The CNT calls a General Strike for March 29

[bricolage]

The CNT rejects any kind of negotiation over the rights conquered by the working class through years of struggle. We call for this strike with the primary objective of immediately repealing the the labor reform that was approved yesterday by the Parliament, which we consider a head-on assault against the working class. This reform continues the measures started by the previous government, such as the labor reform of 2010 and the cuts to public employee salaries, to pensions, and to public services, cuts which are being deepened by the current government.

The CNT demands the end of an economic policy designed to make the workers pay for the crisis of the banks and the employers. This policy has led to an unacceptable number of unemployed workers, a number which does not stop growing, as well as to an impoverishment and worsening of the working class’s living conditions.

The CNT also calls this strike against the cuts. The strike will happen the day before the setting of the General State Budget which will incorporate a brutal attack against public services and social rights.

The CNT rejects the agreement reached in February between the CCOO and UGT unions and the employers’ confederation, the CEOE, as well as the amendments that those unions have presented to the parliamentary process of the labor reform. The CNT rejects these amendments as a valid alternative, since they share the spirit of the reform and assume the logic of the employers and the government, who suppose that the only escape from their crisis must come through the workers surrendering their rights, placing the working class into a position of weakness from the start. The same logic has already led these unions to accept the raising of the retirement age to 67, even after the general strike of September 29, 2010.

For the CNT, the strike on March 29 must be only the beginning of a growing and sustained process of mobilization, one which includes the entire working class and the sectors that are most disadvantaged and affected by the capitalist crisis. This mobilization must put the brakes on the dynamic of constant assaults on our rights, while laying the bases for the recovery and conquest of new social rights with the goal of a deep social transformation.

All of these reasons have led the CNT to make this call for March 29 on its own account. With this call the CNT wants to give coverage to everyone who is taking up positions for a real and continued confrontation that will pay back the assaults on the working class with the same force with which we are receiving them, together with all workers’ organizations that share these objectives and reject the policies of agreement and social peace.

For the CNT, a confrontational rejection of the policies and the bureaucratic union model of the CCOO and the UGT, and their discredit among broad groups of workers, must not become excuses not to take action or struggle. Instead, this rejection must spur us on to reinforce our struggle through a different form of unionism – one based on direct action, on autonomy, and on mutual aid. Against assaults of the magnitude that we are facing, working-class unity is fundamental. This unity must take place in the rank-and-file, in workplace and neighborhood assemblies, in industrial actions and pickets, until the mobilization against those who are responsible for and benefit from this situation – the employers, the banks, and the government – is turned into an unstoppable dynamic that raises a barrier against the temptation to turn the rights that belong to everybody into a bargaining chip that belongs to nobody.

It’s time for all workers – unemployed or employed, retired, on the black market, students, and the precarious – to say “Enough!” We must seize the streets rather than abandon them in order to impose our strength and our demands.

March 29 – everyone in the street, everyone on the strike.
http://solfed.org.uk/?q=international/the-cnt-calls-a-general-strike-for-march-29

[Buitraker]

March 29 everyone in the streets against all of this bullshit called crisis

[DDR]

Yeah they called after CCOO and UGT did. Atleast they could be brave and have called before like the basque nationalist unions (ELA, LAB, etc.) and the galician CIG.

[Buitraker]

Yeah they called after CCOO and UGT did. Atleast they could be brave and have called before like the basque nationalist unions (ELA, LAB, etc.) and the galician CIG.
Here in Bilbao i see cnt stickers calling to march 29 strike before this ad
Nationalist union stickers too

[pastradamus]

Here in Bilbao i see cnt stickers calling to march 29 strike before this ad
Nationalist union stickers too

Yeah it probably has to do with the CNT's regional sector in the Basque Country who would has at least some autonomy from central command. A friend in the UGT told me about this plan a couple of weeks ago and said he thinks the CNT would come abord -as they now have.

This is exciting and good news for the Spanish worker. I dont think we should be taking partisan sides as division in the union front is exactly what the government want at this time.

[Buitraker]

Yeah it probably has to do with the CNT's regional sector in the Basque Country who would has at least some autonomy from central command. A friend in the UGT told me about this plan a couple of weeks ago and said he thinks the CNT would come abord -as they now have.

This is exciting and good news for the Spanish worker. I dont think we should be taking partisan sides as division in the union front is exactly what the government want at this time.

From my point, i dont know whats going to happen strike day

[Искра]

Why would anyone support unions such as CC.OO and UGT? Didn't they brought flexibilisation of labour market to Spain together with PSOE?

