💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › politics › SPUNK › sp000361.txt captured on 2022-04-29 at 02:27:19.
⬅️ Previous capture (2022-03-01)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Libertarian Labor Review #15
Summer 1993, page 2
Editorial:
HOW TO BUILD THE INTERNATIONAL
At its conference on Eastern Europe and Russia last fall, the
International Workers Association (IWA) decided to give the
responsibility for publishing its Eastern European newsletter to
the IREAN (Initiative of Revolutionary Anarchists). The IREAN is
a small propaganda group which split from the KAS (Anarcho
Syndicalist Confederation) a couple years ago. This development
startled members of KAS, who had hoped to maintain good relations
with the IWA, and see little hope that this will be the case with
IREAN filtering the information which the IWA gets about the
syndicalist movement in the countries of the former Soviet Union.
Perhaps what should trouble the international syndicalist movement
is the prospect that this may lead to IREAN's recognition as the
IWA's affiliate in Russia, and put an end to IWA efforts to bring
KAS and CMOT into the international.
We don't intend this to be a criticism of IREAN. We know very
little about IREAN and its politics. What we question is the
wisdom of the IWA in setting up an intermediary in its relations
with Russian anarcho-syndicalists without getting input from the
largest syndicalist organizations. The IREAN is a splinter group
from KAS. It is therefore not in the interests of IREAN that the
IWA be on good terms with KAS. Whether this was the IWA's
intention or not, by giving official recognition to IREAN, the IWA
is furthering a split in the syndicalist movement of that country
and may be cutting itself off from the majority of Russian
syndicalists. Bringing IREAN into the IWA may give the
international another affiliate, but does this serve the cause of
international unity?
This is not the first time the IWA has permitted sectarian
syndicalist groups to draw the international into internal feuding.
In 1984 we warned the IWA about a similar situation with a group of
anti-IWW syndicalists, the Workers Solidarity Alliance (WSA), who
were seeking recognition as the IWA's U.S. affiliate. The IWA
ignored these warnings, and the WSA was given a blank check to
carry on sectarian warfare against the IWW and pro-IWW anarcho-
syndicalists, all in the name of the international. Perhaps it is
not surprising that when the IWW passed a referendum in 1989(?) to
affiliate with the IWA, this received no follow-up from the IWA.
The IWA decided it must rely on the judgement of WSA, who told them
to ignore the IWW's prospective affiliation.
The policy of the IWA should be to seek the widest solidarity
between syndicalist organizations of all countries. IWA Statutes
allow only one affiliate in each country. This is supposed to
discourage sectarian feuding. Ironically this rule has been used
as a weapon by splinter groups to encourage it. Knowing that the
IWA rarely refuses a request for affiliation from a country where
no IWA section exists, these minority splinter groups take
advantage of the IWA's goodwill. Once they are in the
international, the IWA feels it must support these minority
sections in their political feuds, without making a serious
investigation into what these disputes are all about.
To build a strong international, the IWA needs to reassess its
affiliation process. The goal must be to federate with the
majority syndicalist organization in each country. Where splits
have occurred or where a small propaganda group seeks IWA affiliate
status, the IWA should try to get input from the majority
organization before committing itself. Certainly foot-dragging by
the larger group should not stop the IWA from having contact with
sympathetic minorities. The IWA, however, needs to be more aware
of the consequences of giving these minorities official
recognition.