual conflict there was within the international. For many of the younger IWA members who had learned much from the CNT exile, it was very sad and repellent to see, that the dominant CNT faction tried to kick-off the exile just because their children and grandchildren played an active part in the rise of the French CNT and therefore fall out off the Alhambras favour.

- It damaged the perception of the IWA as an international of anarcho-syndicalist unions. Beside the Spanish CNT (though on its knees with little more than 2.000 members at the time) and USI, the CNT-F was the only section that was able to get into job-floor struggles. The rest of us were either trying to get a stand at the job-floor or were quite happy with remaining an anarcho-syndicalist propaganda group and enjoying the possibility to discuss theory and history with others around the world. With the fatal decision we lost a revolutionary syndicalist union and kept a hopelessly divided French network of anarcho-primitists on the one hand and people-assemblyists on the other that split again some years later. While the history of the French IWA sections has been repeating as a farce, the damage was done and it had major impacts on the development - or better setback - of the IWA.

- It poisened the climate within the IWA ever since. As I wrote earlier, the decision concerning France was a close one with many sections abstaining. The FAU that voted against the expulsion of the vast majority of our French comrades, did never accept that decision and thus got into the crosslines of the Alhambra and their allies within the sections and friends of the IWA groups (some of them nothing more than a couple in the civils registry sence, like in Switzerland). Others that as well felt uncomfortable with the decision kept silent though it did not prevent them from getting victims of the next which hunt.

As for the (still) IWA section I am member of (the FAU), we had constant discussions over the past 20 years whether it is of any use for us to stay in the IWA or not. We had several congress decisions on whether we should wait if something changes for the better, whether we should leave it or whether we should wait until we get kicked-out. The votes where different now and then, but we never decided either to leave and neither to come crawling and beg for mercy at the gates of the Alhambra.

Over the years the situation within the IWA improved somewhat. The Spanish CNT recovered based on the job-floor. The balance of power within the CNT changed. People were happy about solidarity when they got into conflicts with multinationals. For us it was a great experience when we picketed PLUS discount shops in some 50 towns all over Germany after a comrade in Sevilla had been kicked off at a local PLUS store there. Same goes for PFERD-Rueggeberg with their lay-offs at Barcelona and our pickets at the German corporate HQ and at trade-fairs where they showed off. That gave us and the Spanish comrades a taste of what international solidarity could be like once we would stop beating us upon the IWA statutes or the NSF spotting the latest secret SAC plans for a parallel international with their camouflage submarine in Stockholm harbor or their wiretap device at what SAC office so ever. Same goes for the USI who had kept rather calm for long until they got under insane fire by one of the micro-sections that shortly after declared that they do no longer consider themselves to be anarcho-syndicalist and dispersed themselves into the big void.

As some of you may know, we (the FAU), are still a quite small anarcho-syndicalist organization and have made little more than our first attempts to walk on the job-floor within the past few years. Nevertheless we sextupled our membership since the early 1990s and I guess we are now number three in membership of IWA sections after the Spanish CNT, the USI and ahead of SolFed. With the increase in membership, the struggles, the consultations for our fellow-workers, the sometimes fierce response of the bosses lawyers, the integration of many comrades that joined us from Spain, Greece, France and other countries following the 2008 economic crisis, our focus has shifted somewhat. Our discussions are less on principles and history but more on practical issues, on how to integrate new members, on how to educate ourselves, on how to defend our members etc.

That said our attitude towards the IWA changed quite a bit within the past few years. For many long-standing members like me, the IWA was a point of reference for many years. Something to - for historical reasons among others - fight for - even against all odds. For many of my younger comrades the situation is quite different. They are mostly looking for practical solidarity in the class-war, for an exchange of experiences, for common action across borders. They do not understand why they should not cooperate on different levels with other syndicalists (with or without the anarcho-prefix) just because the IWA consideres those organizations to be its enemies or because something went wrong with the "sexo de los angeles". Neither do they understand the organizational concept of the IWA (with its one country - one section, one section - one vote, communication through the sections secretariates etc.) because for them it is something that might have been suitable for the 19th century but they doubt whether international cooperation amongst revolutionary and anarcho-syndicalists in the 21 century needs lods of formalities like this at all. And maybe they are pretty right with their attitude!

For most of us in the FAU the IWA has no longer been a very important issue for the last years. The IWA secretariat did us the favor to cut us off all internal communication the day they decided to put us into suspension until the extraordinary IWA congress (was it in december 2016?) should kick us out. Many of us considered this as a means of environmental protection because it saved the life of quite some trees that must not die for the paper to circulate IWA documentation within the FAU membership. And as we were alowed to stop paying dues to the IWA after we have been suspended (I guess we had been among the few sections who were in good standing for many years) we have funds for other international projects. You could call that a win-win-situation.

With the proposal of the Spanish CNT it is manifest that the IWA is in a very difficult situation. The ones who check the IWA sections websites may have noticed that this weekend the USI is meeting for an extraordinary congress at Parma with the IWA question being the only topic on the agenda. Without being able to predict the result of that congress, my impression is that the IWA might lose 90 to 95% of its membership by the end of this year because the three major sections (in terms of membership) are either about to refocus or to be kicked-out. I am not at all happy about this because I appreciate the efforts and advances some of the IWA sections made within the past few years - I am thinking of SolFed and ZSP in particular (Laure no need to comment something concerning FAU and IP - this is my personal opinion). But I can perfectly understand why CNT, USI and most of my comrades in the FAU are "hasta los cojones" and have lost any hope that something within the IWA might change for the better with all those wisenheimers at Moscow, Belgrade, Oslo and a some other places.

sin mas

robot

For last years the CNT, USI and FAU have been trying to bring forth a serious union methodology beyond borders in order to have a real international capable of implementing an union activity and defending ourselves.

I think people would be very interested in this serious methodology that - as it seems the your post above - was rejected by the evil sects. I remember there were some interesting ideas, but I would say that those that were approved by the IWA were rather drfats, ideas. To implement them, it would need input from sections. And correct me if I am wrong, but it is natural top expect that those who porpose things would take the active part in helping to make these ideas implemented in practice. What did the CNT and the camp do? Well, readers, let them be honest and tell it publically. Let's which what type of narrative they will use then.

People think that this is about some evil secretariat or some lazy fucks with no idea what to do, just being happy to be with the IWA and opposing everything that is serious, meaningful etc. etc. I guess only because they are bad and rotten. This is what the CNT and the camp try to sell. I am sorry for those who buy this... The truth is, that it is just a simple narrative to make a complex issue to be acceptable by as many people as possible. I was shocked to see how this methodology works with people and how it really brainwashes them (not only in Spain). It uses the fact that people are tired of conflicts and don't need to spend time with someone else's bullshit and brings it to another level - having power over them to smoothly proceed with the re-launch. First in Spain, then elsewhere. Many people think it is a step forward. Well, that depends on your political mindset (not the label you give to yourself). I don't see anything anarchosyndicalist about it.

The current IWA is a no ideal, no organization or federation is. But despite all the bullshit and ignorance that comes from the part of some sections that now suddenly want to "re-launch the IWA", there is a hard work on side of many sections to fight with the realites that are structurally not so welcome for anarchosyndicalist activities in their regions as are for example for the CNT. There is no equal starting point, this is ridiculous. But only blind can't see that there are sections that really want to help each other and non-IWA organizations to find the best starting points respecting the differences in the countries. And only blind can't see that the "re-launch" forces are those that have been systematically refusing to participate in such activities. And what about those who are not blind and are part of this power game? Time will tell. Let's see who teams up with them and on what grounds.

Well this is why the cnt, fai and and just about anyone else supposedly supporting the working class on behalf of anyone else should be fucked off.

It's time to make a new start...

Sleeper, to avoid getting myself a flame warning from the admins, let's just say I wholeheartedly suggest you take a bit of your own advice from that last post.

USI is holding an 'extraordinary congress' today and tomorrow to discuss the IWA.

http://www.usi-ait.org/index.php/appuntamenti/40-parma/1122-parma-congresso-straordinario-usi-ait

[quote]

Parma: Congresso straordinario USI-AIT

Il congresso straordinario si svolgerà a Parma il 9 e 10 aprile, presso la sede di via Testi 2.

Sabato dalle ore 13 accrediti (a tal proposito tutte le sezioni devono essere in regola coi pagamenti per l'anno 2015, potranno farlo in occasione del congresso) e alle ore 14.00 inizio.

Si dà mandato alla C.i. di invitare CNT e FAU.

L'odg del congresso è il seguente:

a) situazione internazionale AIT:
b) analisi e valutazione attuale AIT;
c) decisione se e come continuare l'esperienza dell'attuale AIT;
d) quale prospettiva anarcosindacalista perseguire sul piano internazionale e con chi.

zaczek

So tell me Proletarian, how has this strategy been working out for you? Relying on court cases almost exclusively, signing up people without caring if they ever show up at a meeting again, pushing the numbers up that way. Any major wins using this bright new and shiny methodology? Clearly not. This is a way of building a mainstream union, so why not join the bigger verdi, since principles don't matter anymore and that would be "less sectarian" and give you bigger SIZE.

I don't know what your're talking about. Who is relying on court cases or signing up people just because? You know what, you're so ridiculous and ignorance that think this strategy is new. The CNT is just carrying out a strategy decided in the 70's, but due to the split and then the illiterated talibans it was never developed. Don't worry because only with flags and flyers you're making the revolution, the rest is just reformism or bourgeois legal stuff.

Sleeper

Well this is why the cnt, fai and and just about anyone else supposedly supporting the working class on behalf of anyone else should be fucked off.

It's time to make a new start...

Internal tension and strife has basically always been a feature of not just the CNT, but essentially every revolutionary organization that I've ever heard of. I've not heard of one yet that has messiah-nistically risen above this, because people and organizations are not perfect. Your post comes off as naive and annoying as fuck - you gonna make some org with perfect harmony and unwavering working-class orientation? Go for it, it'll just be you, a bottle of Mountain Dew and some cheeto-dust on your fingers fucking off on facebook. Anyways, sometimes the strife represents real concern over direction, and the situation needs to unfold (honestly not a commentary on the current IWA situation, don't know enough about meself). All this said, I of course find this situation regrettable, but alas, this isn't new and it certainly does not make a case against revolutionary union organization.

Should also be noted that while sideline heckling internet assholes are attracted to IWA drama like a fly to shit - IWA sections (including the CNT) are primarily involved / busy in their particular organizing initiatives and it is this work that I think should take precedent in sideliners judgement of how 'worthwhile' it all is.

edit - I wanted to clarify that I'm a big supporter of new initiatives and organizations (I think this is symptomatic of the health of a broader tendency) in a general sense - my issue is with Sleepers implied suggestion that internal strife negates the actual work of an organization or that there could be some org in perfect harmony etc. etc.

my issue is with Sleepers implied suggestion that internal strife negates the actual work of an organization or that there could be some org in perfect harmony etc. etc.

To be honest Booze, I think you're giving Sleeper's post more credit than it deserves...

To be fair it was an angry comment directed at organisations that suppose to represent the working class in some way. Be that union organisation in the workplace or community organisation. Or the likes of the CNT that like to claim both for themselves.

Show me, direct me to where the working class, the proletariat, us, have been given credit for anything positive in say the last 20 years?

Chilli Sauce

my issue is with Sleepers implied suggestion that internal strife negates the actual work of an organization or that there could be some org in perfect harmony etc. etc.

To be honest Booze, I think you're giving Sleeper's post more credit than it deserves...

I've got a few thoughts on this

1) I like a lot of the sentiments in the CNT's proposal - fairer representation of big sections (a few hundred dictating to a few thousand people is not democracy), and more autonomy for sections (that's what we're meant to be all about, right?). I think it could go further and be clearer on the autonomy front - but maybe that's a project for the future.

2) The proposal says nothing about dispute resolution - between sections or between sections and officers. In a lot of ways, this is surely the KEY thing we need to improve about international organisation. I don't agree with suspending the FAU but in fairness, that was the only action open to the secretariat to take and they were the only people in the IWA empowered to do anything it (whether anything was wrong in the first place - I'll leave that for later). There needs to be a process for sections to sort out issues between themselves before it gets to the whole international - this would ensure all members of those sections know what is going on first, which I doubt was the case at the time FAU was suspended. I think that with some kind of mediation between the FAU and the ZSP this could have all been resolved years ago. The other thing missing during disputes is the facts - we got the allegations and the FAUs response piecemeal as a result of letters from the different sections that were circulated around the international. That's crazy! Most rank-and-file members still have an incomplete understanding of what happened and yet are asked to vote on the response. A process which starts with an attempt at mediation before it goes before the international would mean we'd start off knowing a lot more and with the issues already laid out in a structured way. A better process would also explain what facts should be presented, how long sections have to respond to allegations, and what format it should take.

3) What has happened here in my opinion is that something initially wrong (some FAU members organising with a union the ZSP had fallen out with - which was not very solidarity-like, whatever the technicalities of it are), got escalated beyond proportion by crap processes and overreaction. I don't think it was good to suspend the FAU for this, the way the facts and allegations were presented was unhelpful to members, and having the suspension ratified by a minority of the IWA membership was totally undemocratic. And then on top of that - the CNT organises a split and releases a communique that exaggerates and makes accusations. "Sections that only exist on the internet" I mean, come on! The ZSP does great work on the ground, and the statement implies they do worse than nothing.

4) For the record, I don't agree with one section, one country, one vote - I think that is too restrictive and mirrors the divisions created by capitalism (is it a coincidence that the two sides in this fall-out are roughly Western vs Eastern Europe???). If we can't work with people we disagree with then we might as well give up! And the fact that sections of an international right now are totally failing to disagree in a constructive way makes me wonder if the whole project is a waste of time. In SF things got a bit nasty a few years back but we made some changes and since then the organisation feels like it is steadily getting better structured, more effective, and more mature. I hope that the same can happen in the IWA following this dispute....

I have my differences with anarcho-syndicalism, the IWA, etc, but this falling out is really sad to see. I hope it can be resolved one way or another.

Admin snip: off-topic flaming deleted.

ciao,

a longer article on the recent development of the cnt from comrades in spain. they analyse the role of 'lawyers' and other professionals within the cnt and the most recent agreements the cnt has signed. their criticism of the cnt is not 'ideological', in the sense of complaining about betrayed anarchist principles, but from a proletarian perspective: what is a 'class union'...?

sorry, no time to summarise the article, nevertheless thought it might be of interest...

https://elsalariado.info/2016/04/07/entre-el-fraude-y-las-finanzas-el-nuevo-modelo-sindical-de-la-cnt/#_ftnref4

militant-proletarian

I don't know what your're talking about. Who is relying on court cases or signing up people just because?

You know very well what I'm talking about and there is no mistake in telling who you are and where we met.

The IWA Secretariat has published the following statement:

http://www.iwa-ait.org/content/publication-cnt-spain-regarding-iwa

It's amazing how people trust something they have heard, something someone told them, something read in Facebook or a defamatory and liar article from the bunch of guys from "El Salariado". Lot of people trust all these things, even if it's a completely crazy thing.

Everything can be credible except the sovereign decision of an organization of thousands of persons.

The original CNT, the one founded in 1910 and not named "anarchosindicalyst", the one from the revolution, had salaried workers in the newspaper Solidaridad Obrera (they even did a strike against the CNT!!). Today CNT doesn't have "liberados" as "El Salariado" says, CNT pays people for doing some concrete work, as it has always in history done, like economists or lawyers. When you have big struggles of hundreds of workers involved against, for example, the closure of a factory you may need professionals who can turn down the technical arguments from the bosses, this technical work, as a work, it could be paid.

CNT doesn't pay people for doing "syndicalism" or for having any charge in the organization.

