Libertarian Labor Review #13 Winter 1992-93, pages 43-44 Excommunicated? WSA vs. LLR The following exchange of letters, we believe, speaks for itself. We regret the fact that the "Workers Solidarity Alliance" continues to be successful in its efforts to sow dissension and disunity in the anarcho-syndicalist movement. We have no interest in arguing with WSA, but we will not allow their ceaseless attacks against ourselves and our comrades to proceed unrebutted. To the editors: We of the Workers Solidarity Alliance were disturbed to find that issue #11 of Libertarian Labor Review continues the long series of attacks on the WSA and its members by LLR. These attacks have been going on for years now. Why, in all that time, has no one from your paper attempted to engage us in civil, comradely dialogue? Why have you spent so much time and effort on perpetuating this rift, rather than on trying to solve it? If you have problems with our politics or with the way we conduct ourselves, join us in an open discussion of these issues, a discussion focussed on real issues rather than on imagined slights or useless mudslinging. Let's discuss the real nature of this disupte without the inflammaroty rhetoric and untruths that have been so much a part of LLR's attacks on the WSA. We invite you to enter into an open dialogue with us. Whether you choose to do so or not, we must demand that you cease your attacks on the Workers Solidarity Alliance and all individual members of the WSA. If you refuse to do so, you leave us with no alternative but to request that the IWA institute a formal ban on relations with your group, as has been done with hostile groups in the past. WSA is the US affiliate to the IWA and an attack on us is an attack on the IWA. We have absolutely no interest in deepening the conflict between our groups. The cause of anarcho-syundicalism can only benefit from improved relations between WSA and LLR. We hope that you will choose dialogue over diatribe and work with us to resolve our differences. Ginger Hutton National Secretary Workers Solidarity Alliance LLR Note: We received this threatening letter just three weeks prior to the 1992 International Workers Association (AIT) Congress. We believe it to be a response to "The Specter Haunting Wetzel," published in LLR 12. That article was a response to attacks against LLR circulated by WSA leader Tom Wetzel at the 1991 Convention of the Industrial Workers of the World, in which Wetzel claimed that LLR was behind a conspiracy against WSA within the IWW. As we pointed out in that article, these charges were a smokescreen for WSA's maneuvering to keep the IWW from affiliating to the AIT (interestingly, in WSA's magazine ideas & action #16, Hutton discusses the possibility of the IWW joining the AIT: "The best thing that could happen is that the IWW decide this is not something they want to do and just drop it..."). WSA International Secretary Mitchell Miller writes, in Direct Action, that IWW affiliation to the AIT "is now moot." In response to WSA's threat to cut off our communications with the AIT, we sent the following letter to the AIT Congress and to those AIT sections for which we have addresses: Fellow Workers, The Libertarian Labor Review sends greetings to the IWA Congress. The tasks facing the international anarcho-syndicalist movement are immense. In virtually every country of the world, transnational capitalist employers pit the workers of each country against workers of other countries. National governments and the official labor unions assist the employers by telling workers that they must compete with foreign labor if they wish to keep their jobs. The IWA is one of the few labor federations which seeks to turn international working-class solidarity from a slogan into practical reality. As an anarcho-syndicalist journal we are committed to the same goals as the IWA, and hope that you continue to make progress. The Libertarian Labor Review is committed to building solidarity between anarcho-syndicalists worldwide by providing information about revolutionary unions. Every issue of the LLR carries news of the IWA and its sections. This information might otherwise be unavailable in North America. For example, we know of no other U.S. publication (aside from the Industrial Worker, which reprinted our report) that reported on the general strikes against the Gulf War called by the USI and sections of the Cobas. We also review IWA literature and reprint articles from your press. And each issue of LLR includes the IWA's Principles of Revolutionary Syndicalism, which we endorse. The members of our collective have also shown solidarity with the IWA in our practical work. When the CNT 'renevados' split from the CNT-AIT, our members defended the CNT-AIT and helped influence the Industrial Workers of the World to adopt its policy of recognizing only the CNT-AIT. Our members pass along IWA news and communiques to the IWW press as we receive them. For many years we have encouraged the IWW to affiliate with the IWA, and we hope that this will be accomplished soon. Unfortunately, on March 20 we received an official notice from Ginger Hutton, National Secretary of the Workers Solidarity Alliance, objecting to an article in issue #12 of our journal. (Hutton says she is objecting to #11, which mentions WSA only in an index to our first 10 issues--her confusion may have been caused by a production error which resulted in pages of #12 being misnumbered.) That article criticized a leaflet attacking us that was circulated by WSA leaers at the IWW's 1991 General Assembly. Although the main point of our article was self-defense, Hutton accuses LLR of attacking WSA and issues an ultimatum: "we must... cease [our] attacks on the Workers Solidarity