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

Whoever called it first (god it's like a playground in here sometimes), solidarity comrades! :)

[NoOneIsIllegal]

Yeah they called after CCOO and UGT did. Atleast they could be brave and have called before like the basque nationalist unions (ELA, LAB, etc.) and the galician CIG.
What's the word from the CGT? Compared to the CNT, they're more relevant in terms of anarcho-syndicalist unions in Spain. The CNT seems to get more more attention only because of historic value.

[marl]

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.anarkismo.net%2Farticle%2F22221

CGT is onboard.

[Os Cangaceiros]

re: CNT and CGT

I think that the CNT is also more "hardline", IIRC

[NoOneIsIllegal]

re: CNT and CGT

I think that the CNT is also more "hardline", IIRC
Basically.
From how it sounds, CGT is open to members and ideologies, although it is syndicalist at heart. Maybe it's a bad comparison, but it could reflect the IWW in the US, to a certain extent.
The CGT, although twice the size in membership (CNT = ~35,000, CGT = ~60,000), but it represents over 2 million workers through labor boards. That can really be a far reach and quite the influence to wield.

Although I was told the CNT has started making reforms to shed some of it's dogma.

[ckaihatsu]

Support the March 29 general strike in Spain!


IUF
Uniting food, farm and hotel workers world-wide


Spanish unions are united as never before in their mobilization against labour law 'reforms' which gut workplace protection and trade union rights and in defense of public services. A 24-hour national general strike has been called for March 29.

Spain's trade union movement is fighting back not only against their own government, but against the European-wide austerity drive which is transferring wealth and destroying public services on a massive scale. You can support their struggle by sending a message of support to the IUF's Spanish affiliates, telling them you are with them on March 29 and for as long as it takes for the government to change course.

Click here to send a message (http://www.iuf.org/cgi-bin/campaigns/show_campaign.cgi?c=663)

For more information click here. (http://cms.iuf.org/?q=node/1533)

Ron Oswald
General Secretary, IUF

International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF)

8, rampe du Pont-Rouge
1213 Petit Lancy, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 793 22 33
Fax: +41 22 793 22 38
website: www.iuf.org

[Buitraker]

Why would anyone support unions such as CC.OO and UGT? Didn't they brought flexibilisation of labour market to Spain together with PSOE?
Because CCOO its the union of Unite Left party(Left-wing party who collaborate at political scene with PSOE)
And UGT its the union of PSOE :laugh:
Thats the reason, the same to reason to explain why people vote PSOE

Last 1 May nearly we punch and kick some bastards of CCOO and UGT
zx5shdGJ5Ns



What's the word from the CGT? Compared to the CNT, they're more relevant in terms of anarcho-syndicalist unions in Spain. The CNT seems to get more more attention only because of historic value.
CNT get more attetion at union scene because dont agree to union system.
So CNT dont recive money from state, dont participate on union voting, etc...

[Devrim]

The CGT, although twice the size in membership (CNT = ~35,000, CGT = ~60,000), but it represents over 2 million workers through labor boards.

I would be absolutely amazed if this were true.

Devrim

[Buitraker]

I would be absolutely amazed if this were true.

Devrim
In some webs membership up to 50,000

The difference size membership between CNT-AIT and CGT its not too large

[Devrim]

In some webs membership up to 50,000

The difference size membership between CNT-AIT and CGT its not too large

I would imagine that 6,000 would probably be stretching it a little.

Devrim

[Buitraker]

I would imagine that 6,000 would probably be stretching it a little.

Devrim
You speak about 60,000 members of CGT, no?


The membership size of most important unions(UGT and CCOO) are 1.000.000 for CCOO and 800.000-900.000 for UGT

50,000 or 60,000 membership size at level state it´s nothing to shout about

[Devrim]

You speak about 60,000 members of CGT, no?


No, I am speaking about the CNT-AIT. I was under the impression that its membership was around six thousand at the very most.

Devrim

[Искра]

Devrim I told you that I think that they have more members... but then again my impression comes from anarcho-syndicalist movement, so it doesn't have to be valid.

Anyhow, difference between CGT and CNT is that CGT gets state support and is using states money. You can be member of Maoist party and still be in CNT. I used to have informations on exact amount of state money that CGT gets, but I've left all reports to MASA when I was leaving.

[marl]

In case it wasn't obvious, the 15M movement will be on board with the strike. Going to be big.

[Buitraker]

No, I am speaking about the CNT-AIT. I was under the impression that its membership was around six thousand at the very most.