AngryWorkersWorld

ciao,

a longer article on the recent development of the cnt from comrades in spain. they analyse the role of 'lawyers' and other professionals within the cnt and the most recent agreements the cnt has signed. their criticism of the cnt is not 'ideological', in the sense of complaining about betrayed anarchist principles, but from a proletarian perspective: what is a 'class union'...?

sorry, no time to summarise the article, nevertheless thought it might be of interest...

https://elsalariado.info/2016/04/07/entre-el-fraude-y-las-finanzas-el-nuevo-modelo-sindical-de-la-cnt/#_ftnref4

The person that write this article doesn't know anything about CNT (not exactly knows that CNT is his enemy). First of all this website is close to a comunist party PCI (bordiguistas) that was kick out of Solidaridad Obrera.

about SO, and the split of PCI-SUT

What is SUT

after putting in context this, the text put as main example 3 conflicts and agreements. 2 of them where sign bay unions that are critics with X and IX congress of CNT. This leave clear that the website doesnt know any thing about CNT and the only thing that is looking for is to criticize CNT with what ever they find in internet. Nothing new, no body give a shit about them in Spain and the only way they found to apear in the photo is by throwing shit to others.

also if you check the website you can find some text were they give support to the CNT tendency of the 20´s that wanted CNT to join the Comunist International, Nin, Mauri etc. that they will finish first in the PCE and then Nin in POUM.

If you read the text in it makes a critic to the "secciones sindicales" and give support to the elections of the works council (of course SUT goes to elections).

The rest of the text is a mix of what ever they find in internet to speak bad a bout CNT. im not going to loose too much time in this text that is not more than a bullshit wrote by obsessive people and the reason that is moving throw FB is that make copy paste about some text of unions that left CNT (funny that some people share it when the main thing that do the author is use them to criticize them).

But what is the main reason of this text that some stupid from CNT are sharing? very easy, there is a conflict in a company cal UDON and both unions CNT and SUT have people in it.

Strike in UDON CNT Barcelona

Note of SUT in UDON

Please be careful with the kind of text we share.

zaczek

So tell me Proletarian, how has this strategy been working out for you? Relying on court cases almost exclusively, signing up people without caring if they ever show up at a meeting again, pushing the numbers up that way. Any major wins using this bright new and shiny methodology? Clearly not. This is a way of building a mainstream union, so why not join the bigger verdi, since principles don't matter anymore and that would be "less sectarian" and give you bigger SIZE.

Is too much to spend hours and hours with banners and pamphlets in conflicts and then came a guy from Poland to tell as that we don´t do what we do, and that we are reformist.

Why you invent that we don´t use direct action or is secondary for as? When the people came to the union to join it, what we have to do is reject them? make them a exam to verify they are pure anarchy blood? i´m anxious to know how you face this issue. about the conflicts, when a company close what you propose, to go to the company to make direct action? oh! wait, there is no company any more. Or you are telling to as that we have to forget to go to the court and only use direct action? (no CNT union do that, not even your friends that tell you bullshits about CNT, all the conflict that CNT ask for solidarity are also in the court) what do you do when a company close and fire all the workers because doesn´t want to have CNT workers in his company? or when a company close during a conflict? yes all this things happens, and not 1 or 2 times.

the people join CNT and are invite from the first day to take part in CNT live, we send to all of the all the information about the union and try hard to make them take part in it, but not everybody do it. maybe you are thinking that we hunt them and obligate them to join the union to have more votes.

armin.tamz

Today CNT doesn't have "liberados" as "El Salariado" says, CNT pays people for doing some concrete work, as it has always in history done, like economists or lawyers.

It's a sign of the times. Even paid union bureaucrats have fake salfemployment contracts.

melenas

when a company close what you propose, to go to the company to make direct action? oh! wait, there is no company any more. Or you are telling to as that we have to forget to go to the court and only use direct action?

I was answering "proletarian" so obviously i referred to his section. Regarding your question, the last time we were dealing with a bankrupt company, we occupied the office of the liquidator. Guess what, it worked and people got paid.

zaczek

melenas

when a company close what you propose, to go to the company to make direct action? oh! wait, there is no company any more. Or you are telling to as that we have to forget to go to the court and only use direct action?

I was answering "proletarian" so obviously i referred to his section. Regarding your question, the last time we were dealing with a bankrupt company, we occupied the office of the liquidator. Guess what, it worked and people got paid.

So, when a company close you accepted it and only ask for some money, you accept that the company destroy work places for their on benefit. Good worker class positioning. In CNT we prefer to prove that the company lies and can't close, so they have to take back the workers. That's the main strategy of CNT, defense the work and do not let the company to destroy it.

But look like this strategic for you is reformist.

melenas

the people join CNT and are invite from the first day to take part in CNT live, we send to all of the all the information about the union and try hard to make them take part in it, but not everybody do it. maybe you are thinking that we hunt them and obligate them to join the union to have more votes.

Yeah, that's why there are several syndicates on CNT with lots of affiliates and not even 10% are militants. One example: SOV Valencia, 180 declared affiliates but their assemblies only brings twelve people. They have a coordinator for a conflict which affects several regions (Servicarne) and there's no worker of the corporation in that coordinator.

The fact is most of the "big" syndicates on CNT are affiliating workers for getting benefits of their fees (collected by bank all months even if the worker has not been seen in the syndicate for months) and for having more votes.

armin.tamz

It's amazing how people trust something they have heard, something someone told them, something read in Facebook or a defamatory and liar article from the bunch of guys from "El Salariado". Lot of people trust all these things, even if it's a completely crazy thing.

And we should believe the fanboys of CNT, whose only tactic is denying all and saying it's all a conspiracy of the enemies of CNT, on a way that remembers the old excuses of USSR? I've seen the fanatics of CNT denying again and again the fact that CNT take part on syndical elections in Sevilla, even with an internal investigation comission proving it true. The answer of CNT? To expel the accusers arguing that they were making non-proven accusations.

You have no more credibility.

The original CNT, the one founded in 1910 and not named "anarchosindicalyst", the one from the revolution, had salaried workers in the newspaper Solidaridad Obrera (they even did a strike against the CNT!!).

That's exactly why CNT should not have any worker. When you exercise an employer role, you will have to act like any other employer, exploiting your workers and becoming your own enemy. But it seems that the modern CNT has decided to copy all the bad things of the old CNT, not the good ones, because now CNT has several people (one of them, the wife of the general secretary of CNT) living by the fees of the workers and they're even thinking on raising the fees to give more money to this unnecesary office...

mntg

melenas

the people join CNT and are invite from the first day to take part in CNT live, we send to all of the all the information about the union and try hard to make them take part in it, but not everybody do it. maybe you are thinking that we hunt them and obligate them to join the union to have more votes.

Yeah, that's why there are several syndicates on CNT with lots of affiliates and not even 10% are militants. One example: SOV Valencia, 180 declared affiliates but their assemblies only brings twelve people. They have a coordinator for a conflict which affects several regions (Servicarne) and there's no worker of the corporation in that coordinator.

The fact is most of the "big" syndicates on CNT are affiliating workers for getting benefits of their fees (collected by bank all months even if the worker has not been seen in the syndicate for months) and for having more votes.

Servicarne? Please do not lie, the coordinator is worker of that company, i go farther he had to change the place where he has living because the company move him as a way of repression. i know him personally.

so you defend to reject workers that wants to join CNT. Maybe you forget that CNT is not a affinity group, is a workers union. Also is tired to have people speaking about the reality of unions that they are not part of and they doesn't know a shit about them. i listen things about my lokal union wrote in internet that have nothing in common with reality, but if you like to lie about other unions to try to defend your position, perfect, all yours.

And we should believe the fanboys of CNT, whose only tactic is denying all and saying it's all a conspiracy of the enemies of CNT, on a way that remembers the old excuses of USSR? I've seen the fanatics of CNT denying again and again the fact that CNT take part on syndical elections in Sevilla, even with an internal investigation comission proving it true. The answer of CNT? To expel the accusers arguing that they were making non-proven accusations.

You have no more credibility.

I´m still waiting that list of members of CNT that take part in elections, because the only time that had happen that the people was expelled from CNT. Please provide this info to your union because we are interested in it. like always is more nice to throw shit in internet that to put the facts on paper and give them to know to the unions. maybe because the facts doesn't exist, ones again.

I like when the CNT haters use a text of the bordiguistas of SUT to attack all the organization, you leave clear your level and your total ignorance about the union.

To the comrades of the IWA: CNT has blackmailed you, CNT is making sabotage against you by no paying to the IWA (even having more than enough money), CNT is defaming you on public and now CNT wants to replace you with a parallel reformist IWA. Are you gonna do annything about that?

In their last congress, CNT discussed the idea of making and ultimatum for IWA: "if the IWA doesn't approve our voting system and all of our demands, we will leave the IWA". There was another proposal: to "relaunch" the IWA, which is an euphemism of making a parallel IWA. The results of the votes were 42% first option, 50% second option.

There were several syndicates which didn't take part of that Congress because they saw it was a sham, so they didn't vote that topic. There are also about 20 IWA-favorable syndicates expelled out of CNT. You're not losing your presence in Spain, there's people here defending the IWA, but CNT has declared a war against you and you have to take steps to confront this.

melenas

Servicarne? Please do not lie, the coordinator is worker of that company, i go farther he had to change the place where he has living because the company move him as a way of repression. i know him personally.

False. There's no worker of Servicarne in the coordinating group created, which also has pushed aside the comrades of Leon because Leon is a non-reformist syndicate (you talked about rejecting workers?). And about "rejecting workers", that's not the topic and I've never said that, what I say is that some of the "big" syndicates of CNT are not doing any effort to getting implication of the workers because they don't want militancy, they only want money and votes. The best example: Sevilla, which declared almost 500 affiliates but an investigation comission confirmed only the existence of over 200.

I´m still waiting that list of members of CNT that take part in elections, because the only time that had happen that the people was expelled from CNT. Please provide this info to your union because we are interested in it.

CNT Sevilla, created a parallel syndicate (SAC) with people and resources of CNT, for getting CNT members inside the enterprise committee of AUSSA corporation, through the syndical elections. I can give you names: admin: personal information removed. Never reveal comrades' personal information on libcom, this is a warning ... There were no expulsions of those people, only temporal disqualification, but the comrades of Motril and several comrades of Sevilla were expelled for reporting the facts and confront the corruption of Sevilla.

Of course, now you will accuse me of publishing private information and even will try to delete this message. That's the eternal tactic: you say all is false, you challenge to prove it, and when someone makes it you charge him for making public "internal affairs". Well, you're defaming IWA on public, so you have to expect this.

The comrade that is the coordinator of the workers of servicarne use to live in miranda and be part that union, then move to vitoria because his company was located there. Then servicarne as an act of repression send him to work to a town near valencia and there continue the repression of the company, 3 comrades fired. He works in the company and you are not more than a liar that attack comrades that suffer repression because their sidicalist action to try to defend your position. MISERABLE.

I'm not attacking any of the workers of Servicarne. I've only said that no worker of Servicarne is member of the coordinating group, and that the coordinating group is monopolized by Valencia which is pushing aside the comrades of Leon because they don't agree with the idiosyncrasy of SOV Leon. Maybe you should learn to read, and stop making demagogy.

You say nothing about the corruption in Sevilla, tolerated and hidden by the rest of CNT? What a surprise...

You wrote that the coordinator is not from servicarne and now you say that the coordination group doesn't have workers of servicarne. Both are lies.

If the workers of CNT leon doesn't want to take part in the coordination is their decision. They can't obligate the rest to organize them selves how ever they want.

Maybe you should learn to read what you write and the meaning of what you write.

Lets finish first with this and then we will speak bout your friend pay by the right party of sevilla and the one of the communist party.

Sleeper, militant proletarian, serge forward: this is a warning for flaming. Akai, it's also unhelpful for you to just denigrate people as "trolls", and for others it unhelpful to personally insult Akai. For everyone on here, please follow our posting guidelines and address people's arguments and comments, not people individually.

Good posts by robot and Juan Conatz.

In terms of CNT members' criticisms of Akai, some of these are not valid. Trying to paint her or ZSP as people who don't do anything practical or exist only on the internet is clearly false, as those of us who are regular libcom readers at least will have followed for years all the great activities and fights they have been involved in. And we should acknowledge the incredibly difficult circumstances they work in in Eastern Europe.

The Spanish comrade who stated that the memory of social revolution in Spain was wiped out by Franco, sorry but that is just not true, and that's not how history works. Of course Franco's 37 year dictatorship had an impact. But then so did the Soviet dictatorship in Eastern Europe, which lasted much longer. And as the Eastern European comrades have pointed out: this dictatorship was in the name of the workers and communism, whereas the one in Spain was explicitly against this.

We are not starting from a level playing field. I mean come on, the CNT after the fall of the dictatorship in 1976 claimed to have 500,000 members. I'm not sure if any anarchist group in Poland has ever had more than 500 members, and certainly not in the past 40 years.

And as for the insults that Akai is "the worst secretary ever", this is also uncalled for. For starters no general secretary should have power to actually do anything harmful. Certainly it seems in her role she has done a lot to help some groups internationally, and elsewhere has followed out the mandate given to her, so cannot be held personally responsible for that. If like the CNT comrades are saying she really is so bad then why has she not been recalled by the membership?

That said, on the flipside Akai has made specific allegations against the CNT which people have stated are false. One in particular was that the CNT had more paid officials than the SAC. If this is not true, then I would agree that it is unacceptable for the general secretary of a federation to inaccurately defame one of the groups in it.

So is this true? Akai, how many paid officials do you state the CNT has, and what are they doing? Then people in the CNT can respond. Like I said above, I think this situation is very unfortunate. However it seems that something like this was unavoidably going to arise at some point. As robot pointed out, the requirement around communications to be carried out through individual sections in each country is completely bureaucratic and utterly unsuited for the modern world (if it ever was).

However it seems that various parties - particularly the CNTE and the USI - have wanted to keep this requirement to stop other sections communicating with their rivals (CGT and the loony fake USI).

So given that this silly rule exists, it does seem unfair that the ban on communication is enforced when it concerns rivals of the CNTE and USI, but not when it concerns rivals of ZSP. So while I may disagree with the suspension of the FAU, it certainly seems to have been done within the rules of the IWA.

I guess the current voting rules with one section 1 vote mean the CNT has been unable to get its way, so the only way it can is if it starts a breakaway IWA and changes the voting rules from the get go.

I think this is an unfortunate way to go. What would seemed more sensible would be to form a commission from across the International to try to come up with a mutually agreeable new voting formula, which can then be put to Congress.

I guess we'll see what happens. The biggest danger I think is if and effective split occurs in the IWA, and then national sections in each country split as well going with rival IWA factions. This could be disastrous, and affect real on-the-job organising in some countries.

Also I think a further danger is that if the "refounded" CNT IWA keeps ridiculous 19th-century rules on communication then these arguments are going to come up again.

Edited to add that yet another possible issue with this will be the inevitable fallout over resources with a split. With the CNT trying to get the IWA trademarked, I guess that opens the possibility for lawsuits over ownership of the "brand", not to mention collective resources like bank accounts and the website. This could divert a lot of energy and resources away from actual working class struggles, at a really bad time, so I hope whatever happens both sides work together to prevent this from occurring.

I have no personal knowledge of this issue and thus have no position on it what so ever. However admins please delete the following:

" I can give you names: admin: names already removed ..."

We should be better than this.

zaczek

melenas

when a company close what you propose, to go to the company to make direct action? oh! wait, there is no company any more. Or you are telling to as that we have to forget to go to the court and only use direct action?

I was answering "proletarian" so obviously i referred to his section. Regarding your question, the last time we were dealing with a bankrupt company, we occupied the office of the liquidator. Guess what, it worked and people got paid.

I still don't know what your're talking about. I don't know who you are and doubt very much you know me. Anyway, I'm glad you're so anarchist and your pamphlet-occupation strategy worked only for the workers to be paid, with no lawyers, trials or other shitty bourgeois stuff. Really, I'm happy for you, but as far as I know anarchosyndicalism is a tool to struggle from within factories, companies and so on, and your strategy only worked to get money for workers. I don't know the details of your example, but if what you highlight is only the money issue and nothing about the lock-out, thanks I prefer to continue fighting for jobs and union delegates and sections.

