Anarcho-Syndicalism and Chronic Illness

[sev1988]

I was reading "Fighting For Ourselves" by The Solidarity Federation, and had a question about Syndicalism.

As a person with at least two Chronic Ilnesses, which make it impossible for me to work a regular job, how might an Anarcho-Syndicalist, society accommodate people the chronically Ill?

[IrishAnarchist]

Id imagine if you cant work, you'd still have them same rights as everyone else. And maybe you could probably take part in community syndicalism (ie help with the running and organizing of your community)

[G4b3n]

I mean, even bourgeois social democrats are not in favor of letting the disabled starve if they cannot work. It would take the worst kind of reactionary filth, lower than scum, (such as "libertarians") to be in favor of such nonsense.

However, Anarcho-syndicalism is more of a mode of an political organization to combat capitalism than it is a blueprint for a socialist society. Most Syndicalists are in favor of communist principles when it comes to production and distribution, which means all are entitled to the needs to sustain life, and they give what they can.

[Jacky Hearts]

As said previously, most syndicalists advocate communism.

In a communist system your role in society would be literally as much as you can contribute whilst maintaining a happy, dignified and healthy existence.

Can't work more than a couple hours a week? No problem.
Not sure when those hours will be? That's fine.

[Rudolf]

I was reading "Fighting For Ourselves" by The Solidarity Federation, and had a question about Syndicalism.

As a person with at least two Chronic Ilnesses, which make it impossible for me to work a regular job, how might an Anarcho-Syndicalist, society accommodate people the chronically Ill?

I agree with the general responses that anarcho-syndicalism is more a method of struggle than a distinct society (although it does in many regards prefigure a future society) and that anarcho-syndicalists are as a rule communists and so advocate a society based on the principle 'from each according to their ability to each according to their needs'. If you're incapable of doing productive activities that's not a problem, the important thing is making sure your needs are met.


As for the anarcho-syndicalist union it's supposed to be a sort of workplace and community union and i know solfed has had some involvement over issues with unemployment and disability benefits.

[sev1988]

I just wanted to say that all of the responses have been very helpful. I realized as I was posting this thread, that the "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" pretty much covers people with disabilities/chronic illness.

That being said, part of the that people who have chronic illness face, is a lack of sympathy/empathy from people, because they don't look disabled. Many try to pass for not being chronically ill, only to have to suffer immensely for doing so.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Yes, unfortunately many people, proletarians not excepted, have a negative view of disabled people. And some of the "leftists" on the Internet are little more than market producerists who think that anyone who can't contribute to the steel production figures is a "parasite" to be starved or kept alive at the pleasure of the "real workers". I must confess a particular loathing for these people - their opinions are as abhorrent as those of the fascists, and they go the extra length of trying to portray these abhorrent opinions as "socialist".

This doesn't mean, however, that you should worry about the socialist society. "From each according to his abilities..." is an expression of what anarchists call "mutual aid". It means people, freed from the limitations of class society, come together to cooperate and assist one another. Everyone does what they think they can - you won't be dragged in front of a commission that would determine what you "really" can do. There is a number of reasons why people might not want to do certain kinds of labour - disability is one of them. Stress is another. People have different inclinations and capacities, and the human society in socialism will take that into account.

Second, while many disabled people do not work, that does not mean they don't preform certain kinds of labour - crucial kinds, even, but obscured by the fact that they do not assume the form of wage-labour. Reproductive, household, and affective labour all provide the foundation for the sort of social reproduction that is necessary for capitalism to run. In socialism, of course, social reproduction will be different - it will be done by the collective institutions of the socialist society (except biological reproduction, barring some truly extraordinary advances in biology) - but the socialist society will know to valorise these forms of labour, not just hitting rocks with a pick in the mines (which doesn't really happen nowadays but whatever).