Devrim
Ten years ago CNT membership was around six thousand, but this days( especially since crisis start) grow up a lot

[Искра]

If that is a true, it looks like they never learn anything :rolleyes:

[bricolage]

If that is a true, it looks like they never learn anything :rolleyes:
who's they?

[Искра]

who's they?CNT, but we could maybe say anarcho-syndicalists in general. If you sudenly grow so fast you can't keep your ideology and in CNT right now everyone can join even if they are members of Maoist or Trot parties. CNT is acting more and more as regular union which you can see from their press... their struggle is becoming more and more strictly economical and less and less political.

[bricolage]

CNT, but we could maybe say anarcho-syndicalists in general. If you sudenly grow so fast you can't keep your ideology
i'd disagree that it's as set in stone as that, social ruptures can happen remarkably quickly and cause dramatic changes in the ways masses of workers see society. for example a massive wildcat strike victory. I don't think this is necessarily what's happening in spain but I disagree that it's impossible to grow fast without compromising your beliefs. it's more determined by how the organisation is acting and how it has attracted the new members.

[Искра]

Ok, but I've named some problems I see with CNT... I'll repeat one... allowing people from other tendencies to join in, which actually means that you can be in CNT if you disagree with it (for example, what do Maoists have in common with anarcho-syndicalists?). That is whole this problem of anarcho-syndicalist unions, because they think of themselves as union, while they'd like to act like political organisations. For example, I find case of Argentinian FORA much more interesting, because they didn't allow people to join organisation unless they were agreeing with whole FORA's program/platform...

[bricolage]

tbh I don't know enough about CNT to comment so I'll have to leave this one.

[marl]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/mar/29/spain-general-strike-rebellion-austerity
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17545174
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17545817

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryMkhsbkFa0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eTM6YNGBHg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbyE5s0zeJo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qA1CXDbT0s

http://i.imgur.com/bu8hw.jpg?1

[Delenda Carthago]

CNT, but we could maybe say anarcho-syndicalists in general. If you sudenly grow so fast you can't keep your ideology and in CNT right now everyone can join even if they are members of Maoist or Trot parties. CNT is acting more and more as regular union which you can see from their press... their struggle is becoming more and more strictly economical and less and less political.

Anarchosyndicalism is not "the syndicalism of the anarchists", its syndicalism from and by the workers. Even though CNT prefers to forget that from time to time. But many leftists, specially in Spain, have joined anarchosyndicalist syndicates, if they feel they are better represended by them.

[Delenda Carthago]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/mar/29/spain-general-strike-rebellion-austerity
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17545174
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17545817

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryMkhsbkFa0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eTM6YNGBHg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbyE5s0zeJo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qA1CXDbT0s

http://i.imgur.com/bu8hw.jpg?1

I seriously doubt they have anything to do with CNT, CGT or Solidaridad Obrera.

[Omsk]

Any communist organizations of parties in Spain?Or it's just the CNT.

(I saw some pretty violent protests on the news,it seems the police is runing like hell.)

[marl]

CCOO, the largest union, is communist.

It seems like comrades from the CCOO were taking part in some pretty militant demonstrations, not just the anarchists.

[Delenda Carthago]

Any communist organizations of parties in Spain?Or it's just the CNT.

(I saw some pretty violent protests on the news,it seems the police is runing like hell.)

Well, the Communist Party has turned really opportunist, really influenced by the mole of eurocommunism. There is the PCPE(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_the_People_of_Spain) and PCE m-l(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCE(m-l) ).Vut both of them are small.

CCOO is as sold out as the PCE is.

[Omsk]

Well, the Communist Party has turned really opportunist, really influenced by the mole of eurocommunism. There is the PCPE(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communi...eople_of_Spain (http://www.anonym.to/?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_the_People_of_Spain)) and PCE m-l(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCE(m-l) ).Vut both of them are small.

CCOO is as sold out as the PCE is.

Well,i know that the PCE turned to Eurocommunism,but i was wondering about the influence of other communist parties in Spain,and if they are active in the protests.

These two groups you linked seem regular,and if i am not wrong,they are both anti-revisionist ML's. I personally think the loss of the PCE to the Anti-Communist theory (Eurocommunism) was a loss for both Greece and Europe,as the Eurocommunists poisoned more than enough parties,especially the ones in Italy,and Spain,plus the English parties,and some French.

And i would like to add that the PCE is not 'really influenced' but completely influenced,and is one of the main Eurocommunist parties,we should not forget that the main figure in the party was Santiago Carrillo,who wrote one of the most influental Eurocmmunist work: Eurocommunism and the State.

