💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › politics › SPUNK › sp000706.txt captured on 2022-03-01 at 16:34:12.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Red & Black Revolution
A magazine of libertarian communism
Issue 1 October 1994
Produced by Workers Solidarity Movement
Syndicalism, its strengths & weaknesses
SYNDICALISM is the largest organised
tendency in the libertarian movement today.
It has built large workers' unions, led
major struggles, been the popular expression
of anarchism in many countries. To
understand the anarchist-communist view of
syndicalism we have to look at its roots,
its core beliefs and its record.
In the 1860s the modern socialist movement
was beginning to take shape. The
International Working Mens' Association,
better known as the First International, was
becoming a pole of attraction for militant
workers. As the movement grew, points of
agreement and of disagreement between the
Marxists and the Anarchists about what
socialism meant and how to achieve it were
becoming clear. This led to the Marxists
using less than democratic means to expel
the anarchists.
In 1871 the Paris Commune came into being
when the workers of Paris seized their city.
When they were finally defeated seven
thousand Communards were dead or about to be
executed. A reign of terror against the
Left swept Europe. The anarchists were
driven underground in country after country.
This did not auger well for a rapid growth
of the movement. In response to the terror
of the bosses, their shooting down of
strikers and protesting peasants and their
suppression of the anarchist movement a
minority launched an armed campaign, known
as "propaganda by deed", and killed several
kings, queens, aristocrats and senior
politicians.
Though very understandable, this drove a
further wedge between the bulk of the
working class and the movement. Clandestine
work became the norm in many countries.
Mass work became increasingly difficult.
The image of the madman with a bomb under
his arm was born. The movement was making
no significant gains.
By the turn of the century many anarchists
were convinced that a new approach was
needed. They called for a return to open
and public militant activity among workers.
The strategy they developed was syndicalism.
THE BASIC IDEA
Its basic ideas revolve around organising
all workers into the "one big union",
keeping control in the hands of the rank &
file, and opposing all attempts to create a
bureaucracy of unaccountable full-time
officials. Unlike other unions their belief
is that the union can be used not only to
win reforms from the bosses but also to
overthrow the capitalist system. They hold
that most workers are not revolutionaries
because the structure of their unions is
such that it takes the initiative away from
the rank & file. Their alternative is to
organise all workers into the "one big
union" in preparation for a revolutionary
general strike.
They established their own international
organisation with the founding of the
International Workers Association in Berlin
in 1922. Present at that conference were
the Argentine Workers Regional Organisation
FORA representing 200,000 members, the
Industrial Workers of the World in Chile
representing 20,000, the Union for
Syndicalist Propaganda in Denmark with 600,
the Free Workers Union of Germany FAUD with
120,000, National Workers Secretariat of the
Netherlands representing 22,500, the Italian
Syndicalist Union with 500,000, the General
Confederation of Workers in Portugal with
150,000, the Swedish Workers Central
Organisation SAC with 32,000, the Committee
for the Defence of Revolutionary Syndicalism
in France [a breakaway from the CGT] with
100,000, the Federation du Battiment from
Paris representing 32,000. The Spanish CNT
was unable to send delegates due to the
fierce class struggle being waged in their
country under the dictatorship of Primo de
Rivera. They did, however, join the
following year.
During the 1920s the IWA expanded. More
unions and propaganda groups entered into
dialogue with the IWA secretariat. They
were from Mexico, Uruguay, Bulgaria, Poland,
Japan, Australia, South Africa, Paraguay and
North Africa.
Syndicalist unions outside the IWA also
existed in many countries such as the
Brazilian Workers Regional Organisation and
the Industrial Workers of the World in the
USA (which soon spread to Canada, Sweden,
Australia, South Africa, and Britain(1) ).
The influence of its methods, if not
necessarily of its anarchist origins, was
even seen in Ireland where the ITGWU
throughout its existence, until it merged
into SIPTU a few years ago, carried the
letters OBU on its badge. This OBU refers
to the IWW slogan of One Big Union. And let
us not forget that both Connolly and Larkin
were influenced by the IWW. Connolly was an
organiser for their building workers union
in New York state and Larkin delivered the
oration at Joe Hill's funeral.
DECLINE
The success of the Bolsheviks did great harm
to the workers movement outside Russia.
Many were impressed by what was happening in
Russia, Communist Parties sprang up almost
everywhere. The Bolshevik model appeared
successful. Many sought to copy it. This
was before the reality of the Soviet
dictatorship became widely known.
Nevertheless the syndicalist movement still
held on to most of its support. The real
danger was the rise of fascism. With the
rule of Mussolini, the Italian USI, the
largest syndicalist union in the world, was
driven underground and then out of
existence. The German FAUD, Portuguese CGT,
Dutch NSV, French CDSR and many more in
Eastern Europe and Latin America were not
able to survive the fascism and military
dictatorships of the 1930s and 40s.(2)
It was at the same time that the Spanish
revolution unfolded, which was to represent
both the highest and lowest points of
syndicalism(3). More about this below.
