Aug 15, 2013

Seattle

After Portland, I think I ran into Seattle a little cocky. The event went so well in Portland that I didn't really prepare for many of the specifics that may come up in Seattle, didn't have some of the conversations about the local context that I had in other cities, and didn't really reflect on the anarchist history of those cities as I knew them. So, it doesn't surprise me that this talk didn't go quite as well. Well, that and it seems there were some people there with a preconceived notion of who I am and what I stand for.

The talk was organized by an old friend of mine who had been involved in Common Action and is now a member of the Seattle Solidarity Network. The talk was held at the Black Coffee Co-op and had about 30 people in attendance.

This more than any other talk was one that I was intimidated by the audience. Not because of the many people there that disagreed with my perspectives, but because of the presence of my friend Marie Trigona, whose writing and video work during a decade of involvement with the anarchist media project Grupo Alavio has informed much of my own understanding of the movements of Argentina.

One major conversation that was raised during the discussion was about the revolutionary potential of some of the major mainstream unions in the US versus the Industrial Workers of the World. In their current form I don't think either are likely to bring us closer to revolution. But, one statement of mine was certainly taken out of context there and spread around a bit. I had said that given their size that if there was a serious shift in internal ideology that the 2 million member Service Employees International Union would obviously have greater revolutionary potential given it's size. This was then quoted as "the SEIU is more revolutionary than the IWW."

Here is what I think we need: massive workers movements and their self-managed, self-directed, sustainable worker organizations that understands themselves as a tool of class struggle for all working people, including their members, and engage in militant industrial strategy (note: not simply workplace action). The SEIU is obviously a long ways off here. They've got sustainable. They've even got massive. Work self-directed? Not really. Engaged in class struggle? Not as the basis of their work and not militantly. Large scale industrial strategy? Inconsistently, although I'm more excited by the fast food organizing than my more purist friends.

What about the IWW? Worker self-managed? Maybe. They are certainly internally democratic. But so many of the members are activists disconnected from workplaces that it's hard to say it's worker self-managed. Massive? Clearly not. Has a class struggle orientation and readiness for militant organizing. Absolutely. Sustainable? Not really. In fact sometimes there are ideological stances taken to maintain a purity of revolutionary thought rather than allow for serious sustained growth. I'd rather see the IWW act as a union than an anarchist and socialist history club. The decisions that I see tell me that in some places that transition is happening and in most places, it remains a social club for revolutionaries.

So does this mean I give up on both of them? No, it means that I give up on neither of them. But they both have serious work to do if they intend to be organizations that move us towards a revolutionary tomorrow.

At the end of the day, this discussion has been had hundreds of times over. Rather than outing one another for strategic disagreements here, I think as anarchists we need to develop a strategy for developing labor organization and militancy that incorporates engagement in both mainstream unions and the IWW.

Beyond the talk though, Seattle was great to be able to reconnect with Marie and relax for a couple of days. Hanging out on a porch near the beach grilling food, drinking wine, and learning a ton in great conversation. That is exactly what vacation is about, and really should just be what life is.

Marie also pointed out a real problem with my presentation, which I made a point to incorporate into future talks. The analysis that I was offering about the build up to the factory occupations didn't include any mention of the piqueteros! Utter failure on my part. Go read up on the piqueteros! 

No comments:

Why Am I Writing?

After an inspiring year following the social and political movements of Argentina, I returned to my hometown of Buffalo, NY intent on beginning the process of actively building local movements with the lessons I had learned in Argentina.

One of those lessons was the importance of participants in our movements telling their own stories and actively analyzing their organizations. That's exactly what I plan to do here, and I hope that some people find it relevant and interesting.