Nazis in CGT-E

Robot pointed out the background of the Sevilla text very well. What remains is the use of a term "ideological". The fact is that CNT-E is political and ideological organisation when you read the Sevilla text. However, they do not tell you your ideology has to be this or that (anarchist, trockist, democratic, whatever...). So I would say, this is what they mean by the mentioned sentence where they speak about membership and being ideological. No big deal in fact...

And as for the CGT. Every organisation can be exposed to inflitration, be it state or from other political groups. However, it is true that CNT-E probably have better mechanisms to prevent such things. And even more when we are speaking about active militants as was the case of the fascist guy.

...not to pick on you personally, but you yourself raised a point on an ancient threat and it might be relevant here:

Whether or not the majority of the CNT membership consider themselves anarchists (and I'd assume they do, actually), what's to stop a situation developing where it grows to the point that revolutionaries become the minority? In any case, do non-political members genuinely act like anarchists?

Well it's a potential problem. Typically, either internal democracy is sacrificed to maintain principles (barring Trots from office but not membership is a step away from all members being equal), or non-revolutionaries use the democratic nature of the union to do non-revolutionary things (there have been various splits and expulsions, some which fit this bill). I think the CNT mostly gets away with it due to a combination of factors; (1) there are larger reformist unions like the CGT you'd join if that was your inclination, (2) the historical reputation of the union as anarchist, so people hostile to anarchism don't join, (3) a recognition from more apolitical members that the effectiveness of the union comes from its anarchist approach, so they elect people who share that approach to local/regional/national positions.

But still, I think the CNT's approach flirts with creating a two-tier membership of more passive apolitical members and more active anarchists (which might be how bureaucracies begin, although there are plenty of checks), and they're probably storring up splits for the future - the big CNT/CGT split came after an influx of reformist members after the union was legalised. I'm not a 'FORAist' in the sense I don't think workers should be expected to have worked-out anarchist communist politics to join, but I think a revolutionary union isn't just a union, it's a revolutionary organisation, which means more than just joining to sort a problem at work then leaving again or retaining a passive membership. I think it's still possible to organise with workers who haven't joined, through workplace/unemployed committees and/or mass meetings/assemblies, and the CNT does do this too, and then those workers who are drawn to anarcho-syndicalist ideas and practices in the course of the struggle can of course join the union. I know the CNT-AIT in France has had some success like this.

One of the biggest day to day problems in the CNT was that workers would join, get their problem sorted out, by people putting in a lot of effort on their behalf, and then leave. Either totally leave, or pay their subs but not go to any meetings or pickets. People think "I'm paying you, and you have to sort it out." They want a union that can protect them, but they resent devoting time to the union.

I'd agree personally that "members don't need to identify as anarcho-syndicalists, anarchists etc. as long as they act like them" but getting there is a big big problem. A lot of people want a "proper leader", they want someone who looks like he knows what he's doing, who is confident, experienced, strong, and they want to follow that person and abdicate responsibility to him. They want this because the whole of their experience in this society tells them that that's the way you get things done. (I'm saying him because it reflects reality, in Spain at least I think a lot of people automatically respect a man more. And in the political movement in Seville the great majority of the leaders are men. The CNT is actually less male dominated and sexist than a lot of of other groups.)
People don't have that much experience of non-hierarchical organising and so on, they are used to the massive social division of labour, the division into people who know things and people who don't, and to break that down requires a massive effort, which is difficult when to keep your union functioning at all also requires a massive effort. So the default position is to drift into an informal bureaucracy and hierarchy. I don't think that anything you can write into your constitution or aims and principles can resolve this problem.

Everything I've said applies to my experience of grass roots struggle in general, and to the union as one part of that, not to the union especially.

I agree with what malone says above.

The split between CNT and CGT came basically because of what said before: participation in company's comittees and sindical elections which cnt rejected and cgt didn't.

According to a-las-barricadas ( http://www.alasbarricadas.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=47570&start=75 ) CGT did started the mechanism to expel the nazis but before the assembly took place the nazis resigned. It is still disturbing tho to know that cgt were aware that these members were nazis beacause they were members of ccoo before who warned the cgt when those became members. It's important to know that cgt is a confederation of unions who have autonomy in their own branches. nevertheless is well known as well that cgt is filled with leftists with all the opportunism problems that come with it.

But i think threre is something more important than everything said before: in the last years ccoo and ugt have been losing affiliation while cgt have been winning it just as cnt and so. In a months time a general strike has been called and the cgt is for it and during this summer different voices in the socialdemocrats as well as in the right have been calling to approve a strike law that makes impossible a general strike. Facing a general strike draw your own conclusions of the convenience of saying that the most radicalised and growing of the non-anarchist unions, is infiltrated by nazis even if it has been.

If you look in the link above you'll see that even cnt comrades agree on this.

For the record, i'm no cgt member.

Hm, I'm quite surprised that mr. Rata started this topic about collaboration with Nazis. I always believed that anarchists (at least real ones like mr. Rata) are not hypocrites. I guess that I was wrong. Here Rata is attacking people from CGT, for who I personally don't care much (union like all others), that they have Nazi members, that they collaborate with Nazis etc. etc. and in the same time he's the one who collaborates with fascists back in Serbia.

All anarchists in Serbia know that mr. Rata is collaborating with fascists group called "1389 Movement" (for more info about this organisation: http://www.1389.org.rs/ or http://sr.wikipedia.org/sr-el/%D0%A1%D1%80%D0%BF%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%82_1389) and that he saved them from police repression (he told them to hide from coppers in Church - http://www.1389.org.rs/17.mart.html).

Also, it's well know that ASI made sticker with nationalists (chetniks!) football holligans holding banner "Death to police, freedom to people!" (picture above)

Few Serbian (and Croatian) anarchists wrote statemant against this act: http://kontra-punkt.info/print.php?sid=56491. Some of them used to be members of ASI.

Maybe I should start another topic and call it: Nazi collaborators in ASI, or ASI as Nazi collaborators?

Death to political opportunists, fascism, capitalism and state.

Anarchist Belgrade

Rata,
As you know there was quite a lot of discussion and accusations about this demo and the thing with the club made by people in Belgrade, including the people who signed this letter. I discussed it with one person and a member of ASI in Belgrade who said ASI did go to this demo against the police made by the nationalists in an attempted "intervention". I don't know if I agree with that type of tactic- unless it is done in a smart way that clearly totally fucks the nazis. But for some people going is like a sin. It's obvious that ASI is anti-nazi and even a target of the nazis, so I cannot figure out the whole point of this attempted "intervention" but given the bad will of so many people against ASI, you should know people will twist this against you.

That statement is about the demonstration and the subsequent sticker but it nowhere names ASI/Rata as those responsible.

The accusations about this were made elsewhere - at least I have both read and heard them. Probably it is assumed that the readers of the statement are familiar with the incident, or at least what was being said about it.

With those FB things you have to be really careful since half the time there are really some organized political groups behind these calls pretending to just be some FB readers - at least here there were such situations.

Finally it's clear that if you are going to be at a demo with a load of nationalists, liberals, trade union bureaucrats or whatever, it is helpful not just to go along in a crowd with the same slogans, but also have some clear statements about why you are there, but distancing yourselves from the organizers.