ILS website?

52 posts / 0 new
Last post
Jacques Roux's picture
Jacques Roux
Offline
Joined: 17-07-06
Oct 6 2005 23:36
ILS website?

Anyone know whats happened to http://www.ils-sil.org/?

the button's picture
the button
Offline
Joined: 7-07-04
Oct 7 2005 08:34

http://www.ils-sil.org/travel/media/shopping/get/health_%26_beauty.htm

grin

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Oct 7 2005 13:54

oh dear me...

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 7 2005 15:42
revol68 wrote:
it realised they were nothing more than a shit attempt at a "libertarian" second international, they then had a wee read over the platform and relaised it was just a rehashing of Lenin's what is to be done in libertarian garb.

They were last seen walking off to a works council.

oh, funny how i though ILS was one of the most inspiring things to happen in recent years on international scene. Good non-sectarian base, loose programme and principles tro allow different groups and approaches, none of this nationalist "one group from one nation state" stuff and so on.

Too bad nothing came out of it. There's some new european syndicalist being set up initiated by COBAS and CGT folks i believe. I can dig up the communique from a infos if anyone is interested...

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 7 2005 15:45

Was this the thing that SAC were in?

nastyned
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Oct 7 2005 15:49

Yes, that's the one.

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 7 2005 15:56

all biggies, SAC from sweden (i guess worlds largest libertarian/syndicalist group per capita), SKT from russia, CGT from spain, CNT vignolles, COBAS and so on - plus loads of smaller ones, including many of the so called platform folks.

My theory is that since these are actual operating revolutionary unions with real work in their hands, they had very little impotus and energy for the largely useless though "cool" international work wink Just a guess though, might be totally and utterly wrong...

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 7 2005 17:58

revol, when groups get bigger than 6 members, there usually are some issues. That is given mate, and any revolutionary group worth anything will have internal conflicts and will make mistakes.

I fucking love SAC and have loads of respect to them and know fair few members from SAC (just union members, regular militant workers, SAC members are not all full on party line guys like it is the case with groups with 6 members).

now that USI is starting to take part in italian style works councils, no doubt Norwegian group with all its mighty 3 odd members will table a motion to fire them out of IWA - yet another proper syndicalist union out of the picture. Ok, just joking about the norwegians, i don't know how big they are really, might even be 6 members...

Deezer
Offline
Joined: 2-10-04
Oct 7 2005 19:17

Had heard some time back that the CNT Vignolles (at least significant sections of it) were becoming increasingly disillusioned with the SIL/ILS and were either on the verge of walking away from it or they had already done that.

Maybe not quite the rosey picture JDMF reckons after all?

Also, I'd heard, from elsewhere that they'd run out of international solidarity work to keep them busy confused and in its absence things were effectively running down - that version sounds a bit weak to me though.

Am I saddened by the apparent demise of SIL/ILS? No, not really. I expect I'll have to do something to sort out my sectarian issues. And after all the platformists have moved on to bigger and better things with Anarckismo!

Or perhaps in times of defeat and lower levels of resistance to capitalist and state onslaught I reckon its more important to maintain a principled (if smaller) revolutionary alternative than compromise with the state and water down that opposition in a bid keep up the numbers. Of course there are issues relating to small propaganda groups having the same voice in the international as small and medium sized unions and this has caused the IWA problems. There should be discussion on restructuring and facilitating greater co-operation and solidarity on an industrial level but its facetious to beat the IWA with these shortcomings while remaining blind to the collaborationist and other problems of components of the SIL/ILS.

Having said that I'm in an organisation that isn't part of any international at present, at least part of the reasoning being that we do not think we are large enough or well enough rooted in the workplace to be part of an anarcho-syndicalist international. We more realistically regard ourselves as an anarchist/libertarian communist propaganda group, albeit one that is involved in a limited range of activity grounded in the ongoing class struggle.

Cheers;

AITista

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 8 2005 08:39
Boulcolonialboy wrote:
Had heard some time back that the CNT Vignolles (at least significant sections of it) were becoming increasingly disillusioned with the SIL/ILS and were either on the verge of walking away from it or they had already done that.

Maybe not quite the rosey picture JDMF reckons after all?

yeah, well, i don't know if thats in conflict with my impression - i mean how can someone get disillusioned when there was nothing to get illusioned by smile They did so very little as a network, so perhaps lack of focus - who knows! Perhaps should try to hunt down some people who were involved... but then again, its not that important.