Theses were achieved by the CNT "paid" members, check it out:

Declarado nulo el ERE Madrid Río ¡Porque luchar sí sirve!

Convenio colectivo en Levante

On the CNT expelling sections. I could be wrong, some of that appears to be bombastic. A few years back the IWW changed it's requirements of our equivalent of SOVs similar to what it appears CNT did. The logic was that it's better for members to focus on organizing until they have the strength to do bureaucratic things like reporting, deal with a bank account, have a secretary/treasurer. It's exponentially harder for a group of 5 than a group of 15 to do that. Some of the little branches didn't make it. One difference I think there is that the IWW has individual membership so they remained members but lost defunct and inactive branches (if they couldn't convince a small handful of people to maintain membership).

So maybe in the CNT's case some SOVs didn't make the cut, but there should be clarification. Are those branches merely the ones that couldn't even manage to get 10 more people to join?Excluding the examples someone listed of vote rigging and weed brownie distributing ones. If so, that's hardly splits or expulsions.

IMHO mixed branch locals are a general issue for our movement. They tend to be havens for the worst things like activist drama, people who never have any intention of organizing their workplace or others, and subcultural activity tied to general leftism more than anarchosyndicalism. The IWW for all its fuckupery did wages an internal battle to abolish mixed locals from 1916 onward. They have a role, but there's also some inherent tensions there that are unresolved.

Steven.

Good posts by robot and Juan Conatz.

However it seems that various parties - particularly the CNTE and the USI - have wanted to keep this requirement to stop other sections communicating with their rivals (CGT and the loony fake USI).

So given that this silly rule exists, it does seem unfair that the ban on communication is enforced when it concerns rivals of the CNTE and USI, but not when it concerns rivals of ZSP. So while I may disagree with the suspension of the FAU, it certainly seems to have been done within the rules of the IWA.

Lets explain this a bit better, because maybe is not so clear in the text of CNT.

The proposal with the title "Autonomy, openness, and dynamism"

The sections have the autonomy to have temporary relationships in the course of their labor conflicts.

In international work we should always use the name of the Chapter next to the acronym for the International (IWA-AIT). In this way we can limit the self-interested use of a section’s name by outside groups. Any kind of external contact will be made with good faith and maximum transparency.

This proposal which was explained to the unions with a example exactly about CGT and FAU. In it was describe that no union can put a limit to the syndicalist action of other section, and if FAU because a conflict has to contact with CGT, CNT cant ban it, the opposite, CNT have to work together with FAU in that conflict and take part in the actions and contact with CGT to try to promote the anarchosindicalist action in that company, so we have 2 benefits, one the fight of FAU and the other to promote CNT inside of the company between the workers.

So what i understand is that had changed this position in CNT. Whats happen is that when FAU asked the position approve was that no contact was allowed, and CNT delegates only transmit the CNT agreements in that moment. People have to understand that from now this is they way that works CNT.

About the voting proposal, is not as important as maybe look like outside. CNT only is coherent with the way it works and put it as part of the proposals. As i said, are no more than proposals of CNT, no one is obligatory, is more important that the international works good and in an anarchosindicalist way and is useful for the class war than the proportional vote.

The Spanish comrade who stated that the memory of social revolution in Spain was wiped out by Franco, sorry but that is just not true, and that's not how history works.

It's really fortunate that Spanish comrades have people to Spanish society to them.

s.nappalos

So maybe in the CNT's case some SOVs didn't make the cut, but there should be clarification. Are those branches merely the ones that couldn't even manage to get 10 more people to join?Excluding the examples someone listed of vote rigging and weed brownie distributing ones. If so, that's hardly splits or expulsions.

I´m not sure if this answer your questions. The unions that are less than 10 members will have 6 months to have them, this start to count since finish the congress. the unions that doesn't rich this number of members will join the closest union, and can continue working as "nucleo confederal". when they pass to be part of other union, the decisions are taken in the assembly of this union. so no member of CNT loose any of his rights.

example of "nucleo confederal" is Leganes, a city in the south of Madrid. they have more than 50 members and they are part of F.C Sur of Madrid that is based in Villaverde Alto. also there are an other 2 "nucleos confederales" that are part of this union, Rivas and Alcorcon. all of them are over the minimum.

Web of CNT- villaverde

Now a day i think nearly no union is under 10 members.

On the CNT expelling sections. I could be wrong, some of that appears to be bombastic. A few years back the IWW changed it's requirements of our equivalent of SOVs similar to what it appears CNT did. The logic was that it's better for members to focus on organizing until they have the strength to do bureaucratic things like reporting, deal with a bank account, have a secretary/treasurer. It's exponentially harder for a group of 5 than a group of 15 to do that. Some of the little branches didn't make it. One difference I think there is that the IWW has individual membership so they remained members but lost defunct and inactive branches (if they couldn't convince a small handful of people to maintain membership).

I'm not sure what you're talking about regarding the IWW. There was a proposal to change the minimum number of members to charter a branch from 10 to 20 in 2006, which didn't pass.

I believe there was a separate proposal another time adding some requirements such as that branches have bylaws, but not changing the required number of members.

OliverTwister

The Spanish comrade who stated that the memory of social revolution in Spain was wiped out by Franco, sorry but that is just not true, and that's not how history works.

It's really fortunate that Spanish comrades have people to Spanish society to them.

I guess some words are missing from this sentence, but I think I get the gist of what you mean. But sorry, being Spanish doesn't mean that everything someone says about Spain is completely correct.

I don't really see how you can say that having half a million members, which they claimed to at the fall of the dictatorship puts them in exactly the same situation as Polish anarcho-syndicalists after the fall of theirs, where they maybe had a handful of individuals. Not to mention that I believe they also had millions of dollars in property which was eventually returned to them.

This of course isn't to in any way diminish how awful Franco's mass killings were. But workers in Poland also faced killings and the gulag.

Melenas, thank you for the clarification regarding the new proposals. That certainly sounds like a step forwards. I guess it's a shame that this just couldn't have been proposed or implemented in the IWA as it stands.

I'm not aware of any claim that they had half a million members. The figures I remember quoted at the time were 200,000 to 300,000. I've since seen it stated that the actual number was around 100,000. I couldn't say for sure whether this is accurate.

Mark.

I'm not aware of any claim that they had half a million members. The figures I remember quoted at the time were 200,000 to 300,000. I've since seen it stated that the actual number was around 100,000. I couldn't say for sure whether this is accurate.

That figure was given in the article Spanish anarchism 'growing like mushrooms after rainfall' in The Open Road. Although weirdly that page of the paper (page 20) doesn't seem to be viewable in this archive: http://openroadnewsjournal.org/

Whether it was 100,000, or 500,000, or even 5,000, it still doesn't make a level playing field with the situation in Eastern Europe.

I believe before the major splits in the CNT, the "membership" numbers I recall being 200-300,000. I use quotation marks because I do not know if these were paid members or estimated strength. Regardless, the numbers were vast. But to try and use Spain as any sort of measure by others without the traditions and history is not exactly fair.

syndicalist

But to try and use Spain as any sort of measure by others without the traditions and history is not exactly fair.

Thank you.

It's kind of tiring to keep hearing it's only the fault of our incompetence and the fact that we didn't vote our voting rights away following the bright new shiny "methodology" that is being presented in this thread. Sorry, but sometimes it feels like talking about an Amway franchise.

Dear Steven (and everyone),

There are a few positive things going on in our local struggles that l prefer to spend time on and a few negative things l also need to deal with, so l am not reading this thread and prefer not to come back here to comment. However friends are reading and said maybe l should answer, so l will. But please understand that at this moment it is tough because l actually have something else to do rather than following the shitstorm.

To start with a small story, (because this was part of what Steven was writing about), yesterday we got a copy of the first post-war “anarchosyndicalist” paper, made in 1992. ( This was quite some years after the rebirth of the anarchist movement, because there were no ideological anarchosyndicalists at all still around, sorry, l think like 9 people survived the nazis.) I put a photo up and a comrade said, oh, l remember that, what every happened to the guy who started it? And my answer: he's in the Falanga. And quite frankly, he is not the only one from the first wave of strange “anarchists” who just settled into the right wing.

Sorry for the slight off-topic, but this was only the first of a few false starts to the rebirth of the anarchosyndicalist movement in Poland. It is one of these things that l have lived through and also shapes our peculiar situation. Unfortunately some people are a bit clueless about it or ignore what is being said and prefer to make some theories about “the good of the class”, etc.

Before l answer Steven's question, l had to scroll and came across some comment of one of our haters who is unaware of what we achieved by direct action. Although l would not like to sound like l have come here to toot our own horn, l think it would be worth pointing out what a modest sized union can do outside of the legal framework and that this can be more than just getting money: reinstatement of employment for almost 50 workers on full work contracts with all benefits, after they refused to take worse conditions and had lost their jobs; reinstatement of workers fired; implementation of working norms in at least a half dozen workplaces; recognition of applying the wrong wage standards and receiving a raise and retroactive pay; payment of overtime for hundreds of workers in one national chain (although we also used some legal means for this, but we were not the legal representative of all the workers); getting health insurance for all workers; getting regulation of all social security payments and fighting against wage cuts (my workplace:-)) … and actually lots of others that are not only related to wage theft. Although wage theft is a huge issue in Poland so we deal with it often.

Just to say we find an overreliance on legalism to be unnecessary but l would clarify that we have used lawyers and if my comrade made it sound otherwise, it is not correct. (Although that comrade represents himself and has represented comrades in court. Without pay.) Why we say that is because there are tons of working people who are paralized by the legalism of the mainstream mentality or are reliant on fighting things in court, which we stress is not the most effective way.

For example, l won't hide it, there are people interested in making a strike outside the mainstream unions. (We think it might not happen, but we can build some actions.) The reason it might not happen is because Solidarity got wind of it and first, they started trolling on the internet. (BTW, they use the same hate language as our supposed comrades about our union. But they are so threatened they spend a lot of time convincing workers against us.) Then there appeared crazy articles on the Solidarity page. The main thing (besides calling us some communist paramilitary organization, hehehe) is that they warn workers that they cannot win their demands, the workplace in question cannot afford to give them raises, that they need to work in the legal way through the union who has lawyers to represent them in front of the company, etc. etc. We have a radically different approach. So excuse my comrade if he gets allergic but people have witnessed an overly legalistic approach from you guys in some situations.

Back to Steven's question, l don't know if l used the word “officials” or not, but if l did, l can see how that word could be imprecise according to the Spanish point of view and so rather l should say (or should have said), union members who are paid/make a living on the money of the union. The GTC, which are 2 lawyers and one economist receive a regular montly payment (salary) from the CNT and this is set out as a regularly allocated sum of the dues. Also at least 3 people from FAL. I would have to check exactly the last information, as l don't want to say anything incorrect.

Of course, there are different points of view on this all and it has been often criticized, for various reasons. But l do not agree with comparing it to some sort of occasional contracting for occasional services as the monthly payment is allocated from dues and goes regularly. Among the specific complaints about the FAL situation, where recently one group of people were chosen to manage it, was that a CNT member complained that he was working as a volunteer but was replaced by somebody who got paid.

I won't get into the question of moral right or wrong now, but people make their living servicing CNT. I mention this is response to the comrade from SAC – they say 3 people there. If that's true, l would just say that they manage better.

Steven, if you can read Spanish, you'll find stuff on the GTC CNT on the internet, you can see how much they earn, the criticisms about them, etc. lt is better to judge the opinions of the Spanish comrades than mine.

Finally, l really don't wanna go and scroll to see what Robot said, l mean, it's just painful, but l will respond to some comments about communication. You wrote:
“As robot pointed out, the requirement around communications to be carried out through individual sections in each country is completely bureaucratic and utterly unsuited for the modern world (if it ever was).
However it seems that various parties - particularly the CNTE and the USI - have wanted to keep this requirement to stop other sections communicating with their rivals (CGT and the loony fake USI).”
I would point out a few things. First, like any agreement of the lWA, they are open to discussion and member organizations are free to bring motions to revise them.
In 2009 there was a motion to give a criteria of official mail. This is because some found it important to define that the official mail of the Section comes through the Section's Secretariat and only that is official of the Section. Seeing what l have seen, there are quite legitimate reasons for this and there are actually a lot of issues that pop up around this.
The idea behind this is to prevent any part of an organization from misrepresenting the views of the organization or acting in its name in an unauthorized manner or even from acting without the knowledge of the rest of the members, but in its name.
To give some concrete examples, FAU has been extremely sloppy with this and many small problems (which they don't care about) have happened when somebody goes off somewhere and nobody is clear is they were delegated or not but everybody reads about FAU participation and “FAU's” positions even though an individual decided on their own.
Or another time somebody told me to talk to X because he was delegated to do something in SolFed so l did but did not CC the official Secretary and later it turned out the Secretary (and thus the whole organization) was not aware of something. You know, so l learned a lesson very quickly and write to where l am supposed to and apologized to the comrades from breaking this standard.
Now there is the situation that there are lots angry people in and out of the CNT who write all the time, but this is not organic communication, so l shouldn't send it in the lWA. So just imagine the snowball effect and shitstorm if everybody from an organization could write, without the approval of the entire organization.
ln our organization we really don't care if some of our local unions contact with other unions directly, but just in their own name and not pretending to represent as a whole. People communicate back in the organization. But that works when you know that you are on the same page and nobody is privately pursuing something different than what the federation set out. This is a key point, because if we commonly agree something, like we are going to cooperate with X and another does something to undermine the federal agreement, it weakens our organization and makes it less credible to our partners.
In this same way, we have had absolutely no problem asking our comrades in other countries about whether X or Y was OK, about how their relations are, etc. - because why should we get involved in a mess if we don't have to? If we needed to have a concrete contact even with a mainstream union because of a very concrete situation, we are sure that there is no problem to explain it to people and all would be fine. I mean, it would be weird is we showed up in the center of London at an action with X union and we didn't tell our local comrades anything and they just came across us in the street, surprised we were there. And yeah, it would be shocking if it turned out that they were screwing our comrades and they had bad blood and we just turned up.
About personal communication, nobody cares if A wants to chat to B. (Oh sorry, unless you are the Secretary of lWA. I hear there was some real paranoia about that. My friend asked me, “who are these people the CNT says you know” and all l can say is l don't know them. :-) l am afraid even visiting friends in CNT they expect you to announce who you are going to sleep with or something.)
Back to the subject, it is obvious that this issue is only contentious when an organization pursues another political agenda in your backyard and does not see its struggle and strategy and the same. But the question is how viable any federative relationship is if this causes strains and there is a perception that the organization is working at cross-purposes, which is a common complaint.
I trust this response can last me for a long time since l have quite a number of things to do and do not want to come back here soon. Carry on without me. As l said somewhere before, this place is not the place for our internal discussions and besides the UK and maybe Australian comrades, it is not widely read by our members. This discussion is more for people outside the lWA.

Hey thanks for that, and fair enough if you don't want to comment further although I would ask what "GTC" and "FAL" mean?

Thanks also for the info about anarcho-syndicalism following the collapse of the USSR. I hope that the Spanish comrades would acknowledge that there is a bit of a difference between having 9 people to start from, and having 2-500,000…

Steven.

Hey thanks for that, and fair enough if you don't want to comment further although I would ask what "GTC" and "FAL" mean?

Thanks also for the info about anarcho-syndicalism following the collapse of the USSR. I hope that the Spanish comrades would acknowledge that there is a bit of a difference between having 9 people to start from, and having 2-500,000…

GTC: Gabinete Técnico Confederal. A professional group of economists, lawyers and more. It exists in order to deal with huge and complicated struggles in which CNT is involved.

FAL: Fundación de Estudios Anselmo Lorenzo. A non-profit organization of the CNT that publish books and keeps the historical archive of the CNT. As you can imagine, managing the historical archive of the CNT is a very serious and important issue.

