IWW, WSA and IWA

[Sosa]

If the IWW is a syndicalist union (economic not political) and the WSA is an Anarcho-Syndicalist group that is not a union. Why haven't they become affiliated? It seems that they have a lot in common. And I know that the IWW was originally considering becoming affiliated with the IWA but because of their stance on religion and politics they ultimately decided not too. Is that still the case today?

[Lolshevik]

what differences do they have on religion and politics? this is news to me.

[Property Is Robbery]

I've wondered why IWW never took an anarcho-syndicalist (political) stance.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I've wondered why IWW never took an anarcho-syndicalist (political) stance.

Most of the prominent members of the IWW at it's peak were not self-described anarchists, so that may be one of the reasons.

Paul Buhle points out in Taking Care Of Business (horrible book btw) that most of the people who scholars today place in the "broad anarchist tradition" classified themselves as "revolutionary socialists", not anarchists. The IWW had different ideological bents depending on location...I can't remember, but I know that one IWW chapter in a major city had a primarily DeLeonist lean.

[Q]

Most of the prominent members of the IWW at it's peak were not self-described anarchists, so that may be one of the reasons.

Anarcho-syndicalists are not anarchists per se, but syndicalists.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Anarcho-syndicalists are not anarchists per se, but syndicalists.

All anarcho-syndicalists are syndicalists, but not all syndicalists are anarcho-syndicalists. That was kind of my point.

And yeah, anarcho-syndicalists are anarchists. They belong to the "broad anarchist tradition"*. Hence the "anarcho" in their title.

*(The "broad anarchist tradition" is just a useful shorthand I've adopted from Michael Schmidt for everything that falls under the libertarian socialist rubric.)

[Widerstand]

The IWW has no-strike clauses. The IWA, at least it's German branch the FAU, but I would assume all of the IWA unions, are opposed to no-strike clauses. Overall, my image is that the IWW is far less "radical" than the IWA - it is less political and its union work resembles that of bourgeois unions.

[Sosa]

The IWW has no-strike clauses. The IWA, at least it's German branch the FAU, but I would assume all of the IWA unions, are opposed to no-strike clauses. Overall, my image is that the IWW is far less "radical" than the IWA - it is less political and its union work resembles that of bourgeois unions.

I don't think thats true. Can you give provide a source for that?

My experience with the IWW, it is nothing like bourgeois unions.

[Devrim]

I don't think thats true. Can you give provide a source for that?

Yrs, it is true. The IWW has some, I think about four, no strike deals. If you want to find a source search through Libcom for IWW and no strike deals and you will find wobblies admitting it.

Devrim

[Widerstand]

I don't think thats true. Can you give provide a source for that?

My experience with the IWW, it is nothing like bourgeois unions.

Ah. That was my first reaction too. Devrim was so kind as to point me to this: http://libcom.org/forums/organise/no-strike-clauses-iww-16122007



The IWW negotiating no-strike clauses has been a 21st Century 'innovation' coming from an US faction seeking 'realistic' IWW organizing. The folks involved in the first no-strike contract kept it hidden from the membership. After I made the contract public they went on a whisper campaign attacking my personal and political reputation.


Currently, I believe the Portland social services shops *do* have no-strike clauses, but the Bay Area branch's two recycling shops *do not* have no-strike clauses and a pretty good union cluture of stopping work when grievences arise, holding stop work meetings and marching on the boss. There is even one case of the African-American workers deciding they should have MLK day off and simply leaving at noon, then when Ceasar Chavez Day came, the Latino workers did the same with the backing of the African-American workers. These holidays were later added into their contracts (a small blurb appeared in the IW on this, but I can't find it on the internet).
I really fail to see what outlawing "no-strikes" clauses in contracts would do that providing people with more skills in bargaining and better organizing wouldn't accomplish better. Often when 'no-strike' is added into a contract it reflects a lack of strength in the fight over bargaining, rather than members and organizers just caving in to pragmatism from what I've seen. There are also a great deal of other problematic parts of contracts as pgh mentioned such as discipline clauses that can sometimes be worse. If we provide more education and training and from our persective of building worker power, I think we'll be better off.

