IWA Congress report-backs?

171 posts / 0 new
Last post
AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Nov 4 2012 17:18

.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 16 2009 19:46

Comrade, thank you for your support today and it would've been great 10 years ago. Yes, that was said sarcasitically. 10 lashes. Seriously, I think it would have been more helpful and you wouldn't have to listen to my repetition for all thses years.

I can not speak for the WSA in any official capacity on your point. While these are my opinions, I think they may be reflective of most in the WSA.

I can only say that the WSA (in 2009) stands in solidarity with all the good things IWA Section's do, we'll continue to support the good work that comes out of "the IWA" and we look seek to have working relations with those who want to have them. As I said, WSA will continue to do what in can in solidarity and send solidarity, to the best of our abilities, as we can.

Our politics are guided by our "Where We Stand" document and, at this time, by no other.
I think I laid out our perspectives in another positing.

The WSA retains its own open international relations policy. We are not in favor of a "no contact" position. That said, relations between organizations need to be principled and straight forward. Any and all solidarity WSA gives is without strings attached and without prejuice towards any principled agreements or disagreements we may have with the organization or individuals we are expressing our solidarity with.

AES, if there's other things you would like me to go over, we can do it elsewhere.

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Dec 16 2009 21:55
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

The IWA is not anarcho-syndicalism, it's merely one tendency, one that is currently riven with sectarianism and paranoia, unfortunately. One that looks a little ridiculous from the outside. The lack of an "official" organisation in the US is due to the sectarianism and paranoia of certain people within the IWA.

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Dec 16 2009 22:20

I hope you don't mean it seriously. A rather bad joke. But it seems the outsiders know better...

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Dec 16 2009 22:31

Snide comments about outsiders make you look extremely insular, as well. 'Aaar, them outsiders think they know better again, they do, talkin about our ways, they are...'

I'm basing my information on this thread - http://libcom.org/forums/workers-solidarity-alliance/workers-solidarity-alliance-and-iwa

What part of it isn't true, or is that to remain an internal secret?

I admire and support many of the individual sections but the international seems pretty dysfunctional.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 16 2009 22:38
Jack wrote:
Well to be fair, however badly the WSA were treated or not (personally I think they were treated appallingly) their politics place them outside of the IWA.
.

Thanks Jack for recognizing how WSA was treated. You're probably one of the few comrades to actually publically say that. Appreciated.

But can you explain why our politics place us outside the IWA?

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Dec 16 2009 23:04
Jack wrote:
I'm about as critical of the IWA as you can be while still being inside it, but tbh making a synonym of Anarco-Syndicalism and IWA isn't that mental, given that the number of anarcho-syndicalist organisations outside of the IWA can be counted on one hand, are almost all ex-IWA or have continuity to the IWA and are universally tiny.

There are various groups in Spain - not only the CGT, but the disaffiliated CNTs, Solidaridad Obrera, maybe? The CNT-F (now apparently revolutionary syndicalist), the SAC, other expelled sections (?). Most of these groups are now dominated by reformism but they have anarcho-syndicalist tendencies within them that are potentially larger than many IWA sections. Also, there are differing definitions of anarchosyndicalism.

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Dec 16 2009 23:11

888, are you a member of WSA?

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 16 2009 23:17

Comrade AES, 888 is not a member of the WSA. I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but this is the sort of stuff which resulted from the problems of 10 years. By which I mean the perception of "the IWA"

I'll let the comrade speak for themse;ves on the other stuff.

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Dec 16 2009 23:19

OK Jack, agreed.

AES wrote:
888, are you a member of WSA?

No, I'm not. I'm in the IWW although I am critical of many aspects of the IWW.

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Dec 16 2009 23:24

I ask because you are generally accomodating of this type of rumour and misrepresentation, which does the IWA no favours.

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Dec 16 2009 23:31

what rumor and what kind of misrepresentation?

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Dec 16 2009 23:39
AES wrote:
I ask because you are generally accomodating of this type of rumour and misrepresentation, which does the IWA no favours.

Well, I'm basing my opinion largely on the WSA/IWA thread I mentioned above, as well as on various news items (on a-infos, infoshop, here, and elsewhere) I have read since my introduction to anarchism in 1998, particularly regarding the French and Italian splits and expulsions. If you can point me in the direction of information that clarifies whether and what the misrepresentation and rumours are, it would be appreciated.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 16 2009 23:39
AES wrote:
I ask because you are generally accomodating of this type of rumour and misrepresentation, which does the IWA no favours.

So why would this make him a WSA member? Is this how folks on the other side of the pond see WSA? As promoting "rumour"? Wow.

Ok, perhaps it's just best for us to start another forum if folks wish. I originally stated this forum to ask for simple, staright forward and factual info on the recently concluded Congress.

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Dec 16 2009 23:42
petey wrote:
what rumor and what kind of misrepresentation?

Claiming the IWA is "sectarian" - the situation is that we have politics and hold opinions, which seems to be unacceptable to those who water-down their organisations to be perceived as serious.