Will be interesting to see how this new network of syndicalist unions (and this time it looks like no propaganda groups are invited) will function. Here's the english article:

http://www.ainfos.ca/en/ainfos17140.html

and here's one web site, mainly in italian:

http://www.fesal.it/

Quote:

Am I saddened by the apparent demise of SIL/ILS? No, not really. I expect I'll have to do something to sort out my sectarian issues.

sectarianism has always been very beneficial for the working class wink

Quote:

Or perhaps in times of defeat and lower levels of resistance to capitalist and state onslaught I reckon its more important to maintain a principled (if smaller) revolutionary alternative than compromise with the state and water down that opposition in a bid keep up the numbers.

I would not automatically analyse that some "watering down" (what ever that is, pehaps being responsive, or changing with times?) is necessarily to keep up the numbers. All this talk about direct democracy and workers control - but then when workers make a decision in a union wich they have a full control over, and for some sectarian reason it is a wrong one, then they should be punished! grin

Some anarchists are keen to slag off SAC for distributing unemployment benefits - like it was somehow beneficial for a revolutionaries to go hungry and live without unemployment benefits just for the sake of being hardcore. If this is watering down, bring on the buckets mate!

I am not really that interested in small "principled" (one could read dogmatic, fundamentalist, stuck in the past etc as well in balance of the positive term) groups, but groups that have a real impact. All good and well being in a small principled group, but i think anarchism/libertarian communism/anarcho syndicalism is the best solution to problems facing our class.

Quote:

Having said that I'm in an organisation that isn't part of any international at present, at least part of the reasoning being that we do not think we are large enough or well enough rooted in the workplace to be part of an anarcho-syndicalist international. We more realistically regard ourselves as an anarchist/libertarian communist propaganda group, albeit one that is involved in a limited range of activity grounded in the ongoing class struggle.

yes, and i am sure you can remain very principled and pure while staying tiny smile just joking, not a dig at your group, i think it is one of the best ones around, but surely if groups are not taking off the ground, proper self criticism and reflection should take place to get back to that upward trajectory.

This brings me back to SAC: they are able to do this self criticism and reflection in ways i haven't seen elsewhere, and react to new situations and conflicts in a positive way. To be honest, many would not even know how to be in a group which is that big. Just the cultural difference of being in a small propaganda group with people agreeing 100% on huge host of largely insignificant "aims and principles" versus a combating, dynamic and responsive revolutionary class struggle group with large membership, is massive and one has to get used to working with people who are not in 100% agreement on things.

We do that all the time at workplaces and elsewhere, but to work in a revolutionary union with a mass membership would be quite a cultural shock smile

One comment on "small propaganda groups in IWA" though: i know people from few of what could be described as such, and also i am a spanking new member of sol fed, so i do have a lot of time to people in say FAU in addition to sol fed folks. There will never be a big anarchist group if there isn't a small one first, never we will have a group with 1000 members if we don't have one with 100 first. So we have to play with the cards we are dealt with.

The trouble with small propaganda groups is though that they get very used of being small, defining their politics all the time to a smaller and smaller detail and usually become quite allerging to any deviations or dissent.

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Oct 8 2005 09:07

Dunno much about SIL, except the WSM are in it, which puts me off instantly (me sectarian?), but doesn't it bother you, as a new SolFed member (it bothers me as an AFer of a few years) , that we have two tiny feds in this country with little to distinguish between them? Yet in Ireland, the AFI and the syndicalists somehow managed to work through the differences?

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 8 2005 09:39
knightrose wrote:
but doesn't it bother you, as a new SolFed member (it bothers me as an AFer of a few years) , that we have two tiny feds in this country with little to distinguish between them? Yet in Ireland, the AFI and the syndicalists somehow managed to work through the differences?

yes mate, it does. But on the other hand, the way we do things in Manchester is pretty good isn't it? Advertise and attend events based on the topic, not the group organising it, and so on.

Jason Cortez
Offline
Joined: 14-11-04
Oct 8 2005 09:40

The Spanish CNT have always dominated the IWA since the 70s regardless of who has been the international secretary. The Norwegians are close to CNT(sp) but unless the FAU or USI are the international Sec it makes little difference what position groups have. Interestingly the east european groups are even more purist, even the one's functioning as small unions.

The point about the SAC adminstering state benefits is that it's all part and parcel of the corporate state model. Tying unions to this model co-opts them into reformist 'welfare' forms of practise, eroding more 'revolutionary' modus operadis wink . That said i would still prefer to join an working (radical) union like the SAC rather than a small propaganda group (no matter how correct[not saying they are]) like NSF. I don't know given the labour law in Sweden (the little i know of) how realistic it would be for SAC to refuse to adminster the unemployment benefits, but this shouldn't blind us the negative consequences of doing so.