The Polish syndicalist union with 130,000
workers, the ZZZ, was on the verge of
applying for membership of the IWA when it
was crushed by the Nazi invasion. But, as
with syndicalists elsewhere, they did not go
down without a fight. The Polish ZZZ along
with the Polish Syndicalist Association took
up arms against the nazis and in 1944 even
managed to publish a paper called
Syndicalista. In 1938, despite their
country being under the Salazar dictatorship
since the 1920s, the Portuguese CGT could
still claim 50,000 members in their now
completely illegal and underground union.
In Germany, trials for high treason were
carried out against militants of the FAUD.
There were mass trials of members, many of
whom didn't survive the concentration camps.
One point worthy of mention about the
Spanish CNT shows the hypocrisy of the
British government which called itself anti-
fascist. Not only were Italian anti-fascist
exiles interned on the Isle of Man but CNT
members whose underground movement assisted
British airmen, Jews and anti-fascists to
escape through Spain to Britain were repaid
at the end of the war when their names were
handed over to Franco's secret police.
THE RUMP
By the end of WWII, the European
syndicalist movement and the IWA was almost
destroyed. The CNT was now an exile
organisation. In 1951 the IWA held their
first post-war congress in Toulouse. This
time they were a much smaller organisation
than the great movement which existed at
their first congress. Nevertheless they
still represented something. Delegates
attended, though mostly representing very
small organisations, from Cuba, Argentina,
Spain, Sweden, France, Italy, Germany, the
Netherlands, Austria, Denmark, Norway,
Britain, Bulgaria and Portugal. A message
of support was received from Uruguay.
Things were not looking good for the re-
emergence of anarcho-syndicalism. In
Eastern Europe the Stalinists allowed no
free discussion, strikes or free trade
unions. Certainly not anarchist ones! In
the West massive subsidies from the US and
the Catholic church went to tame unions
controlled by Christian Democrats and Social
Democrats. Meanwhile Russia did the same
for their allies who controlled the French
CGT, the Italian CGIL and others. The IWA,
in its weakened state couldn't compete for
influence. In the late 1950s the Swedish
SAC withdrew from the IWA. There was now
not a single functioning union in its ranks.
It staggered on as a collection of small
propaganda groups and exile organisations
like the Spanish and Bulgarian CNTs. Some
wondered would it live much longer. But
suddenly in 1977 Franco died and his regime
fell. The CNT blossomed. Within a matter
of months its membership leaped from a few
hundred activists to 150,000. [Problems
later developed within the CNT and a split
occurred which left us with two unions whose
combined membership today probably does not
reach 30,000, though this is still a
significant number.] The growth of the CNT
put syndicalism back on the anarchist
agenda. The IWA now claims organisations
which function at least partly as unions (in
Italy, France and Spain) and propaganda
groups in about another dozen countries.
Outside the IWA are syndicalist unions and
organisations like the 16,000 strong SAC in
Sweden, the OVB in the Netherlands, the
Spanish CGT, the Solidarity-Unity-
Democracy(4) union in the French post
office, the CRT in Switzerland, and others.
Some are less anarchist and more reformist
than others. Say what we will about them we
must recognise that syndicalism is today the
largest organised current in the
international anarchist movement. This
means it is especially important to
understand them.
SOME PROBLEMS
Anarchist-Communists do have criticisms of
their politics, or more accurately lack of
politics. Judging from their own
statements, methods and propaganda the
syndicalists see the biggest problem in the
structure of the existing unions rather than
in the ideas that tie workers to
authoritarian, capitalist views of the
world.
Syndicalists do not create revolutionary
political organisations. They want to
create industrial unions. Their strategy is
apolitical, in the sense that they argue
that all that's essential to make the
revolution is for workers to seize the
factories and the land. After that it
believes that the state and all the other
institutions of the ruling class will come
toppling down. They do not accept that the
working class must take political power.
For them all power has to be immediately
abolished on day one of the revolution.
Because the syndicalist organisation is the
union, it organises all workers regardless
of their politics. Historically many
workers have joined, not because they were
anarchists, but because the syndicalist
union was the most militant and got the best
results. Because of this tendencies always
appeared that were reformist. This raises
the question of the conflict between being a
trade union or a revolutionary anarchist
organisation.
Syndicalists are quite correct to emphasise
the centrality of organising workers in the
workplace. Critics who reject syndicalism
on the grounds that it cannot organise those
outside the workplace are wrong. Taking the
example of anarcho-syndicalism in Spain it
is clear that they could and did organise
throughout the entire working class as was
evidenced by the Iberian Federation of
Libertarian Youth, the 'Mujeras Libres'
(Free Women), and the neighbourhood
organisations.
SPAIN
The weakness of syndicalism is rooted in its
view of why workers are tied to capitalism,
and its view of what is necessary to make
the revolution. Spain in 1936/7 represented
the highest point in anarcho-syndicalist
organisation and achievement. Because of
their a-politicism they were unable to
develop a programme for workers' power, to
wage a political battle against other
currents in the workers' movement (such as
reformism and Stalinism). Indeed
syndicalists seem to ignore other ideas more
often than combating them. In Spain they
were unable to give a lead to the entire
class by fighting for complete workers'
power.