[x359594]

...i was wondering about the influence of other communist parties in Spain,and if they are active in the protests...

The PCE belongs to Izquierda Unida, a coalition of social democratic parties dominated by the PCE. Here's their website for Spanish readers: http://www.izquierda-unida.es/. In the 1980s some factions split from the PCE and formed small parties of their own. Their influence is slight on the national level, but regionally they have more influence.

Concerning union membership, latest figures estimate that about 25% of employed workers belong to one union or another. The Confederación General del Trabajo (split from the CNT) has around 60,000 members. CNT has about 50,000 members, the UGT 840,000 and the CCOO with about 1.2 million members.

[Grenzer]

This general strike business is getting to be a bit old hat, haven't they been trying this for like a hundred years now? They should probably, as the bourgy fucks like to put it, "diversify" their strategy. A nice general strike now and again is all well and good, but doesn't it seem obvious that it's not going to work in really having many long term practical gains?

It seems like the vast enormity of the historical experience tells us that the mass strike doesn't, and will never work entirely on its own; but that's just my opinion. The apoliticism of groups like this is their Achilles' heel.

[x359594]

This general strike business is getting to be a bit old hat, haven't they been trying this for like a hundred years now?...

As a matter of fact in Spanish labor history the general strike is not exclusive to the CNT; the UGT called for general strikes in the 1920s and 1930s. The first post-Franco general strike was called by the CCOO, UGT, and Union Sindical Obrera in 1976.

Since then the CCOO, UGT, CNT, CGT have jointly or in different combinations called for general strikes in 1985 (only called by CCOO,) 1988 (the country was completely paralyzed for 24 hours, prompting the government to negotiate with the unions. Even the TV signal was turned off by the workers; the flexible contract system was retired and welfare state benefits were increased,) 1991 against Gulf War, 1992 against labor market reforms, 1994 against labor market reforms, 2002 against labor market reforms, 2003 against Iraq War (only called by UGT).

In Spain general strikes are what is known there as "revolutionary gymnastics," a way of keeping in shape for the time of revolution. It's a way of increasing militancy, developing strategies and new tactics, keeping the power of the working class in the public eye. Much better than waiting for the revolution to materialize out of thin air in my view.

[Grenzer]

In Spain general strikes are what is known there as "revolutionary gymnastics," a way of keeping in shape for the time of revolution. It's a way of increasing militancy, developing strategies and new tactics, keeping the power of the working class in the public eye. Much better than waiting for the revolution to materialize out of thin air in my view.

Well actually I was suggesting the opposite.. that relying on mass strikes alone is almost the same thing as doing nothing. My criticism is that general strike should not be a strategy in and of itself, but a mere tactical option in a much larger strategic repertoire. It seems like the only thing they call for is strikes. Do they help educate the workers? Do they participate in demonstrations and get the word out to as many people as possible? Do they organize people for political action?

I think the IWW's decision to remain apolitical is what ensured their irrelevance. Is the CNT's call for a general strike part of a greater overall strategy to build sustainable and lasting gains for the working class towards the goal of revolution? I haven't seen any evidence that it is. It seems to me that the mass strike is mere agitation, not really a way of effecting a lasting mobilization of the working class against capitalism. If their purpose is to merely "stay in shape" as you put it, then does this not mean that they are essentially waiting for Capitalism to do their work for them and bring the system to its knees?

I think that the course of the 20th century has shown that this sort of apocalyptic predestinationalism in regards to the fate of capitalism has been false and counter-productive. It seems that we should be taking steps to ensure a permanent build up of our movement. While strikes are an effective way of weakening capitalism, it's only temporary and before long it's as if it never happened to begin with. I just don't see how this strategy is building up the working class in a way that builds upon their gains. I don't think permanent gains can be built upon the transient gains of the mass strike alone. This has always been my complaint about syndicalism, but if I could be persuaded otherwise; believe me, I'd be one of the first to become an anarcho-syndicalist.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Well actually I was suggesting the opposite.. that relying on mass strikes alone is almost the same thing as doing nothing. My criticism is that general strike should not be a strategy in and of itself, but a mere tactical option in a much larger strategic repertoire. It seems like the only thing they call for is strikes. Do they help educate the workers? Do they participate in demonstrations and get the word out to as many people as possible? Do they organize people for political action?

I think the IWW's decision to remain apolitical is what ensured their irrelevance. Is the CNT's call for a general strike part of a greater overall strategy to build sustainable and lasting gains for the working class towards the goal of revolution? I haven't seen any evidence that it is. It seems to me that the mass strike is mere agitation, not really a way of effecting a lasting mobilization of the working class against capitalism. If their purpose is to merely "stay in shape" as you put it, then does this not mean that they are essentially waiting for Capitalism to do their work for them and bring the system to its knees?

