💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › mattias-gardell-a-conference-in-spain.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:42:05. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: A Conference in Spain Author: Mattias Gardell Date: 1993 Language: en Topics: conferences, Spain, CGT, CNT, SAC, IWA-AIT, anarcho-syndicalism, Libertarian Labor Review Source: Retrieved on September 10, 2005 from https://web.archive.org/web/20050910034247/http://www.syndicalist.org/archives/llr14-24/15d.shtml Notes: From Libertarian Labor Review #15, Summer 1993
The following article appeared in the December 1992 issue of
SAC-Kontakt, journal of the Swedish Workers Central-organization, the
syndicalist federation of Sweden. It was translated for LLR by Christina
Dagberger of the SAC. The article is significant because it suggests a
thaw in the relations between the SAC and the IWA (syndicalist
international federation).
The Spanish Confederacion Nacional del Trabajo (CNT) invited anarchist
and syndicalist worker-organizations from the entire world to a
conference in Barcelona in August 1992. When the invitation arrived at
the Internationella Kommitten (IK — International Committee) it was a
clear sign that our continuous work over the past years was finally
beginning to pay off.
The background — which some readers are certainly familiar with —
consists of a conflict and a series of misunderstandings which since the
1950’s have characterized the relations between Sveriges Arbetares
Centralorganisation (SAC — the Swedish Workers Central-organization) and
the International Workers Association (IWA), as well as the split of the
CNT after the Franco dictatorship’s fall, which caused similar fissures
in larger portions of the anti-authoritarian European workers movement.
The following is a short description of these unfortunate events as well
as a description of the IK’s effort to reach a friendly and constructive
relationship with the IWA and the CNT. Following that is a detailed
report from the conference as well as my impressions of the CNT and the
IWA.
The conflict with the IWA (AIT in Spanish) has two sides. Post World War
II Europe was characterized by the cold war and the well- documented
attempts of the CIA to influence West European workers organizations
into an anti-revolutionary and anti-communist direction. In 1952, SAC
adopted a Declaration of Principles which, compared to its predecessor,
was clearly more reformist. It was decided the same year by referenda to
build a state supported unemployment fund, which became reality in 1954.
The IWA, which at that time organized very few working unions (in
practice only the SAC and the French CNT), and therefore able to hold a
more “orthodox” anarcho-syndicalist line, disapproved of such
“co-operation” with the state and supported opposition to this
reorientation, which not the least came from SAC’s older
revolutionaries. The IWA, which worried about reformist tendencies,
decided to give their secretariat the responsibility of observing
different sections’ tactical and principal stances.
In Sweden, this was perceived as the beginnings of a centralized,
opinion watchdog — something completely alien to an anti-authoritarian
and federal movement. In 1956, the SAC withdrew from the IWA by not
paying its membership dues.
The Spanish CNT, which during the Franco dictatorship was forced to go
underground and into exile, returned upon the fascist collapse as the
revolutionary Anarcho-Syndicalist mass-movement it had once been during
the 1930’s. In the summer of 1977, when the CNT held its first mass
meeting since the civil war, 300,000 enthusiastic supporters were
present in Barcelona. Its revolutionary power, however, was soon subdues
by internal struggles caused by intricate patterns of personal and
political conflicts. These conflicts escalated until the 1979 congress,
where a minority (according to the CNT, but a majority according to
those who became the CGT) of more reform-minded comrades left.
The situation became worse as both groups claimed the name “CNT” as well
as the resources confiscated by the Franco dictatorship [ie. the funds
and union buildings included in the “Patrimony” — LLR]. The ideological
and material legacy conflict was not settled until 1989, when a Spanish
court rejected the splinter group’s claims. They then changed their name
to Confederation General del Trabajo (CGT).
The Spanish conflict had immediate effects upon the global movement. The
IWA supported the CNT and anarcho-syndicalist groups in different
countries split up into enemy camps along the lines of the internal
Spanish division. Three camps crystallized in Sweden: one pro-CNT, one
pro-that-was-to-become-CGT, and one completely uninterested or unknowing
group.