Instead they got sucked into support for the
Popular Front government, which in turn led
to their silence and complicity when the
Republican state moved against the
collectives and militias. The minority in
the CNT, organised around the Friends of
Durruti, was expelled when they issued a
proclamation calling for the workers to take
absolute power (ie that they should refuse
to share power with the bosses or the
authoritarian parties).
The CNT believed that when the workers took
over the means of production and
distribution this would lead to "the
liquidation of the bourgeois state which
would die of asphyxiation". History teaches
us a different lesson. In a situation of
dual power it is very necessary to smash the
state. No ruling class ever leaves the
stage of history voluntarily.
In contrast to this the Friends of Durruti
were clear that, and this is a quote from
their programme 'Towards a Fresh Revolution'
, "to beat Franco we need to crush the
bourgeoisie and its Stalinist and Socialist
allies. The capitalist state must be
destroyed totally and there must be
installed workers' power depending on rank &
file committees. Apolitical anarchism has
failed". The political confusion of the CNT
leadership was such that they attacked the
idea of the workers siezing power as "evil"
and leading to an "anarchist dictatorship".
The syndicalist movement, organised in the
International Workers Association and
outside it, still refuses to admit the CNT
was wrong to "postpone" the revolution and
enter the government. They attempt to
explain away this whole episode as being due
to "exceptional circumstances" that "will
not occur again". Because they refuse to
admit that a mistake of historic proportions
was made, there is no reason to suppose that
they would not repeat it (should they get a
chance).
Despite our criticisms we should recognise
that the syndicalist unions, where they
still exist, are far more progressive than
any other union. Not only do they create
democratic unions and create an atmosphere
where anarchist ideas are listened to with
respect but they also organise and fight in
a way that breaks down the divisions into
leaders and led, doers and watchers. On its
own this is very good but not good enough.
The missing element is an organisation
winning support for anarchist ideas and
anarchist methods both within revolutionary
unions and everywhere else workers are
brought together. That is the task of the
anarchist-communists.
Alan MacSimoin
1 It was known as the Industrial Workers of
Great Britain.
2 Some, like the Italian USI and German FAU,
have been refounded but exist only as
relatively small propaganda groups.
Sometimes they are able to take on union
functions in particular localities.
3 A good introduction to this period is
Eddie Conlon's The Spanish Civil War:
Anarchism in Action.
4 In workplace elections in Spring 1994
their vote in the post office rose from 4%
to 18%, and in Telecom from 2.5% to 7.5%.
BOX Direct Action Movement becomes
Solidarity Federation
THE BRITISH section of the International
Workers Association, the Direct Action
Movement, is no more. In its place stands
the Solidarity Federation. This is far more
than just a change of name, they see it as
the second step on the road to becoming a
revolutionary union.
Step one was explaining the anarcho-
syndicalist idea within the anarchist
movement and getting a couple of hundred
people together in the DAM. Now they have
set up three 'industrial network's' in
transport, education and the public sector.
These are seen as the precursors of
revolutionary unions.
These are open to any worker who wants to
join - as long as he/she is not in another
political organisation. Their bulletins
carry reports of grievances and struggles in
their industries. There are few mentions of
anarchism, and possible members don't have
to agree with it, or even know anything
about it.
The 'who are we' piece in each issue of the
Public Sector Workers' Network bulletin sums
up their basic approach. "Network is
published by a group of militant public
service workers to promote the idea of
workers self-management and revolutionary
change in society. It is also an open forum
for all public service workers to share,
discuss and analyse our experiences, and to
develop solutions to the problems we face.
...We are also seeking to network as widely
as possible with like-minded workers. We
see no point in wasting time and energy in
trying to reform the existing unions or
trying to elect more left-wing leaders. We
want to see workers' organisation which is
not divided by union affiliations,
bureaucracy or political parties, and which
embrace all public service workers... on the
basis of practical solidarity."
In an article 'Why we need political unions'
in the summer 1994 issue of Transport Worker
their plan is explained in a little more
detail. "Transport Worker Network believes
we have to build an alternative to the
present trade unions. An alternative openly
committed to a revolutionary transformation
of society, educating workers and raising
class consciousness not only through
militant industrial action to gain concrete
improvements in pay and conditions, but also
constantly raising and debating the failure
of the current system and organising ways to
implement a new society.
While initially some would be attracted to
such unions simply on the basis of effective
action, it is our aim to convince them of
the urgent need and genuine possibility of
building a new society."
The new Solidarity Federation is not an
'anarchist organisation' in the sense that
one must agree with anarchism before
joining. It does not explain anarchism in
its network bulletins or in its Direct
Action paper. How are new members to learn
about the ideas? Will it be left to
informal approaches by other members, will
it be left to a few people producing
pamphlets and holding educational meetings?
Will they end up with some sort of well-
meaning elite running everything important
lest it fall under the influence of members
who don't fully understand or accept
anarchist ideas?
Andrew Flood
anflood@macollamh.ucd.ie
Phone: 706(2389)