I think that the course of the 20th century has shown that this sort of apocalyptic predestinationalism in regards to the fate of capitalism has been false and counter-productive. It seems that we should be taking steps to ensure a permanent build up of our movement. While strikes are an effective way of weakening capitalism, it's only temporary and before long it's as if it never happened to begin with. I just don't see how this strategy is building up the working class in a way that builds upon their gains. I don't think permanent gains can be built upon the transient gains of the mass strike alone. This has always been my complaint about syndicalism, but if I could be persuaded otherwise; believe me, I'd be one of the first to become an anarcho-syndicalist.

That's spot on, comrade.

You even brought up the IWW refusing to be political in any way. I discussed this with NoOneIsIllegal, and he kept dodging the subject, even though I was clear about the IWW becoming its own political party or at least conducting education, agitation, and organization around mass spoilage.

[x359594]

Is the CNT's call for a general strike part of a greater overall strategy to build sustainable and lasting gains for the working class towards the goal of revolution? I haven't seen any evidence that it is...

Nor have I.


...While strikes are an effective way of weakening capitalism, it's only temporary and before long it's as if it never happened to begin with. I just don't see how this strategy is building up the working class in a way that builds upon their gains. I don't think permanent gains can be built upon the transient gains of the mass strike alone...

In the Spanish case, the two largest unions have ties to political parties; the PSOE has held power more than once since the death of Franco. The PCE as part of the Izquierda Unida coalition has a few seats in the Cortez and some mayorships and other regional positions. We can't accuse the UGT and CCOO of being non-political.

Out of a country of around 44 million about 21 million are working people, with 25% of that number unemployed. The ruling PP is not very popular contrary to its name. So what is the missing ingredient that will inspire the masses to revolution?

[Grenzer]

So what is the missing ingredient that will inspire the masses to revolution?

In my opinion, it's the fact that the workers' movement and the communist movement are separate, when they should, in fact, be the same. As it stands, the discontent of the workers' is co-opted and channeled by the bourgeois liberal parties. We should be looking for a strategy that would allow us to turn the tables and co-opt non-revolutionary workers into working in their own class interests, rather than that of the bourgeoisie's.

Marx exhorted communists in the manifesto to not stand apart from the workers as their own party, but to be among them. As it stands, we communists/anarchists are standing to the left of the workers, trying to cajole them to come to us when in reality we should be among them, trying to get them to go in the right direction. I don't mean entryism either.

How we do this, well that's the million dollar question.

[Geiseric]

In my opinion, it's the fact that the workers' movement and the communist movement are separate, when they should, in fact, be the same. As it stands, the discontent of the workers' is co-opted and channeled by the bourgeois liberal parties. We should be looking for a strategy that would allow us to turn the tables and co-opt non-revolutionary workers into working in their own class interests, rather than that of the bourgeoisie's.

Marx exhorted communists in the manifesto to not stand apart from the workers as their own party, but to be among them. As it stands, we communists/anarchists are standing to the left of the workers, trying to cajole them to come to us when in reality we should be among them, trying to get them to go in the right direction. I don't mean entryism either.

How we do this, well that's the million dollar question.

We shouldn't join unions for the sake of joining it, if you want to go with that strategy then you need to actually work in the union at a job. Once I graduate I might join the electricians union, so it could be a useful opportunity. However Communists need to do whatever they can to radicalize the largest amount of workers as they can. This can be better done with a newspaper than somebody joining a union, one might argue. I'm not sure, but it's just a thought.

[Grenzer]

We shouldn't join unions for the sake of joining it, if you want to go with that strategy then you need to actually work in the union at a job. Once I graduate I might join the electricians union, so it could be a useful opportunity. However Communists need to do whatever they can to radicalize the largest amount of workers as they can. This can be better done with a newspaper than somebody joining a union, one might argue. I'm not sure, but it's just a thought.

Who said anything about joining unions? I'm fairly anti-union myself, as I believe the standard unions we have today are tools of the bourgeoisie.

[x359594]

...the standard unions we have today are tools of the bourgeoisie.

The standard unions in the US certainly fit that description, but union formation differs from country to country; one size doesn't fit all. The nature of US unions is the subject of another thread since we're talking about Spanish unions here.

[Grenzer]

The standard unions in the US certainly fit that description, but union formation differs from country to country; one size doesn't fit all. The nature of US unions is the subject of another thread since we're talking about Spanish unions here.