[Devrim]

If the IWW is a syndicalist union (economic not political) and the WSA is an Anarcho-Syndicalist group that is not a union. Why haven't they become affiliated? It seems that they have a lot in common. And I know that the IWW was originally considering becoming affiliated with the IWA but because of their stance on religion and politics they ultimately decided not too. Is that still the case today?

I am sure that Syndicat will be along to explain details soon. He is an expert on the history of anarcho-syndicalism in the US. While we are waiting though if I remember correctly the Chilean IWW became an IWA section also.

Devrim

[Sosa]

Ah. That was my first reaction too. Devrim was so kind as to point me to this: http://libcom.org/forums/organise/no-strike-clauses-iww-16122007

Wow. Thnx for the info.

I know that my branch is opposed to no-strike clauses, they have been helping me and some co-workers organize, I just assumed that it was the same everywhere.

[syndicat]

The IWW has no-strike clauses. The IWA, at least it's German branch the FAU, but I would assume all of the IWA unions, are opposed to no-strike clauses. Overall, my image is that the IWW is far less "radical" than the IWA - it is less political and its union work resembles that of bourgeois unions.


the existing contracts IWW has are, i believe, all in small shops in marginal sectors such as non-profits or social services. these types of contracts were obtained by IWW in an earlier period as a kind of organizational survival strategy.

however, it would be grossly inaccurate to suggest this is the domnant organizing tendency in the U.S. IWW at present. for that you'd have to look to the Starbucks Workers Union and the Jimmy Johns Workers Union. SWU has pursued a "minority union" approach based on grassroots activism to force concessions from the employer through protest and disruption. This is the approach favored by WSA members in the IWW, i believe. Currently about half of WSA members are members of the IWW, including members of both SWU and Jimmy Johns union. WSA members are certainly opposed to no-strike clauses.

to refer to the IWW as a "bourgeois union" shows the poster isn't familiar with the situation.

WSA is a political organization, not a union or mass organization. When we were first organized in the early '80s the IWW was much smaller than it is now, had various internal squabbles, and didn't seem to be going anywhere. Since then the U.S. IWW has grown to a very great extent, now having about 1,600 members I think. nonetheless, it still hasn't overcome its marginality as a union.

WSA doesn't make a fetish of the IWW. Our view is that there are various possible tactics and organizing strategies to increasing worker particiipation in struggle, building grassroots worker organization, and increasing class consciousness developed through struggle and organization. Thus we have members involved in grassroots worker centers such as the Seattle Solidarity Network and the Lansing Workers Center. We also support building independent rank and file groups in the AFL-CIO unions, independently of the bureaucracy, to encourage worker participation and action and to pressure the union from below or develop action outside of it or to transform the local union, where feasible. We would also favor a grassroots independent union even if it were not affiliated to the IWW.

to answer the OP, IWW and WSA are not affiliated because the IWW is a union and the WSA is a political organization. WSA has a pollitical program and condition of membership, IWW does not. if an organizing campaign is defeated, or there is no union around, there still needs to be an organization that can prevent the revolutionaries from falling into isolation. there are various areas of struggle and it's useful to have a political organization that can network activists who are involved in these different areas.

historically the IWW didn't affiliate to the IWA in the '20s, when the IWA was created, due to opposition from the Left-Socialists (SP members) in the IWW. the SP was a major force in the original organizing of the IWW and the CP's attempt to "capture" the IWW in 1924 (to get it to affiliate to the Communist international) was defeated only due to an alliance between anarchists and the Left SPers. the bit about "religion" refers to the opposition to centralism in the IWA statutes, which refers to the centralism of the state and of the Catholic church as models of this which IWA opposes. there are also various bits of specifically anarchist language in the IWA principles such as describing the aim as "libertarian communism." nonetheless, the IWA was officially a "revolutionary syndicalist" international, not an "anarchist" international.

[Sosa]

What is the connection between WSA and IWA? has the potential to affiliate the IWW and WSA or IWA ever come up?

I ask because I joined the IWW this past summer and I'm looking to also join something with a more political bent, specifically anarcho-syndicalist and it looks like WSA and IWW have more in common ideologically than not. Maybe because WSA is not active in my particular city?

btw, WSA website has a lot of dead links. I was trying to see if they were in my area but couldn't find any info.

