IWA Congress report-backs?

171 posts / 0 new
Last post
petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Dec 15 2009 12:23

ok, sorry for my misunderstanding, but just one thing, using the quote function will avoid a good deal of confusion.

Quote:
Esperanto is also maybe an interesting replyu to this isuse

aut lingua latina? cur non?

Anarchosyndicaliste
Offline
Joined: 14-12-09
Dec 15 2009 12:30

Sorry i don t know how to use quote .. may be is it because the site is in English and not in latin wink

Regarding developpment in america i didn't tell "huge developpment". But if you look back 10 years ago, there was no IWA section in America (OK : LATIN (precisly) america) at all. Now there are two small plantlet that make their possible to grow and spread. To my opinion, few is better than nothing, and it is encouraging. No ?

After the Madrid Congress of 1996, many were betting on a quick and definitive death of IWA. Well, apparently, the cadaver is still moving ... May be is it why we have those kind of subtile subliminal messages, but only for initiated people as rightly remark syndicalist.

Anarchosyndicaliste
Offline
Joined: 14-12-09
Dec 15 2009 12:31

sorry mistake

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Dec 15 2009 12:36

ps - i'm not the one who made the comment about no IWA section in north america. (i've read up on the reasons behind that.)

Libertaria's picture
Libertaria
Offline
Joined: 7-05-08
Dec 15 2009 12:55
Anarchosyndicaliste wrote:
> How come the IWA has no branches in North America?

Well if you - or others - are interested to launch one, or at least stay in contact, you may contact the international secretary. The email in on the IWA webpages http://iwa-ait.org

Here's the question one has: would folks think it right to try and launch an anarcho-syndicalist union affiliated to the IWA in North America (USA and Canada) when the IWW already fills that space? I know the IWW has a whole heap of problems, but I kinda feel that trying to build a second explicitly revolutionary union body would be splitting the resources and space for those ideas.

Awesome Dude's picture
Awesome Dude
Offline
Joined: 31-07-07
Dec 15 2009 14:00
Libertaria wrote:
Here's the question one has: would folks think it right to try and launch an anarcho-syndicalist union affiliated to the IWA in North America (USA and Canada) when the IWW already fills that space? I know the IWW has a whole heap of problems, but I kinda feel that trying to build a second explicitly revolutionary union body would be splitting the resources and space for those ideas.

Following that logic, should SolFed-IWA shut shop and encourage it's members to join the IWW-BIROC en masse?

Awesome Dude's picture
Awesome Dude
Offline
Joined: 31-07-07
Dec 15 2009 14:00

double post

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 15 2009 14:25

Libertaria..... perhaps you may want to read the IWA Statutes for clues on this matter.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 15 2009 14:32
Jack wrote:
The IWW are not anarcho-syndicalist, so no.

It's basically like saying we shouldn't aim to set up a group in North America because NEFAC exist. Both NEFAC and the IWW are political organisations with many positions close to our own, but distinct enough that they are not a substitute for anarcho-syndicalism.

The WSA has at its core anarcho-syndicalism. If you are interested in being part of WSA (and there are a bunch of dual IWW, WSA members) email us at wsany@hotmail.com.

Boris Badenov
Offline
Joined: 25-08-08
Dec 15 2009 14:42
Jack wrote:
The IWW are not anarcho-syndicalist, so no.

It's basically like saying we shouldn't aim to set up a group in North America because NEFAC exist. Both NEFAC and the IWW are political organisations with many positions close to our own, but distinct enough that they are not a substitute for anarcho-syndicalism.

I agree with this, which is why I was wondering if North American (esp. Canadian) anarchism exists outside the "close enough" sphere of the IWW and platformism. I definitely don't think setting up an IWA-affiliated union in the US or Canada would be a waste of time or splitting resources.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 15 2009 14:53

The only non-platformist Canadian group is the WSA group in Edmonton. The others (that I am aware of) are close to a semi-platformist position. Our Edmonton members are also dual IWW members in a branch of about 50-75 people (I think those numbers are correct, I'm not IWW).

But I would be very interested to hear how one would simply go about "setting up an anarcho-syndicalist union" in the US or Canada. Surely there must be a be an organic basis and longterm commitment and strategy. It would be kinda odd (to me at least) just to hoist the red & black and declare yourself a union. I suspect this is a different conversation for a different forum.

Boris Badenov
Offline
Joined: 25-08-08
Dec 15 2009 14:59
syndicalist wrote:
The only non-platformist Canadian group is the WSA group in Edmonton.

Thanks for letting me know. That's exactly what I was trying to find out.

