How to respond to a claim that

[Sacrificed]

Hello there. I hope this is the right place for this; if not, a moderator should feel free to move it.

I'm involved in a debate on-line against a reactionary prig who claims that, because some of the founders of the Fasci internazionalista were wayward anarcho-syndicalists, that the entire syndicalist movement must be responsible for and even related to fascism. This isn't the first place I've heard such claims - Robert Paxton's otherwise excellent The Anatomy of Fascism said as much as well.

While I certainly understand that some strains of syndicalism tend towards the violent aspect of anarchism, I hardly think that it's responsible for fascism. Unfortunately, I don't know enough to counter his claim about early fascists taking much of their inspiration from syndicalist thought. Anybody else care to help me on this?

[ComradeRed]

Tossed to learning...

[Chicano Shamrock]

I don't know but that has to be some kind of fallacy.

[apathy maybe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 07:12 am
I'm involved in a debate on-line against a reactionary prig who claims that, because some of the founders of the Fasci internazionalista were wayward anarcho-syndicalists, that the entire syndicalist movement must be responsible for and even related to fascism. This isn't the first place I've heard such claims - Robert Paxton's otherwise excellent The Anatomy of Fascism said as much as well.

While I certainly understand that some strains of syndicalism tend towards the violent aspect of anarchism, I hardly think that it's responsible for fascism. Unfortunately, I don't know enough to counter his claim about early fascists taking much of their inspiration from syndicalist thought. Anybody else care to help me on this?
Obviously that is a fallacy. Because all green apples (x) are apples (y), all apples (y) must be green apples (x).

Yes some fascists started out as syndicalists. But to claim that therefore all syndicalists are fascists is as stupid as claiming that just because some Nazis were environmentalists, all environmentalists are Nazis.

So, yes, some fascists started out being syndicalists. They then stopped being syndicalists. They then became fascists. Really, syndicalism has nothing to do with fascism apart from this fact.

Fascism is about the state having power and about corporatism. Is isn't about workers power, or equality or any of the other concepts associated with syndicalism. Indeed the fascists in Italy crushed the independent trade unions, something that syndicalism is based on.

So, if you "friend" continues to claim crap after the above is pointed out, feel free to flame and then ignore.

[Sacrificed]

Oh, he's no friend of mine, not by a longshot. He claims to be a monarchist, for Christsakes. (Guy's a hardline Roman Catholic also.)

He seems to think that corporatism is somehow related to syndicalism. I haven't exactly studied anarcho-syndicalism in-depth, but I know enough to call bollocks on that one. Class cooperation has nothing to do with unionism, and he seems to misunderstand the term as something akin to 'the workers and the bosses get together to discuss their problems'.

[apathy maybe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 10:54 am
Oh, he's no friend of mine, not by a longshot. He claims to be a monarchist, for Christsakes. (Guy's a hardline Roman Catholic also.)

He seems to think that corporatism is somehow related to syndicalism. I haven't exactly studied anarcho-syndicalism in-depth, but I know enough to call bollocks on that one.
I know he isn't a friend, hence the quotes ("") :P.

(A monarchist who is also a Roman Catholic, wouldn't be British would hey? If so, what a nutter, the British monarchy isn't bloody catholic...)

Perhaps corporatism did take some initial ideas from syndicalist thought (it wouldn't be surprising considering, as I said, many fascists once were syndicalists). But to then claim that it is related, well it is bollocks.

You should ask for proof and evidence. Quotes from fascists showing syndicalist ideas or similar (along with links to said quotes). I bet he can't provide any.

[Sacrificed]

Originally posted by apathy maybe+May 31, 2007 09:08 am--> (apathy maybe @ May 31, 2007 09:08 am)
[email protected] 31, 2007 10:54 am
(A monarchist who is also a Roman Catholic, wouldn't be British would hey? If so, what a nutter, the British monarchy isn't bloody catholic...)


Perhaps corporatism did take some initial ideas from syndicalist thought (it wouldn't be surprising considering, as I said, many fascists once were syndicalists). But to then claim that it is related, well it is bollocks.

You should ask for proof and evidence. Quotes from fascists showing syndicalist ideas or similar (along with links to said quotes). I bet he can't provide any. [/b]
Guy's SpaceBattles profile says he's from Massachusetts. O.o

He quoted some guy named Colin Clark. The quote reads:

"We have the anarchist movement, that great liberator and equalizer of men, to thank for the horrors of fascist Italy and Mussolini's reign of terror. Were it not for a group of beer-drunken nationalist syndicalists in the early days of the Great War, Italy (and, by extension, his second-rate student Hitler) could never have risen to power and Il Duce would have remained a provincial schoolteacher, biding his days until he could retire on his provincial schoolteacher's pension."

It's vague rhetoric, nothing more. You can't exactly be syndicalist - or an anarchist at all, for that matter - and nationalist. Two masters, man.

I understand that most of them did it with the intent to join the Great War and thereby hasten revolution through the destruction of the existing system. It's an interesting idea, and may have worked had the First World War been of a much greater scale. I'm not entirely alien to the early Futurists and others who inhabited the early movement. I do think a certain amount of aggressiveness is needed in the pursuit of revolution. But the powers-that-be halted the war knowingly before it got that far, and the proto-fascists looked like idiots, stuck with a revolutionary position on economics and a reactionary notion of nationalism. I imagine it's something like selling your soul to the devil in all those bad horror stories (always for a good cause!) only to have it turn around and bite you in the ass later. So of course they mutated into the good ol' bombastic ultra-nationalists we know and so love to hate today.

I'll press him for something by someone who doesn't sound like a tremendous douche.