[Devrim]

What is the connection between WSA and IWA? has the potential to affiliate the IWW and WSA or IWA ever come up?

The WSA used to be an IWA member, but no longer is The details are long and complicated and I am sure that Syndicat would explain them better than I could.


historically the IWW didn't affiliate to the IWA in the '20s, when the IWA was created, due to opposition from the Left-Socialists (SP members) in the IWW. the SP was a major force in the original organizing of the IWW and the CP's attempt to "capture" the IWW in 1924 (to get it to affiliate to the Communist international) was defeated only due to an alliance between anarchists and the Left SPers

As I remember it the IWA was created after the anarchist unions walked out of the congress of the Red Trade Union International.


In Moscow in the summer of 1920 the newly formed Third International called for the creation of a Red Trade Union International. In December of that year the Syndicalists met in Berlin to decide upon their response to the creation of such an organisation. The Syndicalists drew up several points, the acceptance of these being the condition on which the Syndic*alists would join the Red Trade Union International; "The total independence of the movement from all political parties and the belief that the socialist reconstruction of society could only be carried out by the economic organisations of the producing classes themselves. "
The Syndicalists then went to Moscow. The conference for the founding of the Red Trade Union International was a farce. From the very start all business was controlled and conducted by a body called the Central Alliance of Russian Trade Unions, a Bolshevik front. The Syndicalists were a minority, their seven points were ignored. But the work of the Berlin meeting in December 1920 was not wasted.
The Syndicalists met again in October 1921 in Dusseldorf and they made preparations for an international convention of all Syndicalist organisations. This took place in December 1922 in Berlin, and is still to this day the greatest gathering of syndicalists, revolutionary syndical*ists and anarcho-syndicalists that has ever taken place. Delegates from the Federation Obrera Regional Argentina, representing 200,000 members; Industrial Workers of the World in Chile, 20,000 members; Union for Syndcialist Propaganda in Denmark, 600; Freie Arbeiter Union in Germany 120,000; Nationaal Arbeids Sekretariat in the Netherlands, 22,500; Union Sindicale Italiana, 500,000; Norsk Syndikalistik Federasjon in Norway, 20,000; Confederacao Geral do Trabalho in Portugal, 150,000; Sveriges Arbetares Centralorganisation in Sweden, 32,000; Comite de Defence Syndicaliste Revolutionaire in France, 100,000; Federation du Batiment from Paris, 32,000; also present were delegates from the Mexican Con*federacion General de Trabajadores, Federation des Jeunesses de la Seine, Russian anarcho-syndicalists. The laigest anarcho-syndicalist organistion, the Confederacion Nacional del Trabajo in Spain was unable to send any delegates due to the fierce class war that was being conducted in that country under the dictatorship of Primo de Rivera. They were later to re-affirm their adherence to the IWA at the Saragossa congress in 1923.
The Berlin congress of 1922 adopted the name `International Workingmen's Association' (later to be altered to International Workers Association), they also adopted a `Principles, Aims and Statutes', laying out the principles of Revolutionary Syndicalism. These `Principles and Aims' were amended only slightly over the years, and today still form the basis by which the IWA conducts its struggle for the emancipation of the international working classes.


Were the IWW at the Moscow conference and what line did they take towards it?

Devrim

[syndicat]

WSA's more active website is our webzine: ideasandaction.info.

WSA was formed in 1984 and was affiliated to IWA from that time due to the fact that its predecessor groups (which go back to the '70s) were affiliated. WSA was officially expelled by IWA at the 2004 Congress...probably due to WSA support for the independent syndicalist conference in San Francisco in 1999. however, at present we've just begun an initiative to try to patch up our relationship with the IWA and let bygones be bygones, so to speak. We've always had good relations with some affilliates and members of IWA (such as FAU...the group that most strongly protested our expulsion...and ZSP in Poland).

WSA has branches and members in various parts of the USA and English-speaking Canada. We have quite a few scattered individual members. There doesn't have to be a group existing someplace in order to join. To find out about joining, you can contact the New York branch: [email protected]