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Dec 17 2009 00:08
AES wrote:
petey wrote:
what rumor and what kind of misrepresentation?

Claiming the IWA is "sectarian" - the situation is that we have politics and hold opinions, which seems to be unacceptable to those who water-down their organisations to be perceived as serious.

ok now we're getting somewhere, because you're talking about political content.

full disclosure: i'm coming back to this milieu after decades being out of it (so have no personal experience of the events in dispute) and have been seriously engaged for about the past 4 years or so. i've met syndicalist, but more importantly i've seen the work he's done and i know the value of that work to the self-consciousness of the syndicalist and/or anarchist element in the states. i'm a member of no organization, but the WSA is the one i'd apply to if i took the leap.

so: how, in your opinion AES, have the WSA watered down their organization?

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Dec 17 2009 00:08
AES wrote:
petey wrote:
what rumor and what kind of misrepresentation?

Claiming the IWA is "sectarian" - the situation is that we have politics and hold opinions, which seems to be unacceptable to those who water-down their organisations to be perceived as serious.

It's very hard not to get the impression that the IWA is sectarian, looking from the outside, unfortunately.

The main reasons I think the IWA is sectarian are the weird no contact rules and the related resolutions to take up contact with groups in other countries only via IWA sections.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Dec 17 2009 00:13
Quote:
Jack wrote:

Well to be fair, however badly the WSA were treated or not (personally I think they were treated appallingly) their politics place them outside of the IWA.

From what I know, I would have to agree that the WSA matter was not handled correctly. That said, I think there is a larger structural problem related to sections with questionable status which I hope will be resolved. In any case, some suggestions about this have already gone out for unofficial discussion. I think that the standards by which sections with questionable status are handled should be known in advance, be the same for all and the process should be transparent.

On the other hand, such situations are caused by internal problems that the IWA as a whole has no control over.

As to the second part of your statement, even keeping in mind the divergence in tactics and politics inside the IWA itself, I suppose that if the IWA sections are not actively trying to court the WSA back into the IWA, they must have come to a similar conclusion. (Although there were plans to investigate the situation in the US, so there was some will to discuss with the WSA.) If this conclusion is wrong, based on misinformation or whatever, more discussion with the WSA on their vision, strategy and positions should make things clearer.

But this is on the WSA thread. smile

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 17 2009 00:24

duplicate. sorry.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 17 2009 00:23
akai wrote:
On the other hand, such situations are caused by internal problems that the IWA as a whole has no control over.

This isn't actually factual. And it wasn't exactly factual over here.

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Dec 17 2009 00:24

Its important to understand the underlying context of this specifc discussion - my concern here is whether the WSA is an organisation which intends to advance anarcho-syndicalism in North America.

It appears to me that WSA is all at the same anarchist, libertarian syndicalist, anarcho-syndicalist, platformist and none of these all at the same time.

And in addition to that, I consider 'syndicalist' to be the most outspoken person to cause damage the reputation of the IWA in the english language world, by his insistence on harping on (well aware that no action will be taken on public forums) about his qualms. Any sympathies I ever had, have come to an end

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 17 2009 00:33
AES wrote:
And in addition to that, I consider 'syndicalist' to be the most outspoken person to cause damage the reputation of the IWA in the english language world, by his insistence on harping on (well aware that no action will be taken on public forums) about his qualms. Any sympathies I ever had, have come to an end

I'm impressed. The "Mighty Oz" has spoken.

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Dec 17 2009 00:39

You can't always have it both ways

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Dec 17 2009 00:41
AES wrote:
You can't always have it both ways

Seriously... what do u mean?

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Dec 17 2009 00:49

You publicly undermine the reputation of the IWA but claim to be our comrade. If you genuinely intend to gain support then give us something to support, such as by clarifying whether the WSA intends building anarcho-syndicalism in North America.

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Dec 17 2009 00:54

When repeatedly publicly asked why the WSA left the IWA it is only fair to offer a public reply. Do you disagree with the factuality of the statements made by WSA members on this thread?

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Dec 17 2009 00:56
AES wrote:
It appears to me that WSA is all at the same anarchist, libertarian syndicalist, anarcho-syndicalist, platformist and none of these all at the same time

about the platformism i've wondered myself, on this thread:
http://libcom.org/forums/north-america/workers-solidarity-alliance-16122009. (i hope syndicalist will speak to that.) as to the other currents: i don't know the difference between libertarian syndicalist and anarcho-syndicalist.

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Dec 17 2009 01:13

#124 posts into a thread intended to discuss the progress of the recent IWA Congress - this seems very apparent as a thinly veiled attempt once again to undermine the reputation of the IWA by revisiting undigestable issues by 'syndicalist' which everyone knows cannot be decided on here.

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Dec 17 2009 01:16

Why would anyone be interested in undermining the reputation of the IWA? Asking questions, criticising is not the same as "undermining the reputation".

AES's picture
AES
Offline
Joined: 15-02-04
Dec 17 2009 01:21

If the issue could be resolved here then I would agree, however banging on for ten years to third parties and not approaching the issue with a view to resolving it is vexatious and not comradely