[Y Chwyldro Comiwnyddol Cymraeg]

syndicalism is non centeralised and fascism is centeralised...the only thing linking thrm is violence

[Whitten]

Fascism grew from National Sundicalism, which is to syndicalism as national socialism is to socialism.

[Ander]

Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 31, 2007 06:08 am
(A monarchist who is also a Roman Catholic, wouldn't be British would hey? If so, what a nutter, the British monarchy isn't bloody catholic...)
Yes, because the only monarchy in the world is the one in England...

[The Grey Blur]

Originally posted by Y Chwildro Comiwnyddol [email protected] 31, 2007 09:26 am
syndicalism is non centeralised and fascism is centeralised...the only thing linking thrm is violence
What a fucking stupid thing to say.

Syndicalism is entirely different from Fascism in that one is for the liberation of the working-class from wage slavery and the other is a form of capitalism which aims to crush working-class organisation, nothing to do with "centralisation". Jesus what a revleft victim.

[RedAnarchist]

Originally posted by Jello+May 31, 2007 01:16 pm--> (Jello @ May 31, 2007 01:16 pm)
apathy [email protected] 31, 2007 06:08 am
(A monarchist who is also a Roman Catholic, wouldn't be British would hey? If so, what a nutter, the British monarchy isn't bloody catholic...)
Yes, because the only monarchy in the world is the one in England... [/b]
So? He was just using it as an example.

[Janus]

I'm not sure about the validity of that claim since said founders couldn't belong to both ideologies as they are two completely separate.

Also, this debate has occured before:
anarcho-syndicalist roots of fascism? (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=59530&hl=+anarcho-syndicalism++fascism)

[syndicat]

The origin of this myth is due to the relationship between certain leaders of the Italian Syndicalist Union (USI) and Mussolini during World War I. Before World War I Mussolini was a Left socialist who was a strong advocate of militant direct action. The USI was founded in 1910, based mainly on the anarchist-organized "direct action committees". It's industrial union program was influenced by the American IWW. When Italy entered Word War I in 1915, Mussolini sided with his own state. His slogan at the time was "direct action has found bayonets" or something to that effect (a slogan from Blanqui). The incumbent leadership of the USI, who had been supporters of Mussolini in his Left Socialist days, followed Mussolini in taking a "social patroit" or nationalist position.

At the next congress of the USI in 1916, the anarchists attacked the leadership from an anti-war/anti-militarist/internationalist position. As a result, the pro-Mussolini leadership of USI was thrown out of office. They then split and formed a nationalist union, Italian Workers Union. This split carried only 15,000 of the USI's 150,000 members with it. So they were a small minority of the syndicalist movement in Italy, which also included a number of organizations besides the USI. The nationalist leaders of the Italian Workers Union subsequently followed Mussolini in his evolution towards fascism. Support for the war effort was a form of class collaboration so it didn't take long for these union leaders to evolve towards the idea of a "corporatist" unionism of pacts with the bosses. In other words, they abandoned their original revolutionary syndicalism and the doctrine of the class struggle, which is essential to syndicalism. Hence in moving towards fascism they ceased to be syndicalists.

[Anarchovampire]

Or, we can really use our brains (something most fascists can only dream of having) and look at the root of fascism:

Fascii, latin for a bundle of sticks, or a military symbol carried by roman legions.

This word, when allowed to evolve during Latin's transformation into Italian became fascism meaning a totalitarian government based on a socialistic control of resources and a hatred for a particular group or groups of people.

This word (fascii), when brought to English became fagot literally meaning a bundle of sticks. Hence a fagot of something refers to a specific number of logs/twigs/branches/stalks tied together and sold as a unit. In later days this was used as a vulgar reference to gay men.

Hence fascists and fagots are directly related. ;)

*No offense intended to any of our gay members, I don't mean to call you fascists, just appling a interesting use of linguistics to appaul and confuse fascists.

[humbabba]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 01:20 am
Fascii, latin for a bundle of sticks, or a military symbol carried by roman legions.

This is partly true. The fasces were carried by the servants, lictors, of Roman officials indicated that they had "imperium"

The bundle of sticks also had an axe in the bunch. This symbolized the power of the state, the sticks symbolizing the authority of the official with imperium to have someone flogged, and the axe indicating their authority to dispense death.

[Anarchovampire]

Originally posted by humbabba+June 01, 2007 02:18 am--> (humbabba @ June 01, 2007 02:18 am)
[email protected] 01, 2007 01:20 am
Fascii, latin for a bundle of sticks, or a military symbol carried by roman legions.

This is partly true. The fasces were carried by the servants, lictors, of Roman officials indicated that they had "imperium"

The bundle of sticks also had an axe in the bunch. This symbolized the power of the state, the sticks symbolizing the authority of the official with imperium to have someone flogged, and the axe indicating their authority to dispense death. [/b]
:rolleyes:

I believe you are missing the point of my attempted joke... I understand well enough the use of the fasces... but I was getting to a punch line... :mellow:

[humbabba]

Manipulation of the facts to facilitate humor indeed! :angry:

[Anarchovampire]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 04:19 am
Manipulation of the facts to facilitate humor indeed! :angry:
How did I 'manipulate facts?' I just gave the part of the history that mattered... the fasces was a symbol of Imperialist rome, later adopted by Italy in the Late 1920's to build a bridge between their fascist government (the word fascist coming from the word fasces) and rome... and then jokingly compared it to the same word, becoming fagot in English in reference to a bundle of sticks... it was a potty-humour joke, low-brow to begin with, and it was for the purpose of cacking wise to fascists who are almost always homophobic. Honestly, it doesn't need much debate... I love history, I know what the fasces was...