These three groups within SAC were united in their determination not to
split upon the basis of the Spanish conflict. None other than the
employers and their collaborators — the reformist unions — would benefit
if the SAC split. The SAC decided therefore to remain neutral (a Swedish
tradition wouldn’t you say). We regretted the Spanish conflict, but at
the same time we explained that it could hardly be the Swedish workers
responsibility to decide which of the opposition groups was the
legitimate CNT. During the congresses of 1983 and 1990, we declared our
intention to cooperate and hold channels open to both parts. The Swedish
door was open for both.
One of the many problems with neutrality is that the decision does not
appear quite as clear to the groups involved in the conflict seeking
international support. For those caught up in an intensive, emotional
struggle, thought of as decisive and a matter of life and death, the
lines of distinction between good and evil are crystal clear. A naive
Swedish attitude of we-want-to-be- friends-with-everyone is destined to
misunderstanding. The thought that anyone who talks to the enemy are my
enemy, is hard to ignore.
The fact that we even communicated with and visited the “renegades” in
the soon-to-be CGT was enough for the CNT to suspect Swedish foul play.
When in 1986, the SAC decided to lend 250,000 SKR [at 1993 exchange
rates this would be about $35,000 U.S. — LLR] to the soon-to-be CGT —
money they would use for participating in union elections — the
situation became interpreted as: “The SAC, those reformists, supports
the trotskyist/reformists in the splinter group!” That we could just as
easily have lent money to the CNT was unimportant. The SAC “schemes for
those traitors and for nothing less than the despicable purpose of the
Francoist, class-collaborationist institution of union elections.” After
that, many members of the CNT and IWA saw the SAC as a sworn enemy.
Confusing and vicious rumors, which had the purpose of smearing SAC’s
reputation, soon spread and of course, outraged the Swedish syndicalists
who were confronted with them. All this created a situation of mutual
suspicion, misunderstandings and hurt feelings.
The IK works under these circumstances. In the IK’s “International
Program,” which was ratified by the 1990 [SAC] congress, it is clearly
stated that we are “especially open...to good relationship with
ideologically similar organizations...both within and outside the IWA.”
Over the years, the IK has participated in many international events. As
well as much else, we have worked towards building up a working
co-operation between non- political-party-tied, anti-authoritarian,
revolutionary unions both in Eastern and Western Europe. This has
included many trips and meetings where we have either met or contacted
IWA sections.
Meeting on a personal level has many benefits. As long as the personal
chemistry works, one soon understands that the other is actually human
and not the devil that rumors portray. Once a political discussion
begins, one discovers the other as an anti- authoritarian socialist and
a brother in a common revolutionary struggle. Details about “who said
what to whom in 1953” lose their importance and a series of
misunderstandings can be cleared. Slowly, but surely, the SAC and the
IWA sections could lower their guard and begin to communicate with each
other.
When the CNT invited the SAC to participate in their international
conference, Certamen Anarquista Mundial (CAM), a milestone was passed
which clearly marked that we were well on the way to the goal which we
had set for ourselves — good and constructive relationships with the CNT
and the IWA. We have much more in common than not. We understood, of
course, that our presence would be controversial, and I, who had the
honor to be our representative, prepared myself for many confrontations
with hardened anarcho-syndicalists who were still caught up in the old
patterns of conflict. I, however, felt confident that I could accomplish
that which I set out to do and looked forward to tackling the Spanish
bull by the horns.
And rest assured, I explained at least a thousand times over our
position in a series of central points:
that fights both capital and the state.
individual member receives a grant if she becomes unemployed (“Oh shit,
we have about the same system in Spain...”)
movement. You have done a good job of that yourselves, which we regret.
participate in union elections. We lent them money but what the CGT
decided to do with it was their responsibility, not ours.
have such a system in Sweden.
of our congress which clearly points to the fact that we also want good
contacts with the CNT.
majority of our members are neither knowledgeable of nor interested in
the conflict. We can not demand that our new members begin to study
Spanish or Spanish anarcho-syndicalist history. We are a working,
direct-democratic revolutionary union which has other issues that our
members find more pressing to engage in, such as the struggle in the
workplace. For many members, it is about as important to take sides in
the Spanish conflict as it is to decide which of the two guerilla groups
in Cameroon to support.