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 8 2005 09:54

I am being way too active here now while i should get some work done smile Anyways, i'll try to answer this one in the absense of anyone more apt to answer it (i'm from finland which has the same system).

Jason Cortez wrote:
I don't know given the labour law in Sweden (the little i know of) how realistic it would be for SAC to refuse to adminster the unemployment benefits, but this shouldn't blind us the negative consequences of doing so.

The unions fought hard for the right to tie unemployment benefits to a union membership. There were numerous reasons for doing so, perhaps some cynical self preservation issues, some to do with union members benefiting from the battles that they carry out, but mainly to do with securing high levels of unemployment benefits which carry immense, direct and immediate benefit to our class.

In finland (and i think in sweden as well) unemployment benefit is about 60% of your salary for couple of years of unemployment before it drops to pure state benefit (which is what anarcho-purists would be happy to take i guess?), and the difference between the state benefit and the 60% is coming from the unions unemployment pots. In practise the benefit is done in a way that state pays its share to the union and union hands it to the member with that added whack of money on top of it.

Just think about it, in this country you have to survive on total peanuts when you get unemployed - in sweden and finland you get 60%, just calculate your 60% from your current salary, not too bad eh?

This had implications to the workplace militancy as well: workers do not have to take so much crap like in UK (and especially in US!) because the safety nets are there - not that they would need to be used that often because the unionisation levels are so high that bosses can't just throw us around. In finland the unionisation level is about 80-85%, i believe in sweden it is over 90% (i have never in my life met any swede who working but is not in a union, almost same goes with finland).

SAC is an odd one out - we don't have anything like that in finland, nor there is anything like that in other scandic countries. To survive they of course had to take part to this scheme - otherwise we would have one more insignificant propaganda group amongs us i guess smile Instead they are a direct action, direct democracy union with 10k + members with the aim of libertarian socialism and end of wage slavery in a land of 8-9 million people. Not big, but compared to any other syndicalist union they are doing really well and growing in membership rather than slowly getting smaller like the mainstream unions in scandinavia (private sector has brought out these private unemployment insurances which work in the same way than the union schemes to undermine unions).

kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Oct 8 2005 10:29

just like to say i agree with everything JDMF has said - bang on the money, makes the rest of you look like sad sectarian muppets tongue

also, i don't think anything has happened to SIL, their website is down that's all.

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Oct 8 2005 11:44

The Manchester way can be OK, but it relies on access to a PC and phone calls. If you don't know what's going on, then you don't know ... if you see what I mean. It's a bit insular and clique like at times. I know, I've been guilty of it myself. The Gate Gourmet thing worked well, however. But if I forget to ring a couple of friends, then they don't know what's going on. I'd like to see a better co-ordination in Manchester. To be honest, I'd like more to join the AF, but am not obsessive about it.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Oct 8 2005 13:00
knightrose wrote:
but doesn't it bother you, as a new SolFed member (it bothers me as an AFer of a few years) , that we have two tiny feds in this country with little to distinguish between them? Yet in Ireland, the AFI and the syndicalists somehow managed to work through the differences?

I dunno it seems to me that basically all it'll take is one set to just sacrifice their brand loyalty (and International) and dissolve into the other. Doesn't seem like anyone wants to though.

Interesting discussion, I've always found the SAC interesting so getting more info on the state benefits is useful. JDMF I might drop you a PM about this later - am off out in a sec. A small point, I think their membership's around the 6-9,000 mark, according to their own prop, but still huge for such a small country. Also is it true the SAC was more militant than the CNT-in-Exile in Toulouse? I heard they supported Sabate and the guerrillas when the CNT wouldn't - can anyone confirm or deny?

AFAIK ILS-SIL hasn't been active in any meaningful way for about 2 years anyway, I guess someone didn't bother to renew the domain name.

enelpozo
Offline
Joined: 14-03-05
Oct 8 2005 13:44
John. wrote:
I dunno it seems to me that basically all it'll take is one set to just sacrifice their brand loyalty (and International) and dissolve into the other. Doesn't seem like anyone wants to though.

well seeing as Solfed are the smallest... wink

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 8 2005 15:34
kalabine wrote:
just like to say i agree with everything JDMF has said - bang on the money, makes the rest of you look like sad sectarian muppets tongue

Comrade Kalabine, i knew that a day would come when we would agree on something wink

Knightrose, we should have that discussion evening on trashing out some ideas and thoughts on how to move forwards. Lets make a mental note about that - i'll try to pop in to the AF meeting next time as well.