People wrote here that it's supposedly pathetic that in 30 years an organization didn't grow. How about if your organization exists for 9 years or less? How long did it take the FAU to start growing in a much more forgiving environment? Wasn't that decades? A competition to gain as many members as possible as quickly as possible without having enough radical people around would produce one of two results: if internal democracy is preserved, the non radical members would change the organization profile to what is most acceptable in the mainstream. So, social democracy or worse types of conservatism in conservative societies. If elitism is built, the activist vanguard could force it's radical agenda on passive membership. We don't want either of those alternatives. Growing faster than you are able to spread your ideas is a really bad proposition.

Akai... stop telling lies.
CNT has a montly fee with a workers-coop of lawers, In the contract we ask them for a minimum of cases a year, they are dealing with 3x times more for free. They also have another clients. That´s not paid members.
We were using lawers who were friends or sympatize with anarquist ideas for years at an enormeous price and with bad results. Now we have a montly fee with very good profesionals, this is saving us a tremendous ammount of money. When we took this deision we didn´t want to have a contract with a company with boses, so we asked to the posible lawers firm to be a workers coop, and to be anarchist friendly. We didn´t want lawers with suits and ties, that today they defend you and tomorrow they defend your enemy.
This workers coop only deal with the legal part (not the the whole conflic) of conflicts that go beyong the local union strenght, cases that the next door lawers doen´t have a chance to win. Basicaly they deal with collective conflicts that afect docens or hundreds of workers. Individual or easy cases are not their duty. The conflict is still managed by local unions in their asemblies, they just deal with the legal part helping local unions with tthe legal stuff that most times go beyong our knowlege.Still, they are dealing with close to 100 cases per year, that´s just an small amout of our yearly conflitcs.
When CNT local unions voted for this contract it was an 80% vs 20% for Yes. We vote every year, and every year with similar results (actually more unions to yes).

Regarding FAL; FAL is the fundation that keeps all the historical documentation of CNT avaliable for researches, they are responsible of their maintenance, you should know that this documentation must be maintain following certain international standards (relating how the documentation is organized, controlled humidity etcetc). They also publish books about anarchism and CNT history. For years this organization was managed by voluntary work, but all the documments with more tham 100 years old were not properly maintain, and they are hundreds of thounsands, most of it is not even cataloged yet. We have a plan at cost 0 for CNT to make a contract with a workers coop so, they manage the publishing and documental work (decisions regarding FAL will still being taken by CNT and voluntary members, this workers co-op will only deal with publishing and maintenance) and in exchange they will get the profits for the books they sell, making FAL work in a professional way and with a 0 cost for CNT. You need to take in consideration that CNT has the biggest collection of anarquism and historical anarchosyndicalism documentation in the world, and this needs to be properly maintain for future generations.

CNT doesn´t have a payroll with any employee, CNT doesn´t pay any fake self employee. Yes, CNT pays for services (lawers, internet, plumbers, insurances, maintenance... )

The old CNT use to pay for all the tasks it needed to be made. If you see the acts and documents of 1910, 20s, 30s unions it is quite common to find people being paid for repairing the roof, cleaning, keeping the door, lawyers, printers... even for doing propaganda activities (as those people were workers losing job wages because of union activities - yes, Federica Montseny, Buenaventura Durruti or Garcia Oliver were sometimes paid members). CNT prevented committee members to be paid for their role, differencing itself from socialism, but not the rest of the tasks.

In CNT with the rise in union and legal activity there's the need to increase the quality level of our action. So, the GTC appeared to be a solution. In a recent report GTC was performing around 120 cases in all Spain. Most of them backing the unions. This work needs total dedication and logically it needs to be paid for. This is so obvious that I doubt if we are living in the same world. Could it be done by volunteers? I mean, every CNT union has its own lawyers some linked to the organization, others private and foreign to it.

Another point is the own concept of "anarcho-syndicalism". In my point of view, anarcho-syndicalism is a form of revolutionary unionism, and it is a special form of socialism that seek the seizure of all means of production. The socialist society will have the unions as the backbone of it. Unions will be the centre of that society. And for that purpose unions will need to be technically ready to seize and manage present day capitalist companies. If you read spanish anarcho-syndicalist papers of the 30s you will see plenty of articles explaining in detail how to create a factory committee, how the economy worked, how to coordinate different factories in a bigger trust... Workers were learning how to take the economy in their hands. GTC is an step to fight for anarcho-syndicalism.

CNT in the 90s was so little and it had so poor quality that they had to say everyday to themselves they were anarcho-syndicalist. That CNT did not aspire to seize companies, to manage production. As for them anarcho-syndicalism was simply an horizontal organization of trade unions, use of direct action to win strikes and promotion of anarchism. That's all. They had forgot all our socialist origins and objectives.

As for the recent self-exclusions and expelling...
- STIS Madrid (an IT union) self-excluded itself and it is now an anarchist collective.
- CNT Lugo, Arosa, Vigo and Coruña (all of them in Galicia) self-excluded themselves as they were not doing union activity but cultural and social activity. They all are in the same region and in 1 year they have not been able to do anything in common. They could have created a new CNT-Galicia, however, they didn't. We're talking about 20-30 people in all. Would you like to count on this people? 2 of those unions never paid their dues.
- CNT Murcia, self-excluded itself. It's a more an anarchist collective than a union.
- CNT Huelva, Cadiz, Velez and Motril have been expelled in the last few years for incurring into false accusations against other unions in Andalusia.
- CNT Sagunt, Alcoy, Marina, Castellón, Albacete, Benissa and Elda, in Valencia region were expelled for not accepting the X Cordoba Congress agreements and blocking the regional federation. These are a few more people, 50-60 as much.

So, to sum up. most of those unions considered that CNT is a kind of anarchist federation and not an anarcho-syndicalist union. There're still a few federated unions inside CNT that share the views of those expelled unions (SOV Madrid, Granada, Oviedo, Candas...). However, some are accepting the new correlation while others are still doubting if leaving CNT or not. This whole IWA issue is important for their decision. I don't personally see those unions forming a new CNT, as there're important differences between them and it would be an unstable organization.

As for the rest of the CNT, in the last few months since the Congress (december) new sections have been developed and the growth is steady (Graficas Madrid, Bilbao, Saragossa, Valencia... ). Only the new section in Graficas has a bigger membership than all the unions that have left CNT in the last year.

The figures after Franco's death were around 120,000 members in September 1977 (see "La Alternativa Libertaria en Cataluña", Joan Zambrana) and 250,000 as Juan Gómez Casas recalls in the spring of 1978. That was the maximum point. In December of 1979, at the 5th Congress of Madrid, CNT had fallen to only 30,000 members.

Salvoechea

The figures after Franco's death were around 120,000 members in September 1977 (see "La Alternativa Libertaria en Cataluña", Joan Zambrana) and 250,000 as Juan Gómez Casas recalls in the spring of 1978. That was the maximum point. In December of 1979, at the 5th Congress of Madrid, CNT had fallen to only 30,000 members.

this decrease in membership numbers is however nothing CNT-specific, most groups to the left of PSOE and PCE went into decline after 1977 when the hopes of a radical Transición which was kindled by the large strikes and movements in the years before didn't materialize, but unlike e.g. most maoist groups, the CNT (and the CGT) survived

Salvoechea

The figures after Franco's death were around 120,000 members in September 1977 (see "La Alternativa Libertaria en Cataluña", Joan Zambrana) and 250,000 as Juan Gómez Casas recalls in the spring of 1978. That was the maximum point. In December of 1979, at the 5th Congress of Madrid, CNT had fallen to only 30,000 members.

Thanks, that may help explain some of the different figures I've seen.

Salvoechea, thanks very much for that info that's very helpful. Yepa thanks for that info as well.

What Akai initially said was:

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

So it does seem this is incorrect (although Akai later clarified to say that rather than "paid positions" she meant members who basically live off income from the union). So while I disagree that this was a "lie", it does seem to be misleading, if it is not comparing like with like. I wouldn't be surprised if the SAC, for example also had lawyers on retainer (and so not included in their paid positions). And I don't know if they don't also have for example paid people in their bookshops who might not be counted in central union figures (and so comparable with the FAL situation)

So Akai while I do sympathise with your perspective, and support the work of ZSP, the secretary of the IWA saying something like that, which is misleading, about the CNT, would make CNT members angry, no? (Although also I think they did misunderstand you, because to me it didn't look like you were using the fact they have paid positions to attack them, which they seem to have interpreted it as. So this could be partly an "English as a second language" issue.)

Anyway I will back out of this discussion now I think, as really it is a matter for comrades in the IWA to determine.

Salvoechea

In CNT with the rise in union and legal activity there's the need to increase the quality level of our action. So, the GTC appeared to be a solution. In a recent report GTC was performing around 120 cases in all Spain. Most of them backing the unions. This work needs total dedication and logically it needs to be paid for.

[...]

Another point is the own concept of "anarcho-syndicalism". In my point of view, anarcho-syndicalism is a form of revolutionary unionism, and it is a special form of socialism that seek the seizure of all means of production. The socialist society will have the unions as the backbone of it. Unions will be the centre of that society. And for that purpose unions will need to be technically ready to seize and manage present day capitalist companies.

So professionalization and focus on legal work is putting revolutionary unionism into practice. Let the lawyers control the means of production. Good work! We're almost there.

zaczek

syndicalist

But to try and use Spain as any sort of measure by others without the traditions and history is not exactly fair.

Thank you.

It's kind of tiring to keep hearing it's only the fault of our incompetence and the fact that we didn't vote our voting rights away following the bright new shiny "methodology" that is being presented in this thread. Sorry, but sometimes it feels like talking about an Amway franchise.

Well, a lot was said and it's hard to get back just to clarify things. I don't wanna stray off the subject, but I'd like to tell something. My comment about Franco's dictatorship was just to recall that for the CNT wasn't so easy as some people here seem to suggest. I've heard thousands of times about the Social Revolution and the 30's, revolutionary tradition, the 70's boom and so on, but it has never been a piece of piss. I mean, in Spain when a new CNT is opened workers don't go massively to join it. Most of people in Spain have no idea about the CNT and its history, so tradition is practically unimportant for the recent affiliation growth. For example, small towns like Castro Urdiales with no tradition at all on this issue has a CNT local union with more that 30 members and it was founded few years ago. Another example is SOV L'Hospitalet, a union with more than 100 members that was born from an union section in the airport in Barcelona, which had 3 or 4 members at the beginning and which put this "new" methodology in practice. Therefore I'm not talking about incompetence, but self-criticism. We're doing something wrong if we cannot get more and more members for 20 years. The history and context is for sure a big issue, but it can't be the excuse to stay as anarchist ghetto with few people. The expelled fools from CNT were always complaining: "we are the good ones, poor of us, workers are so allienated!".

Compared this to some basic facts - I can't think of any example in recent 10+ years when FAU or CNT proposed anything or participated in anything in the IWA that would help to share the knowledge, skills and methodologies among the sections. (Basically all such attempts were done by smaller sections which are - contrary to the dogma of some of the posters - really looking for ways to build their organizations and take on workplace related activities.)

I don't like to use strong words, but it is a clear fact that anyone claiming there was no opportunity is a liar.

So, the narrative that is put forward by some people ignores reality in the IWA and a very specific attitude of the bigger sections which turned into full ignorance of the environment and activities of the smaller sections. You can see it for example in statements like "solidarity pickets or spreading flyers are nice but...". It is a total misunderstanding and ignorance of the reality. The history issue is only a tip of the iceberg.

militant-proletarian

We're doing something wrong if we cannot get more and more members for 20 years.

And what sections of 20 years are you referring to? Have you bothered to check how many of the small sections are that old? And if the whole "problem" is not made-up?

zaczek

militant-proletarian

We're doing something wrong if we cannot get more and more members for 20 years.

And what sections of 20 years are you referring to? Have you bothered to check how many of the small sections are that old? And if the whole "problem" is not made-up?

Maybe we can talk about Kras in Russia, Portugal or COB in Brazil. We have a very interesting anarchist movement in Brazil growing since the 90's that nowadays is represented by the CAB (Cordinaçao Anarquista Brasileira) with organizations in many territories of Brazil, one of the biggest countries in the world. While the COB...

One of the problems I see is that all this anarchosyndicalist groups (we can not call them Unions) look too much to the CNT and its glorious past of revolution. Please, everyone should look more to the history of class war in it's own country and look less to Spain.

And please zaczek

zaczek

So professionalization and focus on legal work is putting revolutionary unionism into practice. Let the lawyers control the means of production. Good work! We're almost there.

Stop saying absurd things.

One of the problems I see is that all this anarchosyndicalist groups (we can not call them Unions) look too much to the CNT and its glorious past of revolution. Please, everyone should look more to the history of class war in it's own country and look less to Spain.

Agree 100%. Ironically, because I know I've developed a reputation among a lot of comrades of referring to the CNT and Spain a lot, but it's to look at what might be relevant in the Spain of 2016. I never talk about the Spain of 1936, I'd rather discuss the USA of the 1934 strikes...

armin.tamz

One of the problems I see is that all this anarchosyndicalist groups (we can not call them Unions) look too much to the CNT and its glorious past of revolution. Please, everyone should look more to the history of class war in it's own country and look less to Spain.

We are looking into our own history. The official CNT (unlike some of it's more open minded sections) hasn't been paying attention or even cared about it. And we are also looking at the history of the CNT and it's periodical downfalls, like the trientistas, the government of the republic, the defeat of the revolution, the CGT and now the new Renovados.

Regarding Russia, conditions there are much worse than even in Eastern Europe and you would be hard pressed to find another thriving union even close to our tradition. We have no reason to complain about COB or SP, as they have provided us with reliable solidarity more than once. I doubt anyone has the authority to decide what is and what isn't a union and i find that deeply presumptuous.

armin.tamz

And please zaczek

zaczek

So professionalization and focus on legal work is putting revolutionary unionism into practice. Let the lawyers control the means of production. Good work! We're almost there.

Stop saying absurd things.

It is absurd, but it is the direction in which the "new and shiny methodology" of the new Renovados is developing.

I haven't been logged on Libcom for years, because I don't have a time for internet debates, but this is the time that I must say something, because anarchosyndicalism is dying before our eyes.

I am a member of local union of ZSP in Wrocław. We are cleaners, postal workers, IT workers, gastronomy workers (we for example have just started a campaign against local vegan-retaurant which desn't pay workers' insurance), etc. We had some great campaings, especially against temporary work agencies and in gastronomy. For nine years we have been fighting here as a working class people, without splits and internal drama, because we have a clear principles and we are respected for that even outside our union.

We've joined IWA because we are internationalists. If a new member asks us what is the difference between us and for example Solidarity union, we say - we are members of IWA, and we are not nationalist union as Solidarity. So this is really important to us, and part of our identity. If someone is unemployed temporarly and can't pay regular dues, we say - ok. but you still have to pay IWA-part of dues, because we have to show our support to workers who can be in even worse condition than we are.

But, we are at the same time disappointed by this, that some IWA sections want to have more votes than our section. That our delegates are constantly called like you could read on this forum. We even are deprived by some of calling ourselves a union! We feel humiliated by some members of IWA sections.

They suggest that we can't understand English properly and don't know what has been accepted on IWA congresses. We are translating to Polish IWA documents before and after every IWA congress and every member who wants to know knows what is going on even if doesn't participate on inernational forums like this because of lack of language skills or time. For example - we know that FAU has been suspended for breaking concrete decisions of past IWA congresses and IWA decisions are for us are as important as ZSP congresses.

And we particularly are disappointed by lack of support from some sections of IWA during our campaings. On the contrary, for example - FAU constantly is supporting financially and morally not so friendly union to us (Workers Initiative). We, here in Wroclaw have never experienced such a support from FAU as WI, and Wroclaw is closer to Dresden and Berlin than Warsaw! This is really a shame.