Quote:
But I would be very interested to hear how one would simply go about "setting up an anarcho-syndicalist union" in the US or Canada. Surely there must be a be an organic basis and longterm commitment and strategy. It would be kinda odd (to me at least) just to hoist the red & black and declare yourself a union. I suspect this is a different conversation for a different forum.

Obviously it would have to grow out of something. I'm not saying I will start a one-man anarcho-syndicalist union because I'm not down with platformism. I think though that there might be other people over here on the east coast whose positions are closer to classical anarcho-syndicalism than platformism.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 15 2009 15:10

East coast Canada, eh? Slim non-platformist influenced pickins'. Canada has always been a bit weak in the anarcho-syndicalist department. there were some folks in Ottawa some years ago who wrote us (and the IWA) about being part of the IWA. They never returned letters (pre-email). Decades ago there was a small group in Montreal we were in touch with, but this was more than 20 years ago.I gather the group with any momentum at the moment is Ontario Common Cause (who consider themselves in the broad platformist tradition.

In general, the WSA has been working with other class struggle anarchist groups in north america and we have co-hosted two invitation only "Class Struggle Anarchist Conference"'
(both succesful and well attended, well represented of the cross of anarcho-syndicalist, libertrian socialst, anarchist-communist tendencies). None of us have all that many numbers or strength, so we tey and cooperate and do joint projects as appropriate.

Feel free to PM any time.

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Dec 15 2009 17:00

Is WSA an anarcho-syndicalist organisation?

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 15 2009 17:34
AES wrote:
Is WSA an anarcho-syndicalist organisation?

The WSA has three main pillars: Anarcho-syndicalism; libertarian socialism and anarchist-communism. These pillars have, more or less, existed in the WSA since the start. To a large degree, this is pretty consistant with some of the other propaganda groups that have been part of the IWA over time. In fact, not every IWA affiliate (USI) would call itself anarcho-syndicalist.

The WSA was not formed on a union basis. We always considered ourselves a propoaganda group and fell within Section V. Conditions of Affiliation of the IWA Statutes. http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/iwaprinciple.html

Given our historic roots in anarcho-syndicalism, we are obviously not hostile to it as the question may imply. Personally, I consider myself an anarcho-syndicalist first and foremost
and believe that the WSA should maintain friendly and principled relations with anarcho-syndicalists and others within the broad libertarian workers movement.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 15 2009 18:45
Jack wrote:
How do you mean 3 main pillars? As in, so long as you accept one of the above you are welcome?

Actually, as long as you accept our "Where We Stand" statement.

Let me roll this back a bit. I've got to do it quickly as I'm "working", but will be happy to come back to it later.

Those of us who came about to form the WSA come from two main groups. The Syndicalist Alliance (Milwaukee) and the Libertarian Workers Group (New York City area). Both groups,at its core were anarcho-syndicalist and, in 1978 both affilauted to the IWA. While seperate and freestanding locals, they were also affiliated to the ex-Anarchist-Communist Federation of North America. So, what does this have to do with things? Well, see, the SA, aside from itself general anarcho-syndicalism felt more confortable with libertarian socialism. The LWG
(the larger and much more pro-active internally of the two) was anarcho-syndicalist and had anarchist and libertarian communist members as well. In the broader network of comrades we met and melded with inside the ACF, there were those who considered themselves comfrtable with as much Kropotkin and Bakunin as with Rocker or other thinkers (for eample).

Unlike in most other lands, there is has not been a long and enduring tradition of one ideological brand of anarchism or another. I guess WSA would be the longest standing contemporary organization as we have just turned 25 this past November. But the point here is that most in the class struggle movement take from a variety of historical traditions and tendencies. Our newer members have no real experiances with anarcho-syndicalism and are just begining to get a feel for it. And it is the role of the few WSA veteran's to pass along what our experiances have been and our general perspectives are and work with those whose experiances and traditions may be somewhat different.

I will not get into the 1999-2000 IWA and WSA period here, except by way of a general commentary. As we passed into a new milenium and the events between the WSA and the IWA unfolded, quite a few younger US comrades chose to be part of movements that had nothing to do with the IWA. What transpired had a negative affect on what was identified with anarcho-syndicalism in the US, as well as internationally.

Since this time period WSA has committed itself to being a positive force here in the US and Canada (to the extent that Canadian comrades want to organically be a part of the WSA). Some of the 1984 veteran's hung in there. It was a hard period, a period of isolation and few members. Yet we made an effort to kept the WSA afloat,we could have just thrown the towel in and walked away defeated. The principles, the pride and the dedication to advancing the WSA as far as it could go served as our high-energy drink.