IWA. However, we seek constructive co-operation with non-
political-party-tied, ideologically similar, unions. Be my guest and
read this yourself in the International Program our congress drafted.
had been. Did you know that we decided upon a new Declaration in 1972
that was ratified 4 years later? No? Be my guest, see for yourself. Yes
exactly, there is a difference. Not to mention that we are revising and
updating it now and it will hopefully be even more radical and clear.
members who pay their salaries. Their salaries are based upon the
principle of equal pay and we see it as no more reformist to work for
our own union than to work for a capitalist company.
And that is how it went. My saving grace was that the Spanish young
people quickly understood the points and stepped in to correct the older
members as soon as they saw that I was bombarded with the same questions
that I had just answered. During the final days, the Spaniards, English
and French discussed amongst themselves and a clear, positive view of
the SAC spread throughout the conference. We could unite behind the fact
that in today’s circumstances, where the anti-authoritarian left is the
only left that is left and therefore the only organized resistance to
robber- baron-capitalism’s havoc, it would be devastating to waste our
energy upon internal differences when we have a revolution to organize.
More about these concrete proposals later. It is now high time to get
into the actual conference.
Every Swedish syndicalist, who has ever taken part in an international
conference on the continent, be it in France, Italy, or Spain, are
acquainted with those special characteristics we associate with problems
in organizing a conference: an impossible time table, endless
philosophically oriented arguments which challenge Fidel Castro’s
reputation for length, and poor — if even that — translations (God knows
that French, Italian and Spanish are international languages spoken by
all the workers of the world).
Mentally prepared to endure yet another conference under these
conditions, I was nearly bowled over by my confrontation with the
opposite reality: the time schedule was respected by the participants
and those who arrived late blushed in an almost Nordic manner,
simultaneous translations worked perfectly the entire conference, every
session was introduced by a prepared leading statement, the following
debates were disciplined and for the most part pertinent and towards the
end a five minute limit was set — and it worked!
During three days, we worked with four main themes — the fall of planned
state capitalism in Eastern Europe; the capitalist crisis in general;
the situation of the anarchist workers movement; as well as which types
of methods that we should use to build a dynamic and strong
anti-authoritarian movement today.
The first two introductions of themes as well as the following
discussions, were predictable and held no surprises. The SAC and most of
the other participating organizations and individuals had the same
analysis and opinions regarding these subjects. The only variation from
an average Swedish syndicalist debate was the portion which zeroes in
upon and attacked the church. The process of secularization has come
further in Sweden than in Spain.
As expected, the last two themes were more interesting. Most of the
participating organizations presented the situation in their own
countries under the third theme. Participating in the conference were,
among other IWA sections, Italy (USI), England (DAM), Germany (FAU),
France (CNT) and Bulgaria (CNT). There were as well, many autonomous
groups and communes from Spain, Groupo Malatesta from Portugal,
autonomes and anti-fascists from Germany, the French Anarchist
Federation, Italian railway workers and many more.
One interesting topic, among others, which I would like to highlight is
that of an anarchist school in Estremadura, Spain. We watched a video
and listened to a pair of teachers who worked there. The presentation
was impressive. The school was located in town and the children picked
up by a school bus, just as all the other children in the area. It was
directed towards a balanced, overall view, with a well thought out
pedagogy, which was truly revolutionary and a brilliant anarchistic
alternative to the bourgeois indoctrination that otherwise characterizes
the western school system. If we had something similar here, I would
send my children without a moment of hesitation. And why not? We have
enough teachers in our organization to start similar schools in Sweden,
at least in the larger cities.