I'm not sure about the CNT, but aren't the other unions participating receiving state money? In my opinion, that makes their long term credibility in this regard rather suspect. It seems the only way these unions can retain their ideological independence is to avoid interactions with the state to the highest degree possible, but then we're right back to the same situation I mentioned earlier.

I think revolutionary unions like the IWW which retain their ideological independence are good, but their apoliticism does them a disservice. I can't see revolutionary unions thriving unless they are part of the workers' movement itself, and all that entails(political activism etc.).

[x359594]

I'm not sure about the CNT, but aren't the other unions participating receiving state money?...

The CNT and the CGT don't accept money from the state but the CCOO and the UGT do. (The CNT and the CGT split over the question of union elections and participation in works councils.)


...I think revolutionary unions like the IWW which retain their ideological independence are good, but their apoliticism does them a disservice. I can't see revolutionary unions thriving unless they are part of the workers' movement itself, and all that entails(political activism etc.)

In the IWW individual union members are free to join any political party of their choice (historically a plurality of Wobblies belonged to the SPUSA,) but the union doesn't endorse candidates for office or spend union funds in electoral campaigns. So in this narrow sense of the word political the IWW (and the CNT and CGT) are apolitical.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Um, what he was saying and what I said in the past is that the IWW itself become a political party.

[x359594]

^^^ Um, what he was saying and what I said in the past is that the IWW itself become a political party.

How so and when?

[Die Neue Zeit]

How so and when?

http://www.revleft.com/vb/iww-organization-beautiful-t161903/index.html

And that was just one occasion when I called on Wobblies here for not organizing to transform the IWW itself into a political party.

[Grenzer]

An organization of beautiful losers? Damn, that's harsh; but if truth be told..

Hustla can go on all day about the need for things to be "organic" but at the end of the day, it still amounts to sitting on your ass doing nothing, waiting for the second coming(i.e. the mythical day when capitalism kills itself). I have nothing but respect for the people of the IWW, but at the same time to claim that it was on the "vanguard of class struggle" seems a bit delusional. It was stronger then than it is now, but it still represented only sectional interests(which is all that union can ever represent, in my opinion; and even then, usually at the expense of some other section).

All I saw in that thread was a load of romanticism and emotional outrage.. you sure do have your way with evoking that sort of response.

[Paulappaul]

The CNT and the CGT don't accept money from the state but the CCOO and the UGT do. (The CNT and the CGT split over the question of union elections and participation in works councils.)

I'm fairly sure CGT accepts State funds as I recall from a document released by the CNT.


In the IWW individual union members are free to join any political party of their choice (historically a plurality of Wobblies belonged to the SPUSA,) but the union doesn't endorse candidates for office or spend union funds in electoral campaigns. So in this narrow sense of the word political the IWW (and the CNT and CGT) are apolitical.

I honestly don't think the IWW needs any sort of Political Party, I think the split that SPUSA and IWW make between Economic and Political struggles are a farce in the current political climate. Rather I think the Union needs to be taking up and organizing around Political issues and drawing in members from such issues. Wisconsin showed how this good in both growing the movement and escalating Class Struggle. In sum I think the IWW needs to be a Political Organization in and of itself.


As it stands, the discontent of the workers' is co-opted and channeled by the bourgeois liberal parties. We should be looking for a strategy that would allow us to turn the tables and co-opt non-revolutionary workers into working in their own class interests, rather than that of the bourgeoisie's.

I honestly don't think discontent is channeled through Bourgeois Liberal parties in the current political climate. All trust in the existing Political institutions were thrown out the window in Obama's first hundred days, much to the agitation of both the Tea Party and the Progressive/Radical Left which saw right through the bullshit.

The issue facing us today is class passivity. The fact that the working class doesn't think struggling will change anything, the fact that there are no institutions to express class struggle. Nihilism is the issue with the American working class, and I think it is reflective of the cynical depression created by the conditions of American Bourgeois culture. Occupy is changing this, but it faces tremendous enemies and unless it gains something, it will continue to stay a minority in the working class.


Stand apart from the workers as their own party, but to be among them. As it stands, we communists/anarchists are standing to the left of the workers, trying to cajole them to come to us when in reality we should be among them, trying to get them to go in the right direction.

I agree. I think communist organization outside the organs of class struggle is good, but when inside it I think we should be acting as working class individuals, not communists trying to grow any sort of party/union/group. Organization should be to provide clarity to our means of pushing class based organs towards an anti - capitalist position.