Since those dark days we built relationships with younger and mainly anarchist-communist and Wobbly members. We have always been outfront as to where we have come from, what we believe and as long as there is mutual respect we can work things out and work together.

So through our jouneys the three pillars have developed.

I hope this is somewhat helpful. Again, I'll be happy to address anything I may have missed or which you might want to ask.

Libertaria's picture
Libertaria
Offline
Joined: 7-05-08
Dec 15 2009 21:47
blackrainbow wrote:
Following that logic, should SolFed-IWA shut shop and encourage it's members to join the IWW-BIROC en masse?

I figure it should be the other way around wink

syndicalist wrote:
But I would be very interested to hear how one would simply go about "setting up an anarcho-syndicalist union" in the US or Canada. Surely there must be a be an organic basis and longterm commitment and strategy. It would be kinda odd (to me at least) just to hoist the red & black and declare yourself a union. I suspect this is a different conversation for a different forum.

See, that's what I meant; I don't know if it would make any sense to put all this hard work into a project that has no organic base, just something from scratch, ya know? Where as in North America the IWW has branches in almost every province in Canada, and in most places in the states, and have a bunch of active campaigns (and I would argue is much more anarcho-syndicalist based then in the UK). So it makes more sense to me, as an anarcho-syndicalist, to work within the IWW.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 15 2009 23:02
Libertaria wrote:
syndicalist wrote:
But I would be very interested to hear how one would simply go about "setting up an anarcho-syndicalist union" in the US or Canada. Surely there must be a be an organic basis and longterm commitment and strategy. It would be kinda odd (to me at least) just to hoist the red & black and declare yourself a union. I suspect this is a different conversation for a different forum.

See, that's what I meant; I don't know if it would make any sense to put all this hard work into a project that has no organic base, just something from scratch, ya know? Where as in North America the IWW has branches in almost every province in Canada, and in most places in the states, and have a bunch of active campaigns (and I would argue is much more anarcho-syndicalist based then in the UK). So it makes more sense to me, as an anarcho-syndicalist, to work within the IWW.

I don't know your situation comrade, so all I can say is, WSA has members who belong to both WSA and the IWW. WSA acts as their "political" home, so to speak, as we are not a union.

If the idea is to bring the IWW into the IWA, well, I serious doubt that a) ever happen and b) even be desired both some in both the IWA and the IWW.

Anyway, fel free to email WSA at anytime at wsanyAThotmail.com or PM me.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 16 2009 02:13

Where'd everyone go? Did my reply "scare" everyone off?

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Dec 16 2009 03:57
jesuithitsquad wrote:
I'm baffled by the complete weirdness of this thread.

As a member of the IWA (on hiatus), I find it more embarassing than weird to be honest. I'm not sure why apparently honest questions should be rebuked thus. If the individuals concerned are convinced that the questions are being asked with malicious undertones due to longstanding personal issues with the IWA, then IMO they should either ignore that and answer them in the same tone as presented or fully explain their suspicions.

People - outside of Libcom regulars - are reading this thread y'know. There's a thing called Google nowadays.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Dec 16 2009 09:19

Caiman,
I think that several people gave some information about the Congress and some of the points discussed, saying that first, people should wait for both more reports back and second, that it would be better to write about some plans as they materialize, not while they are in the planning stage.

I don't think that the point is to rebuke questions. It is just obvious that few readers here are relating to the things actually mentioned about the IWA Congress, or about new developments with FAU and the thread instead has wandered towards things like the WSA, which was not a topic at the Congress.

I have known the person asking the questions close to 30 years now, and am sure there is no malicious intent behind them. I also acknowledge the fact that the IWA as a whole should be better about presenting information about its activities and I hope this will improve.

On the other hand, I do think, to be perfectly frank, that some people from outside the IWA are attracted to issues such as former sections more than most people in the IWA itself are, which contribute to the wierdness of the thread. I personally am wary about getting sidetracked onto such issues when the thread was supposed to be about the Congress.

Probably all of the most important topics / decisions of the Congress were given here in different posts; I think that if somebody wants to discuss them or ask questions about them, people will discuss. I also think though if people want to discuss the American anarchosyndicalist movement, it should probably go to a new thread - surely there is a lot to say about it.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 16 2009 14:35

I have stated a new forum on the Workers Solidarity Alliance so the conversation can keep on point: http://libcom.org/forums/north-america/workers-solidarity-alliance-16122009

To Caiman, I have a longstanding (since about 1974ish) personal interest in the IWA. While I may have personal opinons about the IWA (both positive and very negative) I try to keep my questions objective and seek out factual information.