I have two personal reflections concerning the third theme. The first is
that this conference, despite its global claims, was clearly
Euro-centered. With two exceptions, Morocco and the Spanish colony in
Africa (known as the Canary Islands), everyone at the conference was
from Europe. This points out the importance of attempting to tie new
knots and establish contact with worker organizations in, above all Asia
and Africa (we already have got good contacts in America). In this
context, we must understand that anarcho-syndicalism is a western
phenomenon, which is why we cannot expect to find groups who actually
call themselves “syndicalists” or “anarchists.” In both Africa and Asia,
there are other traditions which mean that anti-authoritarian ideas are
clothed in other words. The second observation, which was immediately
noticeable, was that the conference was overwhelmingly dominated by men.
Not that we have anything to brag about but I hope that Swedish
anarcha-feminists establish contacts with Mujeres Libres, the CNT’s
“Free Women,” who expressed such a desire.
The conference ended with more concrete, action-oriented discussion. The
debate was both intensive and interesting. The same type of
contradictions that we usually find at home arose: tensions between
union and political poles, between intellectual and anti- intellectual
workers, between a men’s and women’s perspective and between
generations. It was quite comforting to note that those stances which I
thought the sensible “won the debate.” The importance of a wide and
anti-authoritarian mobilization against the right-wing was emphasized.
In order to realize this, we must set dogmatic beliefs aside and be more
flexible. Many speaker’s noted the positive in SAC’s participation: we
must respect the fact that the anarchist workers movement will express
itself differently in different countries depending upon different
circumstances, and find the necessary forms for a working co-operation
in our common struggle against capital.
As usual, the unofficial parts of the conference were the most
rewarding. Many long discussions lighted up the breaks and nights and
good personal contacts could be made. Those which were most important
for the SAC and the future deserve to be documented: the unofficial
bargaining with the CNT and IWA.
The CNT’s new general secretary, Jaime Pozas, was easy to get along
with. He had lived in Sweden where he worked as a cook, and had been a
member of the SAC. He is therefore quite familiar with the Swedish
situation. We agreed that we must work towards a good and friendly
relationship and should cooperate on questions of mutual interest. My
impression of the CNT is that it is a well working anarcho-syndicalist
organization — contrary to what is occasionally said by CGT-influenced
comrades in Sweden. They are similar to us on a series of ideological
and practical questions, even if there are, naturally, points upon which
we differ. The CNT is absolutely not a small, orthodox, dogmatic sect;
but a revolutionary, anarchistic, workers organization which we should
take a positive stance towards and cooperate with.
The IWA’s new secretary, Pepe Jimenez, was even more easy to get along
with. The IWA’s secretariat moved to Valencia after the 1992 IWA
Congress. We had a very long and constructive meeting where we
ventilated opinions on everything from the IWA’s organization and
internal democracy, the controversy with the SAC, to a series of burning
political questions. We soon found that we had similar points of view
concerning the most serious questions and problems facing the working
class today. We also agreed that we had everything to gain by
cooperating. The SAC’s participation in the conference is a beginning to
normalizing relations between the IWA and the SAC. We should begin by
cooperating on general questions and slowly work towards expanding the
level of contact.
Today, the IWA consists of only two working unions, the CNTs in Spain
and France. The rest are actually best seen as propaganda groups. It is
also from these propaganda groups — due to that lack of practical
experience of the realities that a union works under — that the most
confusing attacks against the SAC come. It is quite clear that we need
each other — the IWA, the CNT and the SAC!
I delivered an invitation to both the IWA and the CNT, to come and visit
Sweden and the SAC to have the opportunity to find out who we really
are. Likewise, members of the SAC should visit the CNT, travel around in
the country and form our own opinions instead of listening just to what
others say. We should also begin working towards the goal of improving
our contacts with the IWA (including forgiving the mistakes that have
been made on both sides). In the long run — and when the time is right —
my personal opinion is that the SAC should seek to be reinstated in the
IWA. In times such as these, when the supposed “truly existing
socialism” has fallen, we anti-authoritarian socialists make up the only
active alternative left! The internationalization of capital must be met
with international organization and mobilization. An undogmatic and
federal IWA is a good form for the necessary cooperation. Let us hope
that the SAC once again can take place where we belong: as part of a
world-wide, anti-authoritarian, revolutionary workers movement.