A-Infos (en) Brazil, OSL: Notes on OSL's role in CSP-Conlutas after the VI National Congress (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Between April 18th and 21st, the VI National Congress of CSP-Conlutas 
took place in São Paulo, an important space for political and 
organizational debate for class-conscious and independent trade union 
and popular sectors in Brazil. The Libertarian Socialist Organization 
(OSL) participated in the Congress, presenting positions that, although 
not formally submitted as a comprehensive contribution or proposed 
resolution, were partially disseminated through a joint manifesto 
prepared with the Popular Liberation Group (GLP) and presented in a 
discussion held after the congress activities. Furthermore, the 
organization was politically active in the formation of slates for the 
National Executive Secretariat.

CSP-Conlutas and its potential
To begin, it is important to reinforce our understanding that 
CSP-Conlutas possesses significant potential as an instrument for 
articulating the combative sectors of the Brazilian working class and 
for building bonds of international solidarity among peoples and workers 
in struggle.

From our point of view, we understand the Central as a tool for 
organizing, coordinating, and strengthening the struggles of the 
oppressed classes, and not as a space subordinated to the 
self-construction of political organizations. In our opinion, its 
strengthening fundamentally depends on its capacity to broaden its real 
insertion in concrete struggles, incorporate new social sectors, and 
strengthen grassroots organizational processes.

In this sense, we believe that CSP-Conlutas maintains characteristics 
that differentiate it within the Brazilian trade union landscape. First, 
we highlight its class independence from governments, employers, and the 
institutions of Capitalism-Statism. In a context marked by the 
integration of a large part of the trade union movement into 
institutional management mechanisms, maintaining this independence 
constitutes a political advancement for the oppressed classes that must 
be defended and deepened.

We also positively assess the main programmatic axes approved by 
Congress, especially the defense of the repeal of labor and pension 
reforms, the fight against privatizations, the opposition to the fiscal 
framework and austerity policies, as well as the reaffirmation of 
socialism as a strategic horizon.

On the international stage, we highlight the unity built around 
solidarity with the Palestinian people, the defense of the 
self-determination of peoples, opposition to imperialist wars, and 
criticism of different forms of imperialist domination. These elements 
constitute an important basis for strengthening an internationalist 
perspective within the Central.

Political differences and strategic challenges
Although, broadly speaking, we share much of the program approved by 
Congress in its most relevant aspects, we have identified important 
differences in the areas of strategy and organizational design.

The main point stems from our analysis, which starts from the 
understanding that the main problem faced today by the working class is 
not fundamentally a "crisis of leadership," but a problem of orientation 
for organizing the grassroots. While a large part of the currents within 
the Central tend to interpret the current challenges as resulting from 
the absence of a revolutionary leadership capable of guiding the 
struggles, we understand that the central task of the period consists of 
rebuilding the capacity for popular organization in workplaces, schools, 
and neighborhoods, with an orientation that does not treat these spaces 
as mere electoral corrals, in which individuals are thought of only as 
numbers destined to endorse policies previously defined by the leadership.

This difference produces important practical consequences. While in many 
sectors the priority is programmatic dispute and the affirmation of 
political projects within the organized vanguard, the OSL attributes 
greater centrality to building unity of action, strengthening concrete 
work at the grassroots level, and forming an organized social force 
capable of effectively confronting the dominant classes.

We reaffirm the importance of political debate and the right to express 
dissenting opinions. However, when this becomes the central focus of 
organized forces' actions, we believe the direct consequence is the 
weakening of the capacity for organized intervention in the class 
struggle, whether in the dispute over projects with sectors oriented 
towards class conciliation, or in direct confrontation with class enemies.

This position relates to the distinction we make between the social/mass 
level and the political/partisan level of class struggle. Inspired by 
the anarchist tradition inaugurated by Bakunin and developed through 
various historical experiences of anarchism, we understand that 
processes of popular organization must start from the concrete and 
immediate needs of the working class, creating conditions for the 
progressive development of political consciousness.

However, we observe that a significant portion of the currents within 
CSP-Conlutas tend to reject this distinction, identifying it as an 
expression of economism, corporatism, or political degradation. In 
practice, this frequently results in the presentation of highly 
radicalized slogans and formulations in contexts where there is still no 
organized social force capable of supporting them.

This dynamic prioritizes a top-down political construction, that is, 
from the leadership to the grassroots. Our perspective is the opposite: 
to build from the concrete experience of the grassroots, developing 
organizational processes capable of gradually expanding the levels of 
participation, awareness, and activism.

The Congress highlighted a recurring imbalance between discursive 
radicalism and effective mobilization capacity. In many cases, the 
intensity of revolutionary rhetoric does not correspond to the degree of 
real insertion in the categories and movements. This tends to shift the 
center of political activity to internal disputes between currents 
organized by the most suitable labels, weakening the unified 
construction of concrete struggles.

We also identified a growing trend of the Central transforming into a 
space marked by permanent disputes between political blocs of organized 
currents, to the detriment of its role as an instrument for coordinating 
unions, popular movements, and grassroots organizations. This dynamic 
may hinder the expansion of CSP-Conlutas and limit its capacity to 
engage with broader sectors of the working class.

OSL's role at the VI Congress
Our actions during the Congress were guided by these principles.

We maintained an independent political stance, without joining permanent 
blocs or fixed strategic alliances with any group present in the 
Central. Our main commitment remains the strengthening of CSP-Conlutas 
itself as an instrument of struggle for the working class.

It was based on this understanding that we advocated, during the 
election process for the National Executive Secretariat, for a 
composition that would guarantee representation for all the political 
forces that make up the Central.

We understand that a more pluralistic leadership can contribute to 
broadening the collective commitment to building CSP-Conlutas, 
distributing responsibilities more equitably, and encouraging the 
participation of sectors that would otherwise remain restricted to the 
role of external opposition to the processes.

In this context, the existence of the barrier clause spurred a tactical 
rapprochement with minority groups during the dispute over the 
composition of the National Executive Secretariat. This rapprochement 
did not represent the formation of a permanent political bloc, but 
expressed a position consistent with our defense of expanding democratic 
participation and the distribution of responsibilities within the Central.

Outlook for the next period
The VI Congress simultaneously confirmed the potential and the current 
limitations of CSP-Conlutas.

The OSL reaffirms its commitment to building a class-based, 
anti-capitalist, internationalist, democratic, and self-governing 
central organization, independent of governments, employers, and union 
bureaucracies.

We will continue to defend class independence, the simultaneous fight 
against the far right and the democratic-popular camp, the strengthening 
of grassroots organization, and the construction of libertarian 
socialism as our horizon.

In this new phase that begins after the Congress, we will maintain our 
political independence from all sectors that make up the Central. We 
will continue to engage in dialogue and build specific initiatives with 
different organizations whenever, from our point of view, this 
contributes to strengthening CSP-Conlutas and advancing the struggles of 
the oppressed classes.

We will defend initiatives that broaden democratic participation, 
decentralize responsibilities, strengthen grassroots spaces, and 
prioritize concrete action and the daily work of popular organization.

We understand that the future of CSP-Conlutas will depend on the 
collective capacity to permanently distance itself from bureaucratizing 
and centralizing practices, expand its presence in real struggles, and 
build organized social strength among workers and oppressed sectors. 
This is, in our assessment, the main challenge facing the coming period.

Libertarian Socialist Organization July 2026

https://socialismolibertario.net/notas-sobre-a-atuacao-da-osl-na-csp-conlutas-apos-o-vi-congresso-nacional/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en