And comrade form Dresden wrote that they have some poblems with right wing idiots. Yeah, we can talk about this for hours. Check this out, this is from our city, ant they are not PEGIDA anti-islamic fuckers, they are totally neo-nazi shit and we have now far right government who is thinking to give them guns and make of them National Guard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkckAHPtiqg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJYtgZIVvJU

And as I see, you have similar problems, So why we don't have regular contacts? We were supporting actively FAU during your Babylon cinema campaign and even sent an delegation to Berlin on a manifestation.

And now, we read that CNT, USI and FAU are supporting split of IWA, because we are reportedly so small that we shouldn't have the same voice as "legendary" CNT which have on paper a few thousands of members but doesn't pay dues to IWA and do not support properly our International for years?.

And our answer is: WTF?

Most of us are not ideologues. If postal worker will ask me: why we should be in this new "IWA" instread our old proper IWA, where are also our friends who always supported us? In th "new IWA" we will pay dues, but will be pariahs, we will be supporting "new super shiny IWA", but only small section of this IWA 2.0 supported us?

What should I answer to my non-English speaking comprades? Because CNT has "legenary" initials but can't help us in our work to get stronger so we could defend ourselves better against fascist government and bosses? Or what? Maybe you should help me to prepare the answer, because I really don't know?

zaczek

militant-proletarian

We're doing something wrong if we cannot get more and more members for 20 years.

And what sections of 20 years are you referring to? Have you bothered to check how many of the small sections are that old? And if the whole "problem" is not made-up?

Apart from those mentioned by the comrade, you also have CNT France, Priama Akcia or NSF. You can also include your friends in Spain, who showed to be only a negligible bunch of admin: no flaming. This is a second warning who were the same people for more than 20 years.

zaczek

It is absurd, but it is the direction in which the "new and shiny methodology" of the new Renovados is developing.

There is nothing like "renovados" and I told you it's not "new", it's just a non-developed strategy from the 70's that your comrades in Spain never applied, because they had no idea how to. The "secciones sindicales" were the strategy adopted by the CNT against the democratic transition and official unionism, and against Spanish work councils that gave rise to the split later.

The GTC is nothing more than a cooperative with people who knows what to do in complex cases or conflicts where workers legally need to watch their backs. It's a service if you like, and a job like that must be paid or do you work for free? Even your friends were using paid lawyers for years, most of times with awful results. What is more, one of your "self-taught" comrade in Madrid, who was union delegate in Marsans, signed a labour force adjustment plan from where hundreds of workers were dismissed because of the plan and the company locked out. So yes we need people who know what to do, the same when you go to a doctor from whom you expect some knowledge about your body and health.

XaViER

I haven't been logged on Libcom for years, because I don't have a time for internet debates, but this is the time that I must say something, because anarchosyndicalism is dying before our eyes.

I am a member of local union of ZSP in Wrocław. We are cleaners, postal workers, IT workers, gastronomy workers (we for example have just started a campaign against local vegan-retaurant which desn't pay workers' insurance), etc. We had some great campaings, especially against temporary work agencies and in gastronomy. For nine years we have been fighting here as a working class people, without splits and internal drama, because we have a clear principles and we are respected for that even outside our union.

We've joined IWA because we are internationalists. If a new member asks us what is the difference between us and for example Solidarity union, we say - we are members of IWA, and we are not nationalist union as Solidarity. So this is really important to us, and part of our identity. If someone is unemployed temporarly and can't pay regular dues, we say - ok. but you still have to pay IWA-part of dues, because we have to show our support to workers who can be in even worse condition than we are.

But, we are at the same time disappointed by this, that some IWA sections want to have more votes than our section. That our delegates are constantly called like you could read on this forum. We even are deprived by some of calling ourselves a union! We feel humiliated by some members of IWA sections.

They suggest that we can't understand English properly and don't know what has been accepted on IWA congresses. We are translating to Polish IWA documents before and after every IWA congress and every member who wants to know knows what is going on even if doesn't participate on inernational forums like this because of lack of language skills or time. For example - we know that FAU has been suspended for breaking concrete decisions of past IWA congresses and IWA decisions are for us are as important as ZSP congresses.

And we particularly are disappointed by lack of support from some sections of IWA during our campaings. On the contrary, for example - FAU constantly is supporting financially and morally not so friendly union to us (Workers Initiative). We, here in Wroclaw have never experienced such a support from FAU as WI, and Wroclaw is closer to Dresden and Berlin than Warsaw! This is really a shame.

And comrade form Dresden wrote that they have some poblems with right wing idiots. Yeah, we can talk about this for hours. Check this out, this is from our city, ant they are not PEGIDA anti-islamic fuckers, they are totally neo-nazi shit and we have now far right government who is thinking to give them guns and make of them National Guard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkckAHPtiqg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJYtgZIVvJU

And as I see, you have similar problems, So why we don't have regular contacts? We were supporting actively FAU during your Babylon cinema campaign and even sent an delegation to Berlin on a manifestation.

And now, we read that CNT, USI and FAU are supporting split of IWA, because we are reportedly so small that we shouldn't have the same voice as "legendary" CNT which have on paper a few thousands of members but doesn't pay dues to IWA and do not support properly our International for years?.

And our answer is: WTF?

Most of us are not ideologues. If postal worker will ask me: why we should be in this new "IWA" instread our old proper IWA, where are also our friends who always supported us? In th "new IWA" we will pay dues, but will be pariahs, we will be supporting "new super shiny IWA", but only small section of this IWA 2.0 supported us?

What should I answer to my non-English speaking comprades? Because CNT has "legenary" initials but can't help us in our work to get stronger so we could defend ourselves better against fascist government and bosses? Or what? Maybe you should help me to prepare the answer, because I really don't know?

Well, this is a proposal to work together, your section is free to choose whatever it likes. The IWA doesn't work and doesn't want to change to be stronger. The small sections don't respect the work of CNT, FAU and USI, because they see the CGT reformist ghost everywhere and are in a constant defensive position trying to teach a lesson. What is more, the IWA Secretary in this forum has already taken a position and is for the minority that is no longer in the CNT in Spain. Maybe you should ask her why she doesn't respect the CNT decisions.

" Maybe you should ask her why she doesn't respect the CNT decisions. "

IWA secretary should respect only decisions of congresses of IWA not one section, CNT, ZSP or whichever. I am shocked that you don't understand this.

And, she is here only as a private person. She is only secretary when makes official statements signed properly.

And, for me CNT is now outside of the IWA. They don't pay dues, they want to split and destroy IWA. I will propose on my union meeting, that we should demand officially from secretary of IWA that she should defend IWA at all costs against those who want to destroy our International.

(of course she won't have to consider this statement, because this would be only a statement of one union, so she have to read it and next she can easily forget about it ;-))

(disclaimer to anarcho-punks: this is not official statement of my union, because it is not sent properly through secretariat and signed properly :-D)

XaViER

" Maybe you should ask her why she doesn't respect the CNT decisions. "

IWA secretary should respect only decisions of congresses of IWA not one section, CNT, ZSP or whichever. I am shocked that you don't understand this.

No, you don't understand. The internal decisions of the CNT are just that: internal, even if you or whoever secretary likes or not. The IWA Secretary doesn't respect the CNT decisions because she is insulting the majority that decided in last CNT congress and is questioning its validity and taking position in favour of few small groups that are no longer in the CNT, some expelled because they didn't respect CNT decisions and some self-excluded.

militant-proletarian

The GTC is nothing more than a cooperative with people who knows what to do in complex cases or conflicts where workers legally need to watch their backs. It's a service if you like, and a job like that must be paid or do you work for free?[...]So yes we need people who know what to do, the same when you go to a doctor from whom you expect some knowledge about your body and health.

And how exactly is that different from mainstream unionism and mainstream associations?

XaViER

And, for me CNT is now outside of the IWA. They don't pay dues, they want to split and destroy IWA. I will propose on my union meeting, that we should demand officially from secretary of IWA that she should defend IWA at all costs against those who want to destroy our International.

(of course she won't have to consider this statement, because this would be only a statement of one union, so she have to read it and next she can easily forget about it ;-))

(disclaimer to anarcho-punks: this is not official statement of my union, because it is not sent properly through secretariat and signet properly :-D)

Nobody wants to destroy anything. We have autonomy to choose if we want to work with you or not. If you like, nice, otherwise we follow our way with sections and unions that wants too.

militant-proletarian

No, you don't understand. The internal decisions of the CNT are just that: internal, even if you or whoever secretary likes or not. The IWA Secretary doesn't respect the CNT decisions because she is insulting the majority that decided in last CNT congress and is questioning its validity and taking position in favour of few small groups that are no longer in the CNT, some expelled because they didn't respect CNT decisions and some self-excluded.

Did she does it officially, did she does something against IWA statutes or congress decisions? No. CNT wants convoke their new "IWA" against statutes of proper IWA, because they couldn't find support for their proposals. CNT does not pay dues not ZSP.

Preparing split and breaking congress decisions of IWA IS real problem here, not personal opinion of someone on the internet.

As I said I consider that after their last congress CNT is effectively outside of IWA. And good luck to them I won't cry. Real question is who will join them? Will someone wants to be in one structure with unions which doesn't respect decisions of congresses of their organisation because they don't like it? If someone wants to be treated as a second-category member under dictatorship of one, true legendary union (or even three, two of them less legendary)... well.... I have nothing to add.

militant-proletarian

Nobody wants to destroy anything. We have autonomy to choose if we want to work with you or not. If you like, nice, otherwise we follow our way with sections and unions that wants too.

You can create a new organization. But trying to hijack the old one against it's statutes is not only illegitimate, but will most likely fail. True, you will manage to waste a lot of our time.

Lets explain some things about about this "pay positions" of CNT.

Has CNT payed positions?

No, the statutes of CNT doesn't alloyed it. Art. 105

Has CNT a contract with a cooperative about some legal services?

Yes

Does CNT pay a shalari to the workers of that coop.?

No, CNT pay to the cooperative a cuantity base on the volume of work define in the contract.

Are in internet the salaries that receive the members of the coop.?

No, CNT pays to the coop. how the coop administrate the income they have is not a issue of CNT and CNT has no info about this.

How many workers have the coop.?

Im not sure, but the last time i spoke with one of the them were 6 people.

does the coop other works?

Yes, the coop a part of the contract with CNT attempt to other workers.

Very importat example that is a reference in spain: http://www.lapirenaicadigital.es/SITIO/SENTENCIATSJPAISVASCO21052015.html

Has CNT other contrats for other services?

Yes, some unions and regionals has a contract with a insurance company (this comes from the incident in Elda that i explain in other post). also has contracts with the wireless carrier to be provide of tlf lines and internet. other contracts are signed to cover some other needs.

Is this new?

No, a long the 106 years of CNT history, the union always had contracts with lawyers.

Does CNT changed his statutes to be able to contract lawyers?

No, the statutes didn't changed at all.

Had CNT any kind of contract before?

Yes, before was made the contract with the coop. had a contract with a lawyer.

Who define the strategy in a conflict?

The union, the lawyers only provide the info that they are asked. No lawyer or GTC has any power of decision or something similar.

Has consequences in CNT to accuse to other with out proves?

Yes, can be expelled.

And now, we read that CNT, USI and FAU are supporting split of IWA, because we are reportedly so small that we shouldn't have the same voice as "legendary" CNT which have on paper a few thousands of members but doesn't pay dues to IWA and do not support properly our International for years?.

Where did you read that CNT support a split in IWA? Please tell me because i read the agreements of CNT and doesn't say any thing about it.

About the dues it was explained several times, if you don´t read the internal info of IWA do not came here to say the first thing that pass throw your mind.

Most of us are not ideologues. If postal worker will ask me: why we should be in this new "IWA" instread our old proper IWA, where are also our friends who always supported us? In th "new IWA" we will pay dues, but will be pariahs, we will be supporting "new super shiny IWA", but only small section of this IWA 2.0 supported us?

What should I answer to my non-English speaking comprades? Because CNT has "legenary" initials but can't help us in our work to get stronger so we could defend ourselves better against fascist government and bosses? Or what? Maybe you should help me to prepare the answer, because I really don't know?

What i can explain to CNT workers when the secretary of IWA insult in a very hard way to CNT delegation in a congress? how I explain that in diferent congresses the CNT delegation is insulted (in Valencia congress people was clapping the hands when they listen the insults) by other sections delegates? what can i explain to CNT workers when the secretary send from the oficial IWA mail acount to CNT international mail acount lies about other sections internal process of taking decisions? what can i explain to CNt members when they see fotos of a expelled union that usurp CNT name and IWA name taking part in a IWA congress? How you want the members of CNT to react when they are called reformist.

IWA secretary should respect only decisions of congresses of IWA not one section, CNT, ZSP or whichever. I am shocked that you don't understand this.

Not even that respect. she didnt provide any information as it was MANDATED by IWA congress to the vice-secretary of IWA. And had time to do it, but not even try to contact.

How you feel when someone from other section throw in a pablic forum lies about your section? Why you don´t recriminate this to Akai?

And, she is here only as a private person. She is only secretary when makes official statements signed properly.

So because she write as private person is allowed to lie about other sections? doesn´t everybody know here that she is the secretary of IWA? She should or not be careful about this? how can I explain this to my comrades of my local union, that the secretary of IWA is writing lies about CNT when in CNT if you accuse someone with out proves you can be expelled? how can i explain to them that she can say what ever lie about CNT when ever because nothing is going to happen?

And, for me CNT is now outside of the IWA. They don't pay dues, they want to split and destroy IWA. I will propose on my union meeting, that we should demand officially from secretary of IWA that she should defend IWA at all costs against those who want to destroy our International.

How I explain to CNT members that IWA sections doesn't give a shit about the economical problem of the union and we doesn't have any understand about the accident that had happen in Elda and the consequences of it?

zaczek

militant-proletarian

The GTC is nothing more than a cooperative with people who knows what to do in complex cases or conflicts where workers legally need to watch their backs. It's a service if you like, and a job like that must be paid or do you work for free?[...]So yes we need people who know what to do, the same when you go to a doctor from whom you expect some knowledge about your body and health.

And how exactly is that different from mainstream unionism and mainstream associations?

I was going to answer you, but melenas has already explained it pretty clear. If you aren't able to distinguish a service from a decision body, you don't understand anything.

zaczek

militant-proletarian

The GTC is nothing more than a cooperative with people who knows what to do in complex cases or conflicts where workers legally need to watch their backs. It's a service if you like, and a job like that must be paid or do you work for free?[...]So yes we need people who know what to do, the same when you go to a doctor from whom you expect some knowledge about your body and health.

And how exactly is that different from mainstream unionism and mainstream associations?

Yeah, if you're seriously trying to argue that no "revolutionary" organisation should ever try to use legal means to help with disputes, then I don't think you're going to find many people to agree with you here. And TBH it's a completely different discussion, so you should start a new thread about that and stop derailing this discussion.

I do not know, if it is off-topic or derailing the discussion, but as you, XaViER, raised the topic just a few comments on it for you.

XaViER

And we particularly are disappointed by lack of support from some sections of IWA during our campaings. On the contrary, for example - FAU constantly is supporting financially and morally not so friendly union to us (Workers Initiative).

Maybe you just don't know it or you forgot about it, in march 2011 me and FAUist@s from several other locals picketed OTTO Workforce in solidarity with the campaign the ZSP has been involved there. Not in one, but in several ocasions. In february of the same year FAUist@s picketed OBI markets when the ZSP supported a struggle of workers at OBI Krakòw. We usually do solidarity pickets when he have a target for it here. Like informing Ford visteon workers in German factories onece the CNT had a conflict with that company in the Cadíz bay. Or picketing some 50 PLUS markets once a worker got kicked-off PLUS market at Sevilla. FAUist@s have been out for such action more than 30 times and in dozens of locations within the past 10 years.

Once there is no suitable target we usually inform the public about struggles and repression as a means of solidarity. If you just take a look a the FAU federal website you might notice, that we did this for quite a number of ZSP struggles within the past few years.