John, by all means, i can get in touch with some grassroots SAC friends of mine as well and ask verification of those details. When numbers fly around, i am too eager to always quote the biggest one wink

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 9 2005 14:45

This is a fantastic sectarian example

http://www.iwa-ait.org/defence.html

and whats most embarrassing is that someone actually put that on the web! embarrassed

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Oct 9 2005 18:53
JDMF wrote:
John, by all means, i can get in touch with some grassroots SAC friends of mine as well and ask verification of those details. When numbers fly around, i am too eager to always quote the biggest one ;)

Cool

gurrier
Offline
Joined: 30-01-04
Oct 9 2005 22:52

Folks, hate to disappoint y'all, but sil-ils is/was exactly what it described itself as, a collection of libertarian groups attempting to pool their resources to offer solidarity to groups in the poorer parts of the planet. It funded several projects in South America and these projects have now been completed. I don't know if there will be further projects in the future as there have been logistical problems in organising meetings and decision making. To some extent it probably suffered from having such a limited scope as many people probably didn't see the point in putting much effort into something that they could do themselves.

It was never an international, there was never any plans to make it an international and the CGT / SAC / CNT-Vignolles were very much the driving force behind getting political groups involved.

The sectarian sniping on this thread is really really silly. The imaginings of factions fights and plots is worse. Makes y'all sound like sparts or some grand trotskyite leadership in exile.

Quote:
Dunno much about SIL, except the WSM are in it, which puts me off instantly (me sectarian?)....

And what the fuck is that type of crap about?

confused

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Oct 10 2005 16:47
Quote:
And what the fuck is that type of crap about?

Just me being silly. Sorry. embarrassed

gurrier
Offline
Joined: 30-01-04
Oct 10 2005 19:34
knightrose wrote:
Just me being silly. Sorry. embarrassed

If you want to have a pop at the WSM, at least make it about something.

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Oct 10 2005 19:35

OK

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 10 2005 19:41

How about: They're cocks

?

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Oct 10 2005 20:43

I've not kept up with the WSM's positions for some time. But I think I remember something about an anarchist republic in Ireland or somesuch?? Is that similar to what Revol is talking about. then there were some views on the republicans that sounded a lot like apologisms.

Though, I shouldn't have made flippant remarks. Sometimes this board encourages them and having been the recipient, i ought to know better.

gurrier
Offline
Joined: 30-01-04
Oct 11 2005 13:09
knightrose wrote:
I've not kept up with the WSM's positions for some time. But I think I remember something about an anarchist republic in Ireland or somesuch?? Is that similar to what Revol is talking about. then there were some views on the republicans that sounded a lot like apologisms.

Our relevant position paper is at http://www.struggle.ws/wsm/positions/partition.html

It replaced our old position paper a few years ago. The old one is archived at http://www.struggle.ws/ppapers/national.html It contains the phrase that revol refered to.

If you* have any criticisms of it, I would be interested to hear them (although a new thread would be more appropriate).

(*note 'you' refers to knightrose and not revol whose 'criticisms' I have heard all too often and don't take seriously at all).

kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Oct 11 2005 14:31
revol68 wrote:
well obviously you don't take many peoples criticism seriously as none of youse have managed one half decent response to Organises Crossing the Border.

long live anarcho stalinism, anarchism in one country.

why should they give a fuck what organise say? one irrelevent group criticising another...

pointless

gurrier
Offline
Joined: 30-01-04
Oct 11 2005 14:43
revol68 wrote:
well obviously you don't take many peoples criticism seriously as none of youse have managed one half decent response to Organises Crossing the Border.

There are some lengthy responses on this indymedia thread:

http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=67598

Whether you consider them half-decent is rather subjective. Personally, I didn't vaguely recognise our positions or thinking in the Organise! response, so I really don't have much else to say about it.

revol68 wrote:
long live anarcho stalinism, anarchism in one country.

Long live childish name calling and crude charicatures in the place of debate! Let's import the methods of the sparts into anarchism!

kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Oct 11 2005 15:22
revol68 wrote:
aren't you in class war?

How many members out of 60 million people?

Not that I think membership size wins any sort of debate.

And if you think a wee group in northern ireland arguing a position of quite abit of importance and relevance to themselves is pointless, what you think of some arse on Urban75 proposing "One settler, one bullet" as a solution to the Israel/Palestine issue?

no i'm not in class war, i'm in haringey solidarity group and that's it.

and who gives a fuck about a throw away comment on u75? do you treat the internet that seriously that you think a one line post is a serious proposal?