[x359594]

I'm fairly sure CGT accepts State funds as I recall from a document released by the CNT...

Could be, but my information came from a relative in the CGT who believed that it currently doesn't accept state funding.


...when inside it I think we should be acting as working class individuals, not communists trying to grow any sort of party/union/group. Organization should be to provide clarity to our means of pushing class based organs towards an anti - capitalist position.

I thought that's what the IWW is doing with the Starbucks campaign for instance.

[Grenzer]

I agree. I think communist organization outside the organs of class struggle is good, but when inside it I think we should be acting as working class individuals, not communists trying to grow any sort of party/union/group. Organization should be to provide clarity to our means of pushing class based organs towards an anti - capitalist position.

I agree with much of what you wrote.

The thing is with this particular statement that I've quoted is that this is precisely the kind of thing Marx admonished against. He was saying that there should be no difference between the workers' movement and the communist movement. So either we're going to have to move to them while retaining our revolutionary views, or we're going to have to try to cajole them to move to us(this is what you've suggested, which we've been doing for the past 100 years or so without even the faintest degree of success).

[Paulappaul]

I thought that's what the IWW is doing with the Starbucks campaign for instance.

http://michiganmessenger.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/122208-starbucks_protest.jpg

Stuff like this is very touching, and it is why I support the IWW all the while being critical. This wasn't because of the Union. This was because of the rank and file. Not all pickets or actions under the sphere of the IWW are like this. The Union should being doing more to educate and provide the means for stuff like this. It's the difference between say SOLFED UK which is outward Anarcho - Syndicalist and the IWW who is just more labor oriented and keeps the politics to the side.


So either we're going to have to move to them while retaining our revolutionary views, or we're going to have to try to cajole them to move to us(this is what you've suggested, which we've been doing for the past 100 years or so without even the faintest degree of success).

That's not exactly what I'm saying. Infact its the opposite. I think what Communists have been doing for the last 100 years is prefigurative action -- building the big union, building the big party, building the big whatever so that one day we can "proclaim" the revolution. Rather, it'd be great to see an organization which is participating in a movement as workers, pushing the movement towards acting autonomously and thinking in a class based perspective. Once people think this way, I think we can expect a revolution, because the Self - Emancipation of the working class, is the end of Capitalist Social relations.

[Buitraker]

So what is the missing ingredient that will inspire the masses to revolution?
Tax evasion its a national sport here, 20% of GDP its under blackmarket and we are the european country with more 500€ notes :cool:

The day before strike, people get out at the night like in holidays and in Bilbao at the morning everything was close, but in the afternoon all pubs open to see Schalke04-Athletic Bilbao
Of course, almost of people go to pubs....
Or better, 50% of unemployed youth but you get out this saturday night and all pubs and discos are full


Spains rates are the worst, but thats rates dont represent people´s life


Could be, but my information came from a relative in the CGT who believed that it currently doesn't accept state funding
CGT accept state funding

[Die Neue Zeit]

I honestly don't think the IWW needs any sort of Political Party, I think the split that SPUSA and IWW make between Economic and Political struggles are a farce in the current political climate. Rather I think the Union needs to be taking up and organizing around Political issues and drawing in members from such issues. Wisconsin showed how this good in both growing the movement and escalating Class Struggle. In sum I think the IWW needs to be a Political Organization in and of itself.

I agree with you, of course, except for the first part almost being misleading. The IWW needs a political party, but that party can be found by its very own untapped potential.


The issue facing us today is class passivity. The fact that the working class doesn't think struggling will change anything, the fact that there are no institutions to express class struggle. Nihilism is the issue with the American working class, and I think it is reflective of the cynical depression created by the conditions of American Bourgeois culture. Occupy is changing this, but it faces tremendous enemies and unless it gains something, it will continue to stay a minority in the working class.

Occupy has done workers and "the left" enormous favours by demonstrating that activities like its own will always surpass those coming from mere labour disputes precisely because it starts being political.


I agree. I think communist organization outside the organs of class struggle is good, but when inside it I think we should be acting as working class individuals, not communists trying to grow any sort of party/union/group. Organization should be to provide clarity to our means of pushing class based organs towards an anti - capitalist position.

Um, why is "outside" good? If anything else, history has proven it to be bad.

Communist organization within the organ of genuine class struggle is good, but you of all people know what "the organ" refers to.

[x359594]

...This wasn't because of the Union. This was because of the rank and file. Not all pickets or actions under the sphere of the IWW are like this...