By the way, I really like to know how FAU is constantly supporting the IP financially. Every FAUist@ has access to the secretaries accounting reports and I can finding nothing about any constant financial support there. What I can find are occasional contacts between one of the bigger FAU locals and a local of the IP at Poznan. An there was a solidarity picket in Berlin for workers of the IP once those had an industrial conflict. We do this for other workers in unions that are not members of the IWA as well. And we do not make a secret out of such contacts and out of workers solidarity.

XaViER

We, here in Wroclaw have never experienced such a support from FAU as WI, and Wroclaw is closer to Dresden and Berlin than Warsaw! This is really a shame.

So you tried to get into contact with the Dresden FAU local union? And they told you that they do not want to meet with you and neither like to develop a mutual support and exchange of experiences? Or haven't you just tried yet because you think the FAU is full of nasty guys and girls that love the IP and hate everything that starts with a Z? That's not how things are working here. Contact the Dresden FAU syndicate and if you manage to meet them twice a year, this will be propably more of an interchange than any FAU local has with one of the IP in a year.

Just one last thing. Even if almost anyone in the FAU syndicates is not very amused with the attitude and maneuvers of the IWA secretariat, most of us are very well capable to distinguish between the secretariat and the organization it is a member of. I am pretty sure that many if not most within the FAU acknowledge that the ZSP compared to its affiliation is one of the most agile sections within the IWA. Our problem is not with the ZSP but with others.

As always my very personal opinion...

melenas

Not even that respect. she didnt provide any information as it was MANDATED by IWA congress to the vice-secretary of IWA. And had time to do it, but not even try to contact.

How you feel when someone from other section throw in a pablic forum lies about your section? Why you don´t recriminate this to Akai?

This is ridiculous. The vicesecretariat is only there to replace the secretariat if it's unable to act. It has no other function. Why don't you respect the IWA statutes instead of inventing rules that don't exist?

Regarding respect at the Congress, give me a break. Your delegate (the one that you later found out was a thief) tried to interrupt everyone including me and even physically tore the microphone from my hands. Nobody reacted, but he should have been kicked out even before he stole thousands of euros in night clubs with your cnt credit card. I mean, you are talking seriously about financial problems? Well, don't let your delegates drink with your money! And no one will buy this petty lie that you couldn't afford the dues, seeing how much you splurge on congresses for useless gadgets. It was a deliberate boycott and the following events prove it.

Steven.

Yeah, if you're seriously trying to argue that no "revolutionary" organisation should ever try to use legal means to help with disputes, then I don't think you're going to find many people to agree with you here. And TBH it's a completely different discussion, so you should start a new thread about that and stop derailing this discussion.

You didn't answer the question. And my argument is not against the occasional use of lawyers, but against professionalization and the centralization of competencies in a closed group of paid proffesionals inside the union. Criticisms that should be obvious for anyone who is not of the socialdemocratic persuasion.

robot

Maybe you just don't know it or you forgot about it, in march 2011 me and FAUist@s from several other locals picketed OTTO Workforce in solidarity with the campaign the ZSP has been involved there.

Yes. There was a time in 2011 when you organised pickets, and there was impression that it can develop more in the future. I, personally, was in Berlin in 2011 and shared such hopes. But even then I asked there - why we don't have more such contacts, we sholud exchcange more information, especially between Wroclaw and Berlin. And I asked why there is more contacts between Berlin and Poznan IP than us. We are afterall in the same International, so we should help eachother on monthly basis. I proposed even jonit "task force", blog or mailing list, but it was ignored.

After 2011 contacts and suport were less and less frequent. At the same time for example you supported personally and financially IP in Wroclaw during Chung Hong affair which was lost miserably. Even if the conflict was around our city, there was no attempt to contact us here in the city to ask what we think about it (and we had some thoughts to share about it and why it was lost) and if we can do something about it together as members of one IWA.

Your love for IP is completely mistery to us. I don't remember if they supported you in your campaigns as much as we do. What did IP do to be worth of breaking congress decisions? Why don't you support also class conflicts of Solidarity or OPZZ unions if you are so open to cooperate in concrete struggles?

And, of course I think decisions of CNT, FAU, and USI have been made to establish their own International (under pretext of "refounding" still functioning IWA) in an old trotskyite style to clone countless IV Internationals under any pretext, so there is no point to argue with them.

Question is, what others will do? Will they voluntarly join the new International and be deprived of their voices?

Situation strategically looks like this:

Before ZSP and now functioning secretariat of the IWA did start to act, there was only basic IWA www site in two languages. Now there is a www with lots of information and in many languages (even Chinese). There was even no fanpage on biggest social network in the world (Facebook). Our members put a lot of effort to propagate IWA and their principles around the world. This reportedly "worst" secretariat established contacts in Asia and more in East Europe. She was and is very active in propagating IWA in new countries. What old unions like USI did at the same time? Criticised secretary that she is making "vacation trips", even if she only fulfil congresses decisions. WTF? She is losing her job hours and personal time to propagate IWA, without full compensation, and she is accused of "vacation"? What kind of shitty politics is that?

Our impression is that old unions don't want IWA to grow. They are happy with state of the IWA as was before - half functioning, without joint campaigns, without any action internationally. They need only IWA to have fancy "AIT" initials to pretend to be part of international movement, which doesn't work in reality, and nothing more.

And, when the new International will start, yes, you will have three unions (and those who will join them now), but don't be surprised that no other organisation will join this new International in the future. Not on this conditions. And I think that the old unions perfectly know this, because they don't need IWA as functioning international with many sections around the world. They only need this to pretend on their national scene that they are a part of some kind international movement. But there will be no movement.

And last but not least - forget about East Europe. Your new "super IWA" will never be here established. No one will join it. If FAU thinks that IP will join it - forget it. There are too many socialdemocrats in it to allow it, and even now there is opposition to cooperate with you, because some of prominent members call you, citation, "a bunch of punks from Berlin", and propagate cooperation with other German unions. AND now they are cooperating with CGT in red and black coordination, and there is no chance to change it.

They are of course very happy about the situatuion in IWA and translated into Polish CNT statement and circulate it around people (with their own nasty comments of course), but don't expect more.

And in other countries in EE there is no chance for this new Int either. I hope that other sections from the West don't join this new International, because if they do, there would be like a new iron courtain again, which wolud be really sad.

As for organisations who will not accept this "new International". IWA still have potential to grow in other countries. Thanks to work of our secretariat we have stablished new contacts in Asia and other regions. If you want to be in alive, open to new initiatives and federal structure with unions that RESPECT congress decisions, stay with your good old IWA.

Anarchosindicalism is still needed internationally.

zaczek

Steven.

Yeah, if you're seriously trying to argue that no "revolutionary" organisation should ever try to use legal means to help with disputes, then I don't think you're going to find many people to agree with you here. And TBH it's a completely different discussion, so you should start a new thread about that and stop derailing this discussion.

You didn't answer the question. And my argument is not against the occasional use of lawyers, but against professionalization and the centralization of competencies in a closed group of paid proffesionals inside the union. Criticisms that should be obvious for anyone who is not of the socialdemocratic persuasion.

You just don't read what the comrades are telling you.

No, no and no. That "closed group" is a Cooperative of workers. That "inside the union" is NOT true. It is no a part of CNT, it is not organic. It's a Coop that gives services to the CNT as well as to other unions like ELA (Basque country) or worker groups.

And there is not centralization because every union inside the CNT is able to use the GTC or the lawyers they prefer.

armin.tamz

No, no and no. That "closed group" is a Cooperative of workers. That "inside the union" is NOT true. It is no a part of CNT, it is not organic. It's a Coop that gives services to the CNT as well as to other unions like ELA (Basque country) or worker groups.

And there is not centralization because every union inside the CNT is able to use the GTC or the lawyers they prefer.

I bet if the "coop" decided to sue the CNT for employment contracts they would be recognized as CNT employees by the court. I have heard too much of this kind of argument "they are not our employees, it's an external company" from the bosses. I just didn't think I would have to hear it from the CNT.

And regarding why this is an important issue politically, do I really have to write how important it is for local unions to feel empowered on their own level without having to rely on a central service provider? And what it does to an organization structure when a central body takes over their struggles for them? You are saying they don't have to use it, but at the same time you are trying to force-feed this model on everyone and do everything to disrespect small sections acting autonomously.

I'm member of CNT and there are a lot of lies here, from my own comrades. The GTC was created by CNT, with people from CNT, in fact one of its members is the wife of the General Secretary of CNT. CNT is the only client of that "cooperative", CNT is the only one paying services from this cooperative. They've managed this topic trying to make believe that GTC is an independent corporation and that CNT has no control over it, but in the practice that's no true. GTC depends on CNT.

GTC is working on a lot of cases and most of them are not complicated cases and the syndicates could manage it without using the GTC services, but they are forced to pay the GTC. And the few complicated cases in which GTC is involved, are cases with most of the workers not being active on the fights.

CNT is approaching to become a services trade union, instead of being a militant trade union. Like CCOO and UGT, which are corporations getting profits of the fees of their affiliates and gives them lawyers and legal advice when they have a problem, solving their conflicts while the workers can keep watching TV on their couch. The only difference between some syndicates of CNT and CCOO/UGT, is that CNT is not taking part on syndical elections. But even this is questionable. In Sevilla, CNT participated on syndical elections on an undercover way, and in some of the "training studios" (Taller de formación) organised by CNT to teach the new militants what's the anarcosyndicalism, the speakers says them that it's a mistake not taking part of syndical elections.

Finally, about the numbers: CNT accuses other syndicates of being groups of few people which have not grew on several years, but they don't say that CNT was legalized over 40 years ago with over 200.000 affiliates, and now CNT has less than 4000 affiliates (and droping).

Our problem is not with ZSP, many of us see you as a growing organization doing things decently right. If you are not 100 members yet, you will be soon. Any organization of less than 100, and that is a ridiculous number, should focus on growing, not in internal burocracy. Actually for a whole country I think the number should be bigger, but at least 100 is a start.
There is no excuses, if situation is hard in Rusia, Brazil, Slovakia... Them what? are they not revolucionary mass organizations? what kind of revolution will they do if they doen´t grow? should we forget about revolution? that´s counter revolutionary! if an small group doesn´t archive such an small growing as being 100... maybe they should step back, maybe another comrades will do better because we can have only 1 section per country so maybe they are preventing another groups of joining, that´s why there is a "friends of IWA" so you can get support without wasting time in internal debates or they should be just an IWA propaganda group trying to get bigger groups into IWA. It is such a problem focus on growing? it is really a power issue within IWA? groups of 10 friends can not understand the needs of bigger organizations... come on if they can´t understand even the needs of workers in their own country?

Our problem is with Laure, what kind of person did you put as General Secretary??? instead and promoting consensus and cooling down internal conflics from a neutral position, as it should be for an IWA secretary, she was putting gasoline into fire, and now look what is going on! 95% of IWA members are leaving, feeling mistreated and betrayed. For sure she did some things right, she could be a good IWA secretary if not for the internal debates, she takes a position, when she should be neutral... she filters internar section debates winding up even more IWA members... come on, she even writtes in a forum like libcom and get "provoked".... you will never see a CNT General Secretary making mistakes like that, I know some of them were posting in alasbarricadas, but they stopped right in the moment they were proposed for a responsablity position within CNT.

What are going to be the news of new IWA?? incredible growing of Australian section from 3 to 7??? come on! we are talking about the creation of a new correlation of forzes that can lead to make the sitiation better for a social change.
In CNT members are very disapointed, and you are not IWA Secretary just when you stamp.. you are IWA secretary everytime you do something public. And sorry to say but, public positions in organizations are fully open to critizism, some times in a fair way some times not so fair.
IWA secretary acted wirh an iron fist agains FAU, and FAU is several times bigger than all IWA together (without USI & CNT) and we are not nationalist, as members we don´t see countries, we see local unions. Then she took part in an internal conflic of 90% of CNT vs 10%.... hello! we are CNT we ALWAYS have nasty debates, we always had expelled unions, sometimes unions with 20.000 members were expelled, and later they come back or not... so best thing is leave internal debates of sections for them, and only follow oficial agreedments when they are final.
Our only problem with small groups is that instead of focusing in growing local they focus in international, auditing what other sections are doing.... do you know how many months CNT needs to get an agreedment about an IWA issue? how many "try to get consesus" and votings we have to do? from an original proposal of 3 pages we could finish 6 months latter with an agreedment that says "YES", three letters form an original proposal of 3 pages, and the biiger we grow the harder it gets.

CNT has taken a decision to start a process for a new IWA or whatever the new name will be, even if you can talk with every member and make them rethink what they decided it will be a process of 1 year till we get a new agreedment.

mntg is a troll and a liar, he register himself in libcom just to do his job.

XaViER

Situation strategically looks like this:

Before ZSP and now functioning secretariat of the IWA didn't start to act, there was only basic IWA www site in two languages. Now there is a www with lots of information and in many languages (even Chinese). There was even no fanpage on biggest social network in the world (Facebook). Our members put a lot of effort to propagate IWA and their principles around the world.

This is very true. From the outside at least, the IWA appeared to be non-existent as an actual functioning organisation, however in recent years it has actually developed a profile as a working organisation.

Yepa

Our problem is with Laure, what kind of person did you put as General Secretary??? instead and promoting consensus and cooling down internal conflics from a neutral position, as it should be for an IWA secretary, she was putting gasoline into fire, and now look what is going on! 95% of IWA members are leaving, feeling mistreated and betrayed.

Laure has been fulfilling her mandates, which has been confirmed by our organization and the IWA as a whole. Therefore any claim of "not fulfilling the mandate" is a personal opinion, and not an organic opinion of the entire IWA.

As has been said so many times, the FAU issue was actually started by the CNT and the CNT never changed it's mandate on the topic. I guess this was very inconvenient to admit, that's why the card-stealing delegate of CNT tried to prevent the showing of the recorded speech of the "Lion of Alhambra" at the Porto Congress. A recording that proved that this position of the CNT regarding FAU and the mandate of the Secretary really existed.

If Akai can be blamed for anything, it's for being too true to her mandate, which should have been executed years before by previous secretariats but wasn't, in order to avoid trouble. Well, guess what. Trouble brewed anyway and blew up in our faces. It's really lame to blame Laure for that, when the destructive actions are coming from the sections trying to engineer a split. A split that will hinder the development of the IWA for decades to come.

Yepa

mntg is a troll and a liar, he register himself in libcom just to do his job.

again please desist from personal abuse. If she/he has said something incorrect you can respond to it.

Yepa

Our problem is not with ZSP, many of us see you as a growing organization doing things decently right. If you are not 100 members yet, you will be soon.

Don't worry, we exceeded your magical number and still growing. So we don't fight for ourselves, because we could be in your new "refounded International". We fight for principles, respect for congresses decisions and other sections.

There is no excuses, if situation is hard in Rusia, Brazil, Slovakia... Them what? are they not revolucionary mass organizations? what kind of revolution will they do if they doen´t grow? should we forget about revolution? that´s counter revolutionary! if an small group doesn´t archive such an small growing as being 100...

This is really a very arrogant remark in situtation when CNT has lost 90 percent of membership since it's "new start" in seventies. After that, history of CNT is history of constant splits. And now they want to transfer this culture of splitting on international level.

And I have a question - what concrete help you provide to new sections? Not much. ZSP is helping more, with its rather limited resources, than CNT as a whole, not to speak USI. You coludn't even help to grow your sister organisation in France for decades.

And you have the nerve to teach us or small sections how to expand, when you in last 40 years lost almost whole your membership base and dissipated everything you had?

No jokes here please.

robot

Just one last thing. Even if almost anyone in the FAU syndicates is not very amused with the attitude and maneuvers of the IWA secretariat, most of us are very well capable to distinguish between the secretariat and the organization it is a member of. I am pretty sure that many if not most within the FAU acknowledge that the ZSP compared to its affiliation is one of the most agile sections within the IWA. Our problem is not with the ZSP but with others.

I´m from CNT and I completely agree with your comment. Polish people should know, it is not an issue with your organization.

