Fly-by shit stir

100 posts / 0 new
Last post
Joined: 11-02-07
Mar 19 2014 20:19
AES wrote:
No hostility intended ...

This means what it says. I'm not a member of the IWA but I'd rather not see it in crisis. I'm not trying to attack the IWA or akai. It seems like a relevant question to ask - and it's under discussion right now on the alasbarricadas thread, with as far as I can see no one supporting the CNT's previous positions. How representative of the CNT membership this is I'm not sure but I suspect it reflects the mainstream view.

Joined: 26-09-06
Mar 19 2014 20:52
Mark. wrote:
No hostility intended but the thing that strikes me about this is that these congress decisions were made quite a few years ago. My impression is that the majority position in the CNT has changed a lot since then. Would CNT members still support these motions if asked now?

Not so long, like 7-8 years ago. In the life of an International that started it's activities pre-WWII that is really not so long ago. I also don't think majority position in the CNT has changed a lot on that, and other questions relating to the reformists, and I would call everybody not to take anonymous posters on forums to be in any way representative of the opinions of the organizations. And, even if the position changed - which, as I say, I don't think happened - that is the question for CNT, not IWA. If they want to change their position, members of CNT can do that in every moment, as in any other democratic organization. They haven't done that yet, didn't show intention to do it, nor I think they will any time soon or far from here - because from my experience reformist assholes can take hold of some of the positions, some unions of the CNT can engage in reformist alliances and bullshit activities, but the base of the CNT is radical enough not to let this non-parliamentarian socialdemocratic shit pass. Thus it is only hear-say and evil tongues that are spreading rumors and claiming that CNT changed position, because there is no concrete organization activities to confirm that. When talking about that, I feel the same way about FAU and their membership base. Yes, some assholes there are loud, abusive, manipulative and are trying to force their views, but those shit ideas, like propositions to leave IWA, have never managed to pass through FAU membership and get majority. Even if they tried quite strongly.

What this questions is showing is total lack of understanding of how International, and national sections operate, and bluntly presents wishes of people (definitely not comrades, and judging from splits that occurred before, some of them for sure being cops) who are not even able to pretend to follow anarchosyndicalist practices and principles, and are trying to push their idiocy using lies, lobbing and (internet) media manipulation. Just as any other politicians do. That shit never passed in IWA, and it will not pass now.

In that context I call moderators to change the name of this thread, which doesn't in any way presents true situation, and is started by classical, by-the-book type of provocateur, who never posted again to the forum, nor will do it in future, and whose only intention was, obviously, trashing IWA and anarchosyndicalism. I don't see why the people here would give him platform for those activities...

Topic locked