aut-op-sy
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: AUT: IWW on Wharfies (EN)
- Subject: Re: AUT: IWW on Wharfies (EN)
- From: Antagonism <mrnobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 12:04:03 +0100
> This is laughable.
Yup.
> If you think for one second that the IWW -- of which I am one of many
> members -- advocates regular unions (and Labour Parties!?) in the face of
> workers' own councils and struggles you are (I hope, happily) mistaken.
Of course you know I didn't say that. I said that you distort my position in the same dishonest
way as Lenin for example distorted others views.
> Please forward the news of the councils and armed struggles... I'm sure
> we'd all be interested.
Doh!
> Until then, I think 'merely' boycotting and
> blockading -- as the wharfies propose -- is worthy of our solidarity.
I think its worthy of solidarity too. I just pointed out that the IWW are advocating the same
tactics as what you call "regular unions". And that these tactics have previously lead to
defeat in similar cicumstances. And that the non-revolutionary workers, and it seems in some
cases even the "regular unions" are more radical than this. Boycotts and blockades are often,
and porbably in this case, worthwhile. What I'm saying is that they are not enough to win in
many situations. They were not enough to win in the case of the Liverpool dockers dispute for
example. What I am saying, is that Australian workers, in the current dispute, have gone
further that this, when they have struck in support of workers another sector. I think
experience has shown that when workers, and indeed other proletarians, have struggled across
the artificial boundaries set up by capital (eg, enterprise, industrial sector) then their,
our, struggle is more effective. I believe it also has more revolutionary potential (but that's
just my opinion, and can't be demonstrated simply by looking at past results).
I think its sad really that you refuse to discuss these issues and seek only to distort my
views.
--
web: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill//Lobby/3909/
email: mrnobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
post: BM Makhno, London WC1N 3XX, UK
--- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
- Thread context:
- Re: AUT: IWW on Wharfies (EN), (continued)
- Re: AUT: IWW on Wharfies (EN),
Chris Tue 19 May 1998, 15:21 GMT
- Re: AUT: IWW on Wharfies (EN),
Antagonism Thu 21 May 1998, 09:49 GMT
- Re: AUT: IWW on Wharfies (EN),
Bill Bartlett Thu 21 May 1998, 14:46 GMT
- Re: AUT: IWW on Wharfies (EN),
Chris Thu 21 May 1998, 16:25 GMT
- Re: AUT: IWW on Wharfies (EN),
Antagonism Fri 22 May 1998, 11:04 GMT
- Re: AUT: IWW on Wharfies (EN),
Chris Fri 22 May 1998, 15:44 GMT
- AUT: Politico-military "pacification" in Chiapas,
Profit Margin Sat 16 May 1998, 21:50 GMT
- AUT: LL:ART:MUA:War on the Wharfies 16 May update,
by way of pmargin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Profit Margin) Sat 16 May 1998, 21:35 GMT
- AUT: Indonesia,
batcom Sat 16 May 1998, 16:49 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]