About the proposal to limit the vote to certain sections. Many in Spain are convinced that organizations covering the whole country and have less than 100 members, hardly can be called unions. The daily work of such a small organization is very different from that of a real union. No problem in listening to their opinion, but should focus on their own development and it will have time to vote when it grow up. I understand that the dynamics that occur in some of these small sections limit the development of the IWA. CNT tried in the past to change the voting system and got nothing. If we want to go further, we must overcome this blockade. As they can be, within the IWA. If not, we follow the road out.

zaczek

I bet if the "coop" decided to sue the CNT for employment contracts they would be recognized as CNT employees by the court. I have heard too much of this kind of argument "they are not our employees, it's an external company" from the bosses. I just didn't think I would have to hear it from the CNT.

And regarding why this is an important issue politically, do I really have to write how important it is for local unions to feel empowered on their own level without having to rely on a central service provider? And what it does to an organization structure when a central body takes over their struggles for them? You are saying they don't have to use it, but at the same time you are trying to force-feed this model on everyone and do everything to disrespect small sections acting autonomously.

Another time that seems you don't read what we are trying to explain.

The Coop doesn't works only for CNT. I know 100% that has worked for ELA (basque union) and for a few CCOO "secciones sindicales". So PLEASE, stop telling lies.

The 80% of the CNT wants the GTC, is a collective strategy, stop telling CNT what CNT has to do.

Arnt

CNT tried in the past to change the voting system and got nothing. If we want to go further, we must overcome this blockade. As they can be, within the IWA. If not, we follow the road out.

You are free to quit the IWA and found another organization. What you cannot do (in a legitimate way) is to claim that binding organic decisions of the IWA do not apply to you, because you do not like them.

Of course, I realize that people are going to try to use the illegitimate way, break IWA congress decisions and make a split congress. The results will be of course disastrous: a bloodbath for CNT real-estate ownership in Spain and the AIT name. As far as I know, last time it was tried by the CGT, they lost the buildings and the name. Let's see how it goes this time.

One thing is for sure: you will blame our Secretary for it. It's a bit like the Polish Foreign Minister who likes to blame Poland's problems on cyclists and vegetarians.

zaczek

I bet if the "coop" decided to sue the CNT for employment contracts they would be recognized as CNT employees by the court. I have heard too much of this kind of argument "they are not our employees, it's an external company" from the bosses. I just didn't think I would have to hear it from the CNT.

And with this comment you prove that you don´t know any thing about workers rights.

Does the coop work in CNT building?

No, the have their own office pay by their own.

Does the coop. work only for CNT?

No, they have other contracts with other workers. Already i put a link about it and i can put more links.

Does the coop work with the CNT materials or properties?

No CNT do not borrow any property or what ever thing to the coop.

does CNT put the time tables of working to the coop.?

No

Does CNT give orders of how must to organizes the coop the work?

No

So no doesn't have any base the "Cesion ilegal de trabajadores" (i dont know the legal name in English) that you speak about.

If you want to continue laying about CNT because like this you feel better, all yours, we know perfectly what we do and what we don´t and we don´t have any thing to hide.

zaczek

And regarding why this is an important issue politically, do I really have to write how important it is for local unions to feel empowered on their own level without having to rely on a central service provider? And what it does to an organization structure when a central body takes over their struggles for them? You are saying they don't have to use it, but at the same time you are trying to force-feed this model on everyone and do everything to disrespect small sections acting autonomously.

And ones again you invent what ever you want about CNT, you don´t know any thing about CNT fights and how we manage them. you don´t know not even about workers rights as you prove in several comments, you are not even able to understand what people explain.

zaczek

melenas

Not even that respect. she didnt provide any information as it was MANDATED by IWA congress to the vice-secretary of IWA. And had time to do it, but not even try to contact.

How you feel when someone from other section throw in a pablic forum lies about your section? Why you don´t recriminate this to Akai?

This is ridiculous. The vicesecretariat is only there to replace the secretariat if it's unable to act. It has no other function. Why don't you respect the IWA statutes instead of inventing rules that don't exist?

Look like you donñy know why IWA has vice-secretariat. The reason of the vice'secretariat is that if there is any issue with the secretariat, the vice-secretariat can take the responsability and call for a extraordinary congress. this is because the issue during ASI mandate that leave the IWA in a total disorganization. now try to explain me how can a vice-secretariat make the mandate that has from the IWA if doesn't have access to the mail accounts and bank accounts? I tell you, no way, if happens again that the police take to prison the IWA secretariat what do IWA? Nice that what ever issue or accident is very difficult to happens, but sorry we toke an agreement to don´t play with luck.

zaczek

Regarding respect at the Congress, give me a break. Your delegate (the one that you later found out was a thief) tried to interrupt everyone including me and even physically tore the microphone from my hands. Nobody reacted, but he should have been kicked out even before he stole thousands of euros in night clubs with your cnt credit card. I mean, you are talking seriously about financial problems? Well, don't let your delegates drink with your money! And no one will buy this petty lie that you couldn't afford the dues, seeing how much you splurge on congresses for useless gadgets. It was a deliberate boycott and the following events prove it.

Nice you speak about this. Can be a good moent to speak about something and make a small comparative.

There was an issue that is very similar in CNT and IWA. After finish the mandate of both secretariats, was messing the supporting documents and invoices about the expenses. lets see how manage each organization this issue.

In IWA could not vote the economical report because was messing information and it wasn't provide to the sections. toke 6 years to be provide and had to be ZSP the ones that do it.

In CNT when changed the secretariat is discovered that was messing information, was made a first fast investigation and provide the info to the local union that support the secretariat.

IWA: when finally is provide the economical report to the sections the sections see that is messing several invoices. so there is a big amount of money that is not justified. the report is voted by the unions and it is approved.

CNT: the local union with this information makes a monograph assembly and expel the ex-general secretary of CNT and to the secretary of organization and the treasurer secretary is put a punish that doesn't let them to be choose for what ever position in CNT for 6 years. After this the info is provide to the unions and make it public. also start a process of investigation, analyze and there will be a monograph meeting about this issue.

IWA: no consequences a all. no money is give back.

CNT: the ex-general secretary give back an amount of money as deposit to cover all the money that is not justified. This money is keep by CNT till finish the investigation.

The behavior of The CNT - E is very disgraceful .Not just with IWA, but also against CNT itself. Why I said that?
Against IWA the CNT have done the following:
- CNTE did an economic boycott in 2011 to IWA when the treasurer of CNT with the decided to suspend the contribution. There was some unions that asking to hierarchy of CNT why that money is not paid. Nothing was replied. https://mega.nz/#!84kEWapa . That decision was taken by just by secretariat of CNT. It was authoritarian and hierarchical. Nowadays, that General Secretary of Secretariat of CNT is expelled of CNT and its Organization Secretary is disabled because both of them stole worker money for their own benefits. Total amount is more of 21.000 €, although that is without do the audit. https://mega.nz/#!1sMFXZiR https://mega.nz/#!pl9QwLyR.
- That economic boycott was repeated again in 2014 when the proposal of CNTE was rejected. CNTE said that need money because of big crisis is beaten to working class, while they are squandering its budget in GTC (Lawyer, false self-employment), in group of worker of FAL (Anselmo Lorenzo Foundation, false self – employment as well). As we can see, that is false. It is a strategy for economic strangling to IWA. That’s nauseating. In addition, in that moment, most of proposal to CNTE’s congress about how many euros have to pay are coincide in raise the total amount quote. That is a senselessness, if the militant are beaten by crisis, and they can’t pay IWA quote (0.73€), how they can pay more money to CNT (From 10€ to 12€, 15€, etc).
- The CNTE hide logo IWA of its activities. Some unions claim to secretariat of CNTE why AIT is hidden in their logo. It is other way to try to make not visible to IWA. https://mega.nz/#!o9cDkDSR May day poster https://mega.nz/#!clFTmJDZ
- The CNTE try destabilize to IWA. For that, they try to make economic strangled, hiden to IWA, and did a motion to censure to Secretariat of IWA. Secretariat of CNTE lost that motion. Put a woman as vice secretary of IWA, but like she could manage nothing, she gave up this position. That position is just representative. CNTE then, launch this attack against IWA.
- When IWA did a week of fighting, I think it was in 2014, CNTE preferred to participate with First of March European Movement, where is CGT, and other organization that belong to parallel International.
Against CNTE, the secretariat of CNTE or same union than support to permanent secretariat have done the following:
- They participated in syndical elections.
- Some Unions paid more quotes than they were really, so they have more votes than the rest (representative system vote).
- Some Unions have private police, and they can put penalties.
- The actual Secretary of Syndical Action is an employer. http://www.infocif.es/cargos-administrador/buenaventura-lebrija-sl
- The CNTE have false self-employed, so CNTE actually is an employer. The GTC (Lawyer) and group of worker of FAL, don’t have other activities than they do to CNTE. In addition, the wife or partner of Actual General Secretary belong to GTC.
- With the new permanent secretariat of CNT (Less than 1 years) there is an imbalance of more than 21.000€. Again, imbalance is present in our treasury, although this time, Permanent Secretariat of CNT lost the same amount in just one year than last secretariat permanent stole in four year. And yet, the union can’t access to account book. https://mega.nz/#!V110TBwJ
- The X CNTE Congress was a sham. https://mega.nz/#!Vt01BA5B https://mega.nz/#!FpdVgTIK https://mega.nz/#!Q10TTQpJ https://mega.nz/#!tgkkXARB In those document, we can see as a group of unions planned the congress before than it started.
- CNTE is divided. On the one hand are who support the hierarchy, the corruption or as they are called CNT Renovados or heterodox and on the another hand is who fight against any hierarchy, the corruption or orthodox. Beltrán Roca wrote about that, before that happened. https://mega.nz/#!ltNRnZLR (That’s in English). This man is the ideological boss of all of them. All unions that are critical with hierarchy in CNT are expelled of CNTE. 4 unions in Andalusia, 7 unions in Levant, 4 unions more in Galicia. Most of them are expelled in just one year. Other unions have decided to give up CNTE because that situation is unbreathable, like STSI, SOV of Murcia, among others. http://www.stsi-madrid.org/articulo/22-09-2015/nos-vamos-de-cnt-nos-vemos-en-las-calles/ // https://mega.nz/#!90EyDQKK
This is just a little part of normal operation of CNTE. It’s really a fraud. This is not a revolutionary organization that all libertarian people has in mind. It’s just a fraud. CNTE is actually kidnapped, and now, they go to attack to IWA

It's much of a coincidence that the same money is give up, is the same money that is imbalance.

Why you hide that the ex-general secretary give back the money?

Melenas, there are two inbalance. The first, it was when before permanent secretariat stole worker money. The second is now, with the new Treasury report. If you lost 21000€ first time plus you lost other 21.000€. You have lost 42000€. If it give back 21000€, the amount total that is imbalance is 21000€. Nothing is cover. You should read treasury report. I hide nothing. Your hair don't let you see clear

Becouse, that is false. First, the audit is not done. So you can't know how much money is stole. And he give back the same money that new imbalance. Much of coincidence.

you mix things and put clear lies. today i don´t have time to answer more lies. also I´m starting to think that no reason to continue explaining why are lies.

better to spend my time organizing with the workers of my company and preparing a strategy to win rights and stabilize a union in it. At the end there is some people that doesn't matter how many proves you put in front of them, they are able to assure that the earth is flat and Land´s End is the end of earth.

Melenas said:

"Look like you donñy know why IWA has vice-secretariat. The reason of the vice'secretariat is that if there is any issue with the secretariat, the vice-secretariat can take the responsability and call for a extraordinary congress. this is because the issue during ASI mandate that leave the IWA in a total disorganization. now try to explain me how can a vice-secretariat make the mandate that has from the IWA if doesn't have access to the mail accounts and bank accounts? I tell you, no way, if happens again that the police take to prison the IWA secretariat what do IWA? Nice that what ever issue or accident is very difficult to happens, but sorry we toke an agreement to don´t play with luck."

You should know that vice secretary is just representative position. Nothing else. In view of the facts, is the best that Secretariat of IWA have done.

melenas

you mix things and put clear lies. today i don´t have time to answer more lies. also I´m starting to think that no reason to continue explaining why are lies.

better to spend my time organizing with the workers of my company and preparing a strategy to win rights and stabilize a union in it. At the end there is some people that doesn't matter how many proves you put in front of them, they are able to assure that the earth is flat and Land´s End is the end of earth.

Everybody lies less you. It is no coincidence that I speak about treasury report. You just said everbody lies. Your reply is very normal and I understand you. It's a reply when you don't have argument.

La Ravachole

Becouse, that is false. First, the audit is not done. So you can't know how much money is stole. And he give back the same money that new imbalance. Much of coincidence.

Is the money that was more or less counts in the first moment. of course we don´t know if is that the money and i didn't say that is the exact amount, so tell me, what is false of what i said?. Also, try mix both quantities is totally paranoid, since everybody knows that are not exactly friends the previews secretary with the new one.

Data, just data. I know what there are in treasure report. In the last report and the new report. If they are friend each other or not. Really That iis not important. The worker money, that is important.

With obviously most arguments exchanged, the only stuff left to say seems to be washing one's dirty laundry in public. This is as boaring as embarassing. Looks as if it's about time to desubscribe this thread.

From the perspective of a solfed member, this dispute is obviously quite distressing and pretty hard to engage with. I've been producing a wiki which is currently shared within the Bristol Solfed local and we could make that available for other locals if that would be useful. The aim being so that a majority instead of a tiny minority can actually get their heads around the many different angles that have been raised in this.

I agree with you Robot. That is boring and embarrasing. And like you said in CNTE there are a lot of dirty. Although I have to remind you, Permanent Secretariat of CNTE were who started this discussion. They were the one who make that discussion public. They were who make a irrational criticism to to IWA and its secretariat. You could have said something #276 post ago, about the embarrasing and boring is this issue.

hammclovnaggnell

From the perspective of a solfed member, this dispute is obviously quite distressing and pretty hard to engage with. I've been producing a wiki which is currently shared within the Bristol Solfed local and we could make that available for other locals if that would be useful. The aim being so that a majority instead of a tiny minority can actually get their heads around the many different angles that have been raised in this.

Woowww. That wiki look like very interesting. We use Eliseo (It's a intranet wich is called Eliseo) where every local unions can raise their agreement, and everybody can see the different argument from different point of view. But what is the problem with Eliseo? That Permanent Secretariat CNTE or any Permanent Secretariat any region can censor as they have done a lot of time. Other problems is that a lot of local unions don't allow their militants to access to Eliseo, so, they manage where have to look at their militants.

be washing one's dirty laundry in public

Are we not on a thread where "dirty laundry" of IWA is washed? If only secretary of IWA has been "washed" there wasn't any problem for you. When there are some documents put in public about CNT, then this is a scandal. Because everybody can spit at IWA and our secretariat, tell everybody that she is lying and not showing any proof of this, but CNT, oh this is different story, CNT is holy queen :-D

I have no problem with "washing laundry in public". There is no other way of communication in IWA where regular memebers can exchange information. There is only libcom forum I see, and what I read is very interesting.

just a quick remark: as a former member of a (post-)trotskyist international whose section in the land where I'm from was split into two separate organisations, it is my perception that our internal discussions back then were conducted in a sometimes hard but far less vitriolic way and that comrades were generally able to cope with the fact, that there were other comrades or groups with different perceptions or opinions

btw.: is there a formalized right in the IWA to form factions/tendencies/whatever?

Entdinglichung

just a quick remark: as a former member of a (post-)trotskyist international whose section in the land where I'm from was split into two separate organisation, it is my perception that our internal discussions back then were conducted in a sometimes hard but far less vitriolic way and that comrades were generally able to cope with the fact, that there were other comrades or groups with different perceptions or opinions

btw.: is there a formalized right in the IWA to form factions/tendencies/whatever?