The rank and file is the Union, and if not all IWW pickets or actions are like the Starbucks campaign, then that's because the locals have proceeded in some other manner.

I belong to the Los Angeles GMB and it's run by the rank and file. Other GMBs with the IWW may do things differently (during the 1970s and 1980s I belonged to the New York City GMB and it too was entirely a rank and file outfit.) Some of us are dual carders who agitate within our business unions for rank and file control.

[x359594]

CGT accept state funding

Thank you for this information fellow worker.

[Paulappaul]

I agree with you, of course, except for the first part almost being misleading. The IWW needs a political party, but that party can be found by its very own untapped potential.

It doesn't need a political party, it needs to become a party.


Occupy has done workers and "the left" enormous favours by demonstrating that activities like its own will always surpass those coming from mere labour disputes precisely because it starts being political.

I agree.


Um, why is "outside" good? If anything else, history has proven it to be bad.

Communist organization within the organ of genuine class struggle is good, but you of all people know what "the organ" refers to.

Outside in organization, inside with its militants. I don't think we should try to mix up geniune class struggle with our organizations, rather the organs of class struggle will arise out of political class struggle as we've seen all around the world, today and in the past and will see surely in the future.


The rank and file is the Union, and if not all IWW pickets or actions are like the Starbucks campaign, then that's because the locals have proceeded in some other manner.

I mean the union in the broad sense of the term viz the entire organization. That's not my experience in the least, I've seen very reformist kind in the IWW and classical unionists who don't necessarily espouse Anarcho - Syndicalism.

[x359594]

...I mean the union in the broad sense of the term viz the entire organization. That's not my experience in the least, I've seen very reformist kind in the IWW and classical unionists who don't necessarily espouse Anarcho - Syndicalism.

That's correct. It all depends on the membership of the locals. I belonged to New York City GMB from 1974 to 1989 and then to Los Angeles GMB from 1990 to the present (as well as belonging to a business union I don't care to name.) During the period when I belonged to the NYC GMB the membership was consistently anracho-syndiclaist or revolutionary marxist. The L.A. GMB is mostly anarcho-syndicalist.

[Die Neue Zeit]

It doesn't need a political party, it needs to become a party.

That was my point, but others here don't get this.

[NoOneIsIllegal]

You even brought up the IWW refusing to be political in any way. I discussed this with NoOneIsIllegal, and he kept dodging the subject, even though I was clear about the IWW becoming its own political party or at least conducting education, agitation, and organization around mass spoilage.
No, I didn't. If I ever do "dodge" the question with you, it's because you are annoying.

That was my point, but others here don't get this.
We understand it, but we don't agree.

I mean the union in the broad sense of the term viz the entire organization. That's not my experience in the least, I've seen very reformist kind in the IWW and classical unionists who don't necessarily espouse Anarcho - Syndicalism.
The IWW doesn't demand ideological adherence, so of course you'll see reformists slip by. As long as you're a worker and agree with the Preamble. However, they're growing in numbers because a lot of the new generation (which makes up the union: the membership has increased by 300% in 6 years) are more dedicated towards organizing their jobs and doing revolutionary activity, rather than being social-activists like the grey-beards of yesteryear wanted to be.

[Paulappaul]

The IWW doesn't demand ideological adherence, so of course you'll see reformists slip by.

a limit of Unionism.


As long as you're a worker and agree with the Preamble.

I think the fetish of the point of production is another limit and in the vacuum reformist Socialists and Communists fill the grey areas of class struggle: students, domestic labor, the unemployed. And yes I know the IWW accepts students. But frankly, how could they help me as a student? I can't imagine the Wobblies setting up a Picketline in the face of tuition hikes.


However, they're growing in numbers because a lot of the new generation (which makes up the union: the membership has increased by 300% in 6 years) are more dedicated towards organizing their jobs and doing revolutionary activity, rather than being social-activists like the grey-beards of yesteryear wanted to be.

While I agree the Social activism that characterized the 90s and early 21st century was bad, I think the union neglecting class struggles outside the point of production is negative. While I think the IWW continues to be the Vanguard of organized labor, other organizations are filling in the vacuum of equally important struggles.

[x359594]

...how could they help me as a student? I can't imagine the Wobblies setting up a Picketline in the face of tuition hikes...

At the University of California Los Angeles fellow worker J.B. has done just that. He and other student workers went to Sacramento and picketed outside the Board of Regents meeting a couple of months ago on that very issue of tuition hikes.

The IWW deliberately seeks out those layers of the working class that are ignored by the business unions such as student workers, fast food workers, sex industry workers, baristas and bicycle messengers.