Alliance and all individual members of the WSA" or WSA will ask the IWA to "institute a formal ban on relations with your group" since "an attack on [WSA] is an attack on the IWA." We believe that the role of the anarcho-syndicalist press is not just to give blanket praise to any group or individual claiming to be anarcho-syndicalist, but to also criticize them for their mistakes. A free and critical press plays a vital role in maintaining liberty for rank-and-file workers and in holding our officials accountable. The point of our article in LLR #12, which so offended WSA, was that WSA does not want to see the IWW affiliate with the IWA and has tried to make LLR into a scapegoat to conceal this fact. In the most recent issue of WSA's journal, Ideas and Action (#16, p. 36), Ginger Hutton admits that WSA is opposed to the IWW joining the international: "The best thing that could happen is that the IWW decides this is not something they want to do and just drop it... I really don't think it's something that's going to happen." This simply reflects long-standing WSA policy. When representatives of the Libertarian Workers Group (the WSA's earlier name) attended the 1984 IWA Congress, they urged the IWA to drop its efforts to get the IWW to affiliate. WSA also made several derogatory remarks about the IWW, which amounted to a false charge that the IWW was class collaborationist. When our group of anarcho- syndicalists, active in the IWW, found out about this, we wrote an open letter to the IWA to protest these attacks. Thus, our 'quarrel' with WSA dates back to what we saw as a divisive and sectarian report they made against the IWW. While the Libertarian Labor Review has serious differences with the WSA over how to build an anarcho-syndicalist movement in North America, we wholly support the IWA's priciples. We believe that revolutionary unionism and international working-class solidarity are essential to the construction of a free, self- managed society. Familiarity with the activities, tactics, goals and aspirations of our fellow workers around the world is essential to building such solidarity. At present, we exchange publications with several IWA sections, and would gladly add other IWA sections to our exchange list. On occasion, the IWA Secretariat has sent us copies of communiques, which we have published in our journal and sent to other labor papers and sympathetic organizations. We would very much appreciate it if we could receive such information on a regular basis, and if we could be provided with copies of the resolutions and other materials acted on by the Congress. For international working-class solidarity, Libertarian Labor Review Collective We subsequently received the following resolution from the newly elected AIT General Secretary, Jose Jimenez: "On XIX I.W.A. Congress our resolution is condemning the unjustified attacks on the U.S. section by the Libertarian Labor Review group and given that these attacks have not ceased the I.W.A. shall declare a boycott of this group and all sections shall cease to have formal relations with them, until such time as they cease their attacks on the W.S.A. and clearly recognize them as the U.S. section of the I.W.A. Valencia, 5.12.92" We responded as follows: Fellow Worker Jiminez, We recently received the congress resolution you forwarded on May 12th, and must admit that we find it quite perplexing. Your resolution refers (1) to our "unjustified attacks" against the Workers Solidarity Alliance, (2) infers that we refuse to recognize them as the A.I.T.'s U.S. section, and (3) calls upon all sections to cease to have formal relations with us. We do not know what to make of this. We are unaware of having made any unjustified attacks against the W.S.A. Indeed, to the best of our knowledge we have never published any criticism of W.S.A. for which we did not have documentation. We would appreciate receiving a list of all "unjustified attacks" against W.S.A. published in our journal so that we may either provide the documentation proving their accuracy or, in the event that we have made an error, retract them. We have long acknowledged that the W.S.A. was the A.I.T.'s U.S. section, even if we would have preferred that the International exercise greater caution in admitting new sections. The Libertarian Labor Review does not dispute the fact that W.S.A. is a section of the A.I.T. For example, in LLR issue #7, page 2 (Editorial), we specifically referred to WSA as "the IWA's affiliate in the U.S." Finally, although we exchange publications with some A.I.T. sections' newspapers, we are not aware of any "formal relations" between our collective and the A.I.T. or its sections. As an independent anarcho-syndicalist magazine, we have never attempted to enter into formal relations with the A.I.T. We trust that this will clarify the latter two points, and that you will advise us as to what "unjustified attacks" we might have made against the W.S.A. While we have serious political differences with that organization, we would not wish to level any unproven accusations against them. Anarcho-syndicalist Greetings, the Libertarian Labor Review Collective One final note: As we go to press we have not received a response from the Secrtariat. Nor are we sure what the practical consequences of being "banned" will be. Nevertheless, this episode should demonstrate to anarcho-syndicalists in the U.S. the W.S.A.'s sectarian nature and their hypocrisy when they claim to be "pluralistic" and to want "open discussion." It is unfortunate that the IWA/AIT has allowed itself to be dragged into the middle of this disupte. It would be better to make WSA fight its own battles, rather than allow them to use their AIT affiliation as a gag to silence their critics.