This is IWA Statute. Your answer is there. http://www.iwa-ait.org/content/statutes. We aren't troskyist, we are anarchosyndicalist.

hammclovnaggnell

From the perspective of a solfed member, this dispute is obviously quite distressing and pretty hard to engage with. I've been producing a wiki which is currently shared within the Bristol Solfed local and we could make that available for other locals if that would be useful. The aim being so that a majority instead of a tiny minority can actually get their heads around the many different angles that have been raised in this.

We realize this is very painful for Solfed in particular and that this section might be torn internally. This conflict might have been dealt with earlier and it would have been easier. But it hasn't. I clearly remember warning that this would explode in our faces and it did.

Mr Ravachole, you know very well that to lie and defame in public your organization CNT would be expelled. Why does it from anonymity, that great anarchosyndicalist are...

Look at this. SolFed is not been bleed. Assuming the CNT proposed, as if it is a new international and the AIT are whether the AIT remains is 10% of the members. What the problem that in matters of Union struggle that goes beyond borders not be can work together? The CNT has no problem working with SolFed whatever happens, even with any section in the Union fight.

Entdinglichung

just a quick remark: as a former member of a (post-)trotskyist international whose section in the land where I'm from was split into two separate organisation, it is my perception that our internal discussions back then were conducted in a sometimes hard but far less vitriolic way and that comrades were generally able to cope with the fact, that there were other comrades or groups with different perceptions or opinions

btw.: is there a formalized right in the IWA to form factions/tendencies/whatever?

See this old thread (from 2007) for some discussion of 'factions' in the CNT:

https://libcom.org/forums/thought/debate-cnt-27122007

Some things in this conflict are acceptable and some aren't. Here is how I see it:

What is NOT acceptable:
- scapegoating individuals for fulfilling their mandates
- ignoring congress decisions for decades and expecting nothing to happen
- trying to hijack an organization on a split congress

What is acceptable:
- disagreeing on strategies and arguing what will lead to mainstream unionism and what will lead to radical developments (no one can claim to know for sure, so any discussion about this is legitimate)
- disagreeing on internal policies affecting internal growth
- quitting organizations that do not share common goals and setting up new ones

But Mark, these two factions or more telling Beltran Roca are not truth. There are trade unions, with their small approach diferecencias that anarcho-syndicalism and small cores of groups of extremely ideological friends who are constantly making internal noise and do not trade unionism of any kind, except a couple of exceptions...

Ragnar

Mr Ravachole, you know very well that to lie and defame in public your organization CNT would be expelled. Why does it from anonymity, that great anarchosyndicalist are...

You know better tham me that I am not liying or defaming. My arguments are supported by facts and evidence. I've said everything I have accompanied with evidence.It is a pity that you do not.

The Permanent Secretariat of CNTE could take your advice.

Ragnar

Look at this. SolFed is not been bleed. Assuming the CNT proposed, as if it is a new international and the AIT are whether the AIT remains is 10% of the members. What the problem that in matters of Union struggle that goes beyond borders not be can work together? The CNT has no problem working with SolFed whatever happens, even with any section in the Union fight.

The question is - is it better to have smaller organisation, but with everyone respect congress decisions and with unions that really work towards international solidarity and mutual aid, and which are not concentrated only on their internal national conflicts.

We (for example ZSP) are maybe smaller than CNT on a paper, but in practice we did more for international solidarity and IWA growth than most members of CNT. We have helped everyone who asked us for help, especially for example FAU and CNT. Only fraction of CNT did the same to us.

So - not quantity but quality really matters. You can have a big organisation on a paper, but not working in real world, and smaller, but fighting as hell.

And one more thing. We don't have tools to check how many members any union has. From IWA perspective we are now bigger than CNT, because CNT doesn't pay dues :-).

But, if you want to enforce proportional voting, you sholud also propose tools to check how many members you really have, because we really don't know, you too often change your minds ;-).

Look La Ravachole:

It is not true that it did boycott in 2011, the reason for the delay in payment has to do with the case of Elda and having to leave quarantine € 500,000 (today expelled, from the same tendency of La Ravachole town)

The GTC's already explained in the above other users and prove the lies you tell. The cooperative may 1 not only works for CNT, in fact the GTC does not have why work only with that worker cooperative.

The XICongress of the CNT has decided not to raise the payment of money by affiliation, there are proposals from some unions and other decisions that local unions. New sample that is slandering. There is a saying, inflicted something will...

IWA logo not say that in the Basque country, the CNT, they have never used the logo IWA? Since it gives to understand that it is the translation into Basque of CNT. In recent years he is working the Union to make a good corporate image for propaganda, the dissemination of news, campaigns, etc. in which Spanish society who works recognizes and appeals to you best way to Union, and obviously does not come the logo. Does that make be less than an international? Not right?

The CNT not strangle the economy of the AIT, since there are many thousands of euros in the accounts of the AIT (mainly of the approximate €30,000 per year of quotas giving CNT)

The CNT participated in fight week and the European March, both one and another irregularly

You say that in CNT participate in:

- They participated in syndical elections.
- Some Unions paid more quotes than they were really, so they have more votes than the rest (representative system vote).
- Some Unions have private police, and they can put penalties.
- The actual Secretary of Syndical Action is an employer. http://www.infocif.es/cargos-administrador/buenaventura-lebrija-sl

The exCNT-Cadiz was expelled for saying this himself, for lying and that means defamation.

The imbalance has to do with the money owed by the former exSecretary-General. If you cannot read a report of accounts it is not my problem. In addition you will have a full monograph which will discuss this whole subject in depth.

You can be critical of some procedural issues or importance, above all in a constructive manner, my Union, and I are, why we're close to 250 members, growth and constant involvement from the X Congress of the CNT and aren't or renewed, or heterodox or Orthodox simply do anarcho-syndicalism.

Without saying more, this whole conversation has been quite eye opening...and disappointing.

Being on the other side of the earth it's hard to know with any great degree of accuracy what is exactly going on and it is difficult to discern the veracity of the claims made. My sources are only what I hear from exilios (who don't live in Spain) and the tiny number of ex-ASF members now resident there. But if the rumours I have heard are in fact true, it would seem to me that the CNT is about to be engulfed in a massive scandal from which it will take some effort to recover.

The root cause of the problems in the IWA with the CNT are directly linked to the very attributes that appear to be their greatest strengths; the massive size (in comparison to other sections) and their magnificent legacy (in comparison to other sections). From the moment the CNT re-appeared in the 1970s, it was the largest section with an awe-inspiring reputation. The CNT became accustomed to calling the shots; who dares stand against the great CNT? There was no talk of 'proportional representation' even though the imbalance between the size of the CNT and the size of the other sections of the IWA was greater then that it is today. (Over the long term, the CNT is in decline) There was no talk of 'proportional representation' because it was understood that 'democracy' based on proportional representation is premised on the bourgeois notion that posits the rights of the individual over the rights of the union. There was no talk of 'proportional representation' precisely because it was understood that the IWA is a federation of national sections where each was regarded equally with respect; one section, one vote. The organisational basis of the IWA is founded on the understanding of anarchist federation which has as its central purpose the dissipation, dispersal and attenuation of power. So how can we explain the sudden eruption of 'democratic' feeling within the CNT? What changed?

The re-emergence of the CNT in the 1970s contributed greatly to the re-emergence of the IWA. But it was still confined to those parts of the world where it had operated traditionally; Western Europe and South America. During the 1980s new (very small) sections were admitted from places outside; Japan, USA, Australia, etc. More votes to be counted but who dares contradict the mighty CNT? The 1990s saw arguably its greatest period of expansion with a number of sections from Eastern Europe. The increase in the number of new sections was directly proportional to the increased potential threat to the CNT's hegemonic position. What was needed was a bit of vote-rigging to head this threat off but how to?

Change the status of sections that have a vote to Friends sections which do not. Start with sections that are separated from Europe by large bodies of water. First, the ASF and then the WSA. Manufacture false allegations of participating in parallel internationals and admitting employers to membership and whatever other bullshit that serves the intended purpose. Deliberately censor by omission facts which might suggest otherwise or offer clarity. To this end, an IWA Secretary was installed by the CNT who some here have referred to as the 'Lion of Alhambra'. (I'll refer to him as GR).

The manner in which the status of the ASF and the WSA was changed arbitrarily on the basis of false allegations and in conjunction with the deliberate withholding of documents necessary to reach an informed decision constitutes nothing other than vote-rigging. I intend going into detail with regard to the ASF and the WSA later but suffice to say the votes of the ASF and the WSA were effectively anulled. In the case of the ASF, the details of this injustice was revealed in a report to the 2008 Congress and the issues it raised and directed to the CNT were ignored by the CNT.

The CNT had become accustomed to its privileged position afforded to it by its great numbers and magnificent history. Privilege is invisible to those who have it, and when you're habituated to it, equality seems like oppression. So naturally when an IWA Secretariat emerged that refused to genuflect in the direction of the CNT and determined to carry out the decisions of the IWA Congress she became a monster devil-woman oppressing the true will of the people, spying on other sections subjecting them to an overly-inquisitorial monitoring making false allegations and withholiding documents i.e. the very things that IWA Secretariats, either CNT-appointed or CNT compliant, had been doing for fucking decades.

Any doubt about the CNT's sense of its own entitlement to control and direct the IWA as an adjunct of itself was erased by the April 3 statement by the CNT outlining the decision of the XI Congress to 're-found' the IWA in its own image according to what it alone has decided. One need only look at its own schedule to see that it will accord itself four votes where the other sections that would qualify only one. i.e. status quo restored.

Which sections will get on board with this? I'll lay Melbourne to a brick that the FAU will be first cab off the rank as, according to what I have heard, important members of the FAU and important members of the CNT have been colluding to this end since at least 2010. This gives lie to the notion that it came from the rank and file. Add to that the USI, I'm willing to bet, based on their recent comments. The only other section that would qualify would be the SolFed and I have no idea, but you would not need to be a qualified rocket surgeon to work out some English-language spin-doctoring will emerge from the CNT. (See CNT_Exteriores)

Some have commented here on how sad it all is that it has come to pass. But it has been brewing for sometime. One need only look at the voting record of some sections to see the amount of abstentions on proposals that should have required closer scrutiny. The trouble with sitting on the fence is that, sooner or later, you will eventually hop off with splinters up your arse.

I'm not sad, I'm excited. I'm excited by a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to rid the IWA of the millstone round its neck; the CNT. The very section that has done more to prevent the growth of the IWA beyond the narrow confines of Western Europe to where it needs to go to be truly international and truly global; Asia-Pacific and Africa. I posted earlier a list of the ten most populous countries in the world - have a look. It also presents an opportunity as challenging as it is exciting to build a new Spanish section, almost certainly a new German section and quite possibly a new Italian section. Now there is a chance to re-examine all the practices of the IWA with the aim of improving it and enhancing its prospects for growth in places beyond 'the West'.

A quick comment somebody asked me to put up. One issue here is apparently misunderstood and that is the issue of paying people for services. The problem is not paying for the occasional lawyer etc.. There is a problem when people are trying to get money for services that other comrades have been doing or do for free. lf there are comrades in SolFed making a wiki, then l suggest you don't try to copy paste from Libcom, which is a chat of individuals, but l suggest you ask your Secretary or the lWA Secretary to forward you the record of the conversations about this in the lWA - ie., where people from a certain place tried to get paid for doing stuff without looking for volunteers and where these tasks a) were being done as wolunteers in other Sections b) there were volunteers from them who eventually did it. The call for volunteers had not been made inside the organization, only first there was a proposal that we all pay somebody for the service.

Since this happened more than one time, it showed a pattern and Sections, not individuals, spoke to that problem. This is what you should put in your wiki - the official opinions of the Sections on these matters - not look through personal opinions in this chaos.

Yepa

you will never see a CNT General Secretary making mistakes like that

In fact, the last General Secretary of CNT did something worse: he stole 15000€ from CNT for drug-related reasons. Several SOVs warned that during the two years he was Secretary, there was no treasury report, so the militants could not check if everything was allright. But the reformists said "shut up, they're doing fine!", because the secretariat was located on a reformist syndicate and most of the syndicates denouncing the lack of reports were not reformists. Finally, the situation get so serious that the new secretariat decided to announce publicly the facts.

http://www.cnt.es/noticias/cnt-inicia-una-investigaci%C3%B3n-por-uso-irregular-de-sus-cuentas

Edit: in fact, he stole more than 15000€, but he gave back a fraction of the stolen money. I talk about the amount not turned back, and I'm not sure but I remember it was about 15000€

Lugius

I'm not sad, I'm excited. I'm excited by a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to rid the IWA of the millstone round its neck; the CNT. The very section that has done more to prevent the growth of the IWA beyond the narrow confines of Western Europe to where it needs to go to be truly international and truly global; Asia-Pacific and Africa. I posted earlier a list of the ten most populous countries in the world - have a look. It also presents an opportunity as challenging as it is exciting to build a new Spanish section, almost certainly a new German section and quite possibly a new Italian section. Now there is a chance to re-examine all the practices of the IWA with the aim of improving it and enhancing its prospects for growth in places beyond 'the West'.

I really don't want to diminish your excitement. But don't you think it's a little simple-heartet? Organizations do not grow because they are a section of the IWA or not. They grow because they are considered to be a useful tool in the class-war by at least a portion of the working class in their respective regions. Or they do not grow because no workers think they are a useful tool. We have both sorts of organizations in the IWA right now.

If you are excited about getting rid of CNT, USI, FAU then you are obviously excited about staying in an international with at best 500 members all over the planet. Of course you may add possible new sections in Spain, Italy and Germany to that. You will propably find a dozen of fans distributed over three towns in Germany. You may find another dozen in Italy. And propably two hundreds in Spain where they already tried a couple of month ago, but failed over their infights and organizational incompetence.

But what's they use of adding some more directions to the IWA website with the same structural problem you already have more than enough of? I could list a least half a dozens of IWA sections that will never in my lifetime be capable of attracting a membership of more than a couple of dozens – either because they can't or because some don't even want to. Two or three others do or may hopefully grow based upon the foundation they laid. They propably will run into the same problems like the ones you are excited to get rid off once they will have a membership of a couple of hundreds. They will predictably be the next to be blaimed as heretics from the one and only anarcho-syndicalist orthodoxy.

I guess Zaczek has expressed are quite more realistic view of what will be the future of an IWA without those you are excited to get rid-off.

robot

And propably two hundreds in Spain where they already tried a couple of month ago, but failed over their infights and organizational incompetence.

lol If you knew about what you're talking...

If you don't like IWA, there's an easy decision: get out. But what you're doing is totally unacceptable, and I hope the IWA will do what your own cowardice blocks you to do.

PD: if numbers are the only relevant factor of a federation, you're ridiculous compared with CGT and you're pure shit compared with CCOO/UGT (the main syndicates on Spain). Maybe you should learn about that organizations, they outnumber you so they have to be more useful to the working class. That's your way of thinking.

Mood Lugius, since the new section you would like to ride in Spain will be friends of the "León de la Alhambra" ;)

I find it regrettable the current situation. No one doubts that there is a problem in the IWA. But instead of seeking solutions, we seem comfortable enlarging the differences.

CNT, FAU and USI organizations are still small, but they are making a name among the working class at the expense of working hard. It seems incredible that finds people who prefer us out. Do not forget that we are partners and all are doing anarcosindicalism.

Keep fighting and throw things at face is the easy way. How difficult it is to find solutions, sit and make a internacinal where all are comfortable. Where smallest can grow, and the "bigger" to see fulfilled their aspirations coordinating, without being all day under the magnifying glass of the inquisitor.

I agree with some of you in that the sectionis the subject of decission, and therefore it makes sense that all have the same votes. In this I disagree with the proposal by CNT, but is just that, a proposal. You can work on it. What I would like you to understand more people is the need to limit the vote to small. Should focus on growth, not supervise others. A very small organization has limited resources and focus on growth is the best strategy. And do not forget that after all, the IWA is an international union. We can have small groups in growth, but call unions some of them is a bit pretentious.