Anarcho-syndicalism

[Black Sheep]

I heard recently about the anarchists in spain..That there is CGT, anarcho-syndicalists who participate in the worker's committees and several of its members are members of political parties too:confused: ,CNT who is also anarcho-syndicalist but doesnt participate, and others who reject anarchosyndicalism alltogether, claiming it is traitorous to the anarchist principles and stuff.

What is the whole thing with syndicalism and anarchism?

[revolution inaction]

this might help

http://libcom.org/library/anarcho-syndicalism-rudolf-rocker

[Black Sheep]

Thanks man, i ll try to find it in my mother tongue.

[Sentinel]

What is the whole thing with syndicalism and anarchism?Anarcho-syndicalism is the strategy to radicalise and organise the workers through revolutionary unions. Struggling against the bosses at work with the support of a federation of comrades both creates class-consciousness, and teaches the workers how to organise in a direct-democratic fashion -- resembling how the libertarian socialist society, which is the ultimate goal, would be run.

I would like to see which fool made the claims that anarcho-syndicalism is 'traitorous to the principles of anarchism', and exactly what he said as well. No doubt is he some sort of anti-workerist individualist, nihilist or primmie.. :closedeyes:


Anarcho-syndicalism with political power always ends in fascism, just look at Sorel, Mussolini's inspiration, or Franco and national-syndicalism.What utter horseshit, in Spain the anarcho-syndicalists were among the fiercest enemies of Franco. Also, traditional anarcho-syndicalism has no ideological ties with fascism whatsoever, but is rather opposed to everything fascism stands for.

'National syndicalism' is to syndicalism what 'National socialism' is to socialism -- rhetoric aimed to con the workers into supporting the fascists. How it's existence could make you draw the conclusion that anarcho-syndicalism -- worker's direct-democratic organisation and self-management -- always leads to fascism is beyond me.

[Dimentio]

Sorel was no more a fascist than Nietzsche was a national socialist or social darwinist. And Mussolini did surely not have syndicalist roots, he was just another populist - who styled himself "socialist". Of course, Sorel glorified violence, but glorification of violence in itself does not add up to fascism, since "the cult of violence" is/was an inherent part of western civilisation.

Fascism - and now I say Mussolini-style fascism, mainly focused on "the cult of the state" as the main historical actor. In economic terms, corporatism resembles syndicalism a bit, with the exception that the capitalists are those who are syndicated under corporatism.

Anarcho-syndicalists are egalitarian and anti-statist, while the fascist model is elitist and statist. That is the main difference. To say that fascism equates syndicalism is to say that sharks equates dolphins just because of the fens.

To be fair, there were some off-shots of anarchism which grew in the reactionary monarchist soil in Europe during the late 19th century. The reactionary monarchists, saw syndicalist organisation of production as a latter-day development of guild production, where the employer (a blacksmith or miller) employed people who they learned their profession. These elements were anti-industrialist, anti-egalitarian and reactionary, and disliked capitalism because of what they saw as its moral degradation. Like current day national anarchists, they tried to win support from socialist intellectuals by giving their primitive ideas more attractive sounding names (while current day national anarchists call warlordist ethnic tribalism for "anarchism", the 19th century reactionaries called their ideal "guild socialism" or "anarcho-monarchism").

Tolkien was an anti-capitalist catholic anarcho-monarchist, and the Shire was an exampe of his far right-wing ideal society. He was also very much against industrialism.

Another example was the carlista fraction in Spain, which wanted an absolute monarchy mixed with Yugoslav-style economics.

So, the lesson is that you cannot reduce a movement to just its economic organisation structure, but must look at the movement's relation to civil society as well.

[The Douche]

I would like to see which fool made the claims that anarcho-syndicalism is 'traitorous to the principles of anarchism', and exactly what he said as well. No doubt is he some sort of anti-workerist individualist, nihilist or primmie.. :closedeyes:

While the chosen wording is a little strong, syndicalism has not always been as widely accepted within the anarchist movement as it is today. Please refer to:

http://francais.infoshop.org/revolt/inter/malatesta_synd.html

I assure you he is no "anti-workerist individualist, nihilist, or primmie".

[Sentinel]

While the chosen wording is a little strong, syndicalism has not always been as widely accepted within the anarchist movement as it is today. Please refer to:

http://francais.infoshop.org/revolt/...esta_synd.html (http://www.anonym.to/?http://francais.infoshop.org/revolt/inter/malatesta_synd.html)

I assure you he is no "anti-workerist individualist, nihilist, or primmie".


This -- linking to 'scripture' written by 'great names' and making each other work -- isn't the way we debate here. Why don't you explain, or at least post some quotes explaining, how anarcho-syndicalism supposedly goes against anarchist principles or is traitorous to them, or whatever.

Then I'll reply to them. I am not interested in reading an entire article, and then trying to guess what parts you were referring to, and then reply to them, only to find that you've replied with another link, etc..

[Black Sheep]

What about anarchist syndicalists who take part in the voting in the worker's uhm.. representation.. you know, committees..

my english came to a halt here.