CNT proposes reorganization of IWA

781 posts / 0 new
Last post
Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Apr 6 2016 06:28

Ok, robot, so why was the ASF targetted?

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

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Apr 6 2016 06:37

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?

Sharkfinn
Offline
Joined: 7-11-13
Apr 6 2016 07:13

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.

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 6 2016 07:45

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.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Apr 6 2016 07:48
Quote:
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.

Sharkfinn
Offline
Joined: 7-11-13
Apr 6 2016 08:05
Quote:
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

CNT_Exteriores
Offline
Joined: 4-04-16
Apr 6 2016 08:07

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.

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 6 2016 08:16

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...

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Apr 6 2016 08:39

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.smile o hell.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Apr 6 2016 09:05

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?

Quote:
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:

Quote:
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.

Jim
Offline
Joined: 30-04-06
Apr 6 2016 09:07
Lugius wrote:
From www.cnt.es;

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

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

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.

Yepa
Offline
Joined: 26-09-09
Apr 6 2016 10:03

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.

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 6 2016 10:26

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).

Yepa
Offline
Joined: 26-09-09
Apr 6 2016 10:29

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.

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 6 2016 10:45

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 holdersgrin) 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.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Apr 6 2016 10:49

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.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Apr 6 2016 10:59

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.

Yepa
Offline
Joined: 26-09-09
Apr 6 2016 11:05

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.

Sharkfinn
Offline
Joined: 7-11-13
Apr 6 2016 11:09
Quote:
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.

Jim
Offline
Joined: 30-04-06
Apr 6 2016 11:15

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?

Jim
Offline
Joined: 30-04-06
Apr 6 2016 11:16
akai wrote:
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?

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 6 2016 12:31
Jim wrote:
akai wrote:
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?

Ragnar
Offline
Joined: 29-12-15
Apr 6 2016 12:32

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.

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 6 2016 12:35
Jim wrote:
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?

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 6 2016 12:40
Ragnar wrote:
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.

OliverTwister's picture
OliverTwister
Offline
Joined: 10-10-05
Apr 6 2016 12:45
Quote:
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.

Ragnar
Offline
Joined: 29-12-15
Apr 6 2016 18:10

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...

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 6 2016 13:03
Ragnar wrote:
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

Ragnar
Offline
Joined: 29-12-15
Apr 6 2016 13:07

that what you said your. Do they do it?

Yepa
Offline
Joined: 26-09-09
Apr 6 2016 13:33

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.