CNT proposes reorganization of IWA

781 posts / 0 new
Last post
melenas
Offline
Joined: 10-12-14
Apr 12 2016 21:11

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.

La Ravachole's picture
La Ravachole
Offline
Joined: 7-04-16
Apr 12 2016 21:12

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.

La Ravachole's picture
La Ravachole
Offline
Joined: 7-04-16
Apr 12 2016 21:18
melenas wrote:
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.

melenas
Offline
Joined: 10-12-14
Apr 12 2016 21:20
La Ravachole wrote:
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.

La Ravachole's picture
La Ravachole
Offline
Joined: 7-04-16
Apr 12 2016 21:25

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.

robot's picture
robot
Offline
Joined: 27-09-06
Apr 13 2016 05:33

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.

hammclovnaggnell
Offline
Joined: 8-04-16
Apr 13 2016 07:00

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.

La Ravachole's picture
La Ravachole
Offline
Joined: 7-04-16
Apr 13 2016 08:52

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.

La Ravachole's picture
La Ravachole
Offline
Joined: 7-04-16
Apr 13 2016 09:19
hammclovnaggnell wrote:
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.

XaViER
Offline
Joined: 18-03-07
Apr 13 2016 09:26
Quote:
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 grin

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.

Entdinglichung's picture
Entdinglichung
Offline
Joined: 2-07-08
Apr 14 2016 09:59

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?

La Ravachole's picture
La Ravachole
Offline
Joined: 7-04-16
Apr 13 2016 10:16
Entdinglichung wrote:
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.

zaczek
Offline
Joined: 29-05-07
Apr 13 2016 10:48
hammclovnaggnell wrote:
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.

Ragnar
Offline
Joined: 29-12-15
Apr 13 2016 10:50

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...

Ragnar
Offline
Joined: 29-12-15
Apr 13 2016 10:56

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.

Mark.
Offline
Joined: 11-02-07
Apr 13 2016 10:58
Entdinglichung wrote:

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

zaczek
Offline
Joined: 29-05-07
Apr 13 2016 11:09

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

Ragnar
Offline
Joined: 29-12-15
Apr 13 2016 11:15

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...

La Ravachole's picture
La Ravachole
Offline
Joined: 7-04-16
Apr 13 2016 11:57
Ragnar wrote:
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.

XaViER
Offline
Joined: 18-03-07
Apr 13 2016 12:09
Ragnar wrote:
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.

XaViER
Offline
Joined: 18-03-07
Apr 13 2016 12:26

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 smile.

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 wink.

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

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:

Quote:
- 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.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Apr 13 2016 13:22

Without saying more, this whole conversation has been quite eye opening...and disappointing.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Apr 14 2016 03:45

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'.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Apr 14 2016 04:59

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.

mntg
Offline
Joined: 10-04-16
Apr 14 2016 09:54
Yepa wrote:
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-irr...

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€

robot's picture
robot
Offline
Joined: 27-09-06
Apr 14 2016 09:47
Lugius wrote:
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.

mntg
Offline
Joined: 10-04-16
Apr 14 2016 10:02
robot wrote:
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.

Ragnar
Offline
Joined: 29-12-15
Apr 14 2016 10:34

Mood Lugius, since the new section you would like to ride in Spain will be friends of the "León de la Alhambra" wink

Arnt
Offline
Joined: 6-04-16
Apr 14 2016 10:34

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.