Brown University Interview Clothing

The greatest betrayal in history

Finally I give my opinion on the pension agreement signed by employers, government and unions. tiempor've been waiting so to see what was on the Confederation Council of Labor Committees, the reactions of IU and the PCE and the discussions in the forum

iu, which I recommend that you go sometime.
I have read many articles in I LOVE UI on the pact, some very good. Others put songs like "Working Class Hero" of Lendakaris Dead. I have come to mind 2 songs. One of the legendary Eskorbuto, the "It's a crime." Specifically states:
The party that governs this country
and his entire parliamentary opposition.
The employers, unions,
all contribute to our failure.

is a crime,
is a crime.
is a crime,
is a crime.

From Potron
promised solution to all problems of this nation.
Unemployment, poverty, humiliation, is what we got,
only chance may trigger a reaction.

is a crime,
is a crime, both lead
malgastao,
is a crime, in bodies
unnecessary
is a crime, both lead
malgastao,
is a crime, in bodies
unnecessary
is a crime.


The other song is Oskar kon k, an anarchist songwriter, very appropriate for the occasion. At the end they will be right and all the anarchists.

I put the song "libertarian" who speaks on the subject:
As a labor union can negotiate with the government,
when they are the ones who are going to explode.
As a labor union can negotiate with the government,
when it is assumed that he must fight against.

We are workers, are the people,
our enemies are the state and government.
We must not agree with those who exploit us
is stupid and detrimental to our future as free people.
We do not want to give us and then take away,
we do not want to smile back and manipulate us.
pact with them would be lost to the struggle.
freedom is achieved pulse to pulse and defeat after defeat, and that
so we have no reason to sympathize with them,
and so can always be their enemies, and have reasons and to justify
that anarchy is possible, and that through self-management and mutual support,
can build a more just and egalitarian society, without pluses and no less,
but equal, long live the punk alive revolutionary struggle.

Join us, the union is strength,
fight against them is not beside them.
Join us, the union is strength,
fight against them is not beside them.

I put a post earlier
social dialogue on 14 January when had not yet been agreed. Picture 3 possible scenarios:
On 1 was that it came to retirement at age 67 and had confrontation.
The 2 nd that the unions managed to push back retirement at age 67 through dialogue. The 3, which has happened, to swallow 67. At this point specifically said this:
and unions is give talks on the proposal of 67 years saying that waged by people with more years of contributions and who have managed to smooth things labor reform.

As I said before I do not see the unions giving in to that, but with dialogue so who knows. I think this scenario would be worse, would the total discrediting of unions.
Although who knows, maybe that push towards alternative Unions rose and occupy their space.

I focused fully on the 1 st sentence. The last two are for see. What I do is contributing to the rejection of the left main unions. Has contributed to strengthening the leftist thesis against major trade unions.

I will not get to criticize the government or employers, or to criticize the agreement, because that makes the whole world.
I'm going to criticize the unions, and also to IU and the PCE.

can not be that IU and the PCE continue on as before, criticizing the government and the employer but not a word of criticism of the unions. They can not have the same speech on January 26 that on 13 February. On January 26, criticized the Government and the employers and said that pension reform was not necessary. A February 13 still saying the same thing. As if nothing had happened. One who did not know what happened between January 26 and February 13, reads the declarations of these two days and believes that everything remains the same and that the unions have not agreed.
But no, they agreed. And so IU and the PCE should criticize.
not going to have a complete break with UGT and CCOO. I've always said, if my work UGT was the most militant union I joined him head even though I did not like its overall policy, because it would be best placed defend my rights in my surroundings.
Therefore, above all, absolute respect for UGT and CCOO where there are combative, and peers that they are active.
But one thing does not remove the other. It can be military or CCOO UGT in a sector where they are combative, and at the same time criticizing the agreement they have reached their addresses. It's the least they should do IU and PCE.
I'm not saying you have to break completely with them, but unless a statement stating:
"We disagree with the position taken by the leadership of the CCOO and UGT in the covenant. We believe they made a mistake by signing and many of its rank and file disagree with is signed. "
That would not break them outright. Immediately afterwards, one could add:
"The PCE and IU will continue work and dialogue with the CCOO and UGT from mutual respect to find common ground and work together. That does not mean that if there is any point where we disagree, stating ".
One thing very simple. It seems that there is much fear of breaking with the CCOO and UGT, because they are the 2 main trade unions that bring together the highest number of workers . So I do not think you have to send them. But unless a critical public.
check

Once critical to IU and the PCE, he takes issue with the unions. In their respective councils, only 10 % of UGT and CCOO 10% opposed the deal. However, it seems that that vote of the address does not correspond at all with his base, because Most people reject the pact, and many fellow CCOO and UGT base as well.
Then there is a clear alternative. Try that grassroots discontent is reflected in the address. For this critical sector of the CCOO and the PCE should be involved to the fullest, trying to get to the real feel of the unions. However

is a complicated task, and we must be prepared for the possibility of losing forever CCOO and UGT. If it proves impossible to change the addresses of the CCOO and UGT have to think seriously about Plan B.
And for me that plan B goes through minority unions. These
aware of their social minority, should consider joining on a broad front, each retaining its ideology and its scope.

This front should be driven by the critical sector of CCOO and PCE that an inability to change the direction of trade unions, would switch to another strategy. It should invite all minority unions (CGT, CNT, USE, Solidaridad Obrera, SOC, SAT, CUT, ELA, LAB, COS, CIG, Cobas, CSIF, HIRU, COAG, STEES ...) to form the front. Surely not everyone wanted to join him, but at least they would be invited, and who have higher propensity to agree, would be based on front.
is the only alternative I see, establish a trade union front. Why spend all to a minority union, was CGT, CNT, or USO, would scatter forces at a time which would have to unite to address the CCOO and UGT pact.


short. IU and the PCE should criticize the position of trade unions and set to work to recover. If you do not succeed, must get to work immediately to achieve a viable union alternative. Because the agreement signed
has been the biggest betrayal in history, and will be remembered for many years among people, thus leading to non-members and their rejection of the unions, and therefore to the hegemony of the discourse of right that unions are some sold, some vague that they do not work, they receive state subsidies and have released. What

served the general strike on September 29? Many people were fired for striking, myself and another comrade are waiting for a record by putting up posters in favor of the strike. There was much work to convince them that the strike was necessary, many bites, a lot of movement, lots of energy. All this, why? Why we end up selling? Normal people are raised to strike, if you are not going to help anything because the unions are going to sell. and address this situation and deal with that speech there, or that seek to recover the CCOO and UGT, either launch an alternative union strong and viable to compete against CCOO and UGT. It is a matter of vital importance, because the economic and labor is 1 st magnitude and deserves our attention and all our efforts. Lately