If I may, then I'll close it here. I get a sick sort of laugh about the whole matter of the IWA and what was the WSA's former relationship to it. Those outside the IWA, criticize me for being too pro-IWA and some inside the IWA critize me for being anti-IWA. Seems all too funny and contradictory. Well, I supose one can be committed to the Principles, the bond of solidarity and so forth while still being wary of other aspects.

To my IWA comrades, good luck & good health in the new year.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Dec 16 2009 15:01

Good luck also to WSA. I will ask something on your new thread. smile

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Dec 16 2009 15:46
syndicalist wrote:
To Caiman, I have a longstanding (since about 1974ish) personal interest in the IWA. While I may have personal opinons about the IWA (both positive and very negative) I try to keep my questions objective and seek out factual information.

It was some of the responses to your (IMO genuine/sincere) questions which prompted my post. My point was that if people recognised you and your group's history within the IWA and for whatever reason considered it an issue, then they should present it openly rather than via snide-isms, reason being the very public nature of this discussion.

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Nov 4 2012 17:13

.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 16 2009 18:10

AES, it is not about one person, it is ultimately what happend to a Section. I happened to have been at the end of the battering ram for others. I happen to still care about relations between anarcho-syndocalist comrades. Reasonable people can disagree about things and that's cool. If you wish to dismiss things, that's cool too.

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Dec 16 2009 18:32

You the only member of the WSA that most of us have ever encountered, and I am referring to many years of involvement - I do also have concerns of the WSA and its reliance on the importance of experienced "veterans" (presumably you are one of these "veterans") - this sounds similar to linear hierarchy and has no substance.

The IWA has responsibilities to advance anarcho-syndicalism which are being undermined and overshadowed by your consistent repetition for years.

If the WSA has any ongoing relevance, then by all means have the WSA hold a meeting which states that it is dedicated to specifically advancing anarcho-syndicalism in North America and make your case that the WSA is relevant to our common current and ongoing purpose.

At this stage it seems apparent that the WSA, if it is not dedicated to advancing anarcho-syndicalism, is in fact a placeholder which prevents such an organisation from emerging

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 16 2009 18:57
AES wrote:
You the only member of the WSA that most of us have ever encountered, and I am referring to many years of involvement - I do also have concerns of the WSA and its reliance on the importance of experienced "veterans" (presumably you are one of these "veterans") - this sounds similar to linear hierarchy and has no substance.

The IWA has responsibilities to advance anarcho-syndicalism which are being undermined and overshadowed by your consistent repetition for years.

If the WSA has any ongoing relevance, then by all means have the WSA hold a meeting which states that it is dedicated to specifically advancing anarcho-syndicalism in North America and make your case that the WSA is relevant to our common current and ongoing purpose.

At this stage it seems apparent that the WSA, if it is not dedicated to advancing anarcho-syndicalism, is in fact a placeholder which prevents such an organisation from emerging

Thank you for those kind words comrade.

As I scratch my head, the WSA (even after it was no longer a part of the IWA) has, to the best of its abilities, shown solidarity with IWA Section's and their campaign's. I think there's enough on the record stuff to prove that. And I suspect there are enough honest comrades who are reading this forum to back up my statement.

As for me being a "veteran", ok, change the word if you wish. The point I was trying to make is that it is a few older members who helped to organize the IWA in the US and who still actually give a crap about what that meant/why it's important to maintain IWA ties where they can be maintained and so forth. Hey, it ain't wrth crap to you, I get. It does to a few of us.

Now you may not care for what I have to say. Ok, no problem. But to say that the work of the IWA in north america "is ...being undermined and overshadowed" by WSA or my words is somewhat unbelievable.

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Dec 16 2009 19:02

You continue to play out the victim scenario

wrote:
by all means have the WSA hold a meeting which states that it is dedicated to specifically advancing anarcho-syndicalism in North America

Again I am asking for this, and lets leave it there

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 16 2009 19:08
AES wrote:
You continue to play out the victim scenario
wrote:
by all means have the WSA hold a meeting which states that it is dedicated to specifically advancing anarcho-syndicalism in North America

Again I am asking for this, and lets leave it there

That's not what the thrust of you email was.

Comrade, just for clarification, the WSA is not asking to be part of the IWA at this time.But that doesn't mean tere aren't some comrades who are not interested in what happens with the IWA. And our relevance is not predicated by your and anyone else's criteria. WSA will continue to build relations with those who want to have meaningful relations with us.

But, yes, we shall end it here.