💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › sebastien-faure-the-revolutionary-forces.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 14:00:12. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: The Revolutionary Forces
Author: Sébastien Faure
Date: 1921
Language: en
Topics: syndicalist
Source: Retrieved on October  8, 2010 from http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/faure/revforces.html
Notes: Translated by Larry Gambone, Librairie sociale, Paris, 1921. “La Brochure Mensuelle” dans les séries “La bonne collection” et “Propos subversifs”. Retranscription d’une conférence faite par Sébastien Faure à Paris, le 25 janvier 1921 dans la grande salle de la Maison des Syndicats. Piqué sur: http://bibliolib.net/Faure-Revforc.htm.  Translator’s note: I cut out a portion of this speech. Repetition mostly, and summarized other areas not important to the overall meaning of the text. I also have a question for the reader. What are the forces of the revolution today?

Sébastien Faure

The Revolutionary Forces

Comrades, I explained — quickly, but in a sufficient way — the first

part of libertarian Communism, the critical, negative part and, I hope

that I managed to convince you that misery, ignorance, hatred,

repression, suffering in all its forms, is the fatal result of the

social background in which we live.

If, as I hope, you arrived at this conviction, you must also be

convinced of the need and the urgency to put an end to a social system

which generates such pains. It is precisely what we will begin to study

this evening. It is necessary to destroy the established social order

since it is generating sufferings, inequalities, injustices and

miseries. It should be destroyed at all costs; it should be destroyed as

soon as possible; it should be destroyed root and branch.

Here are terms of the problem that it is necessary for us to solve:

since the current social forms are in formal contradiction with the

needs of the hour and the aspirations of the present generation, these

social forms must disappear. Which are the forces we can put in line and

oppose to the social forces which maintain the current situation? What

spirit must animate the militants who constitute these vast

organizations that I call the forces of revolution? Which is the goal of

each one of these organizations, of each one of these forces? Is it

possible, whereas each one is independent, autonomous, having its

doctrines, principles, methods, tactics, to join them together in a

common block to constitute the block of the Revolution? Such is the

problem that we will be posed and that we have to solve. It is clear.

Therefore, on which forces can we support our action? These forces are

as follows: Free-thought, the Socialist Party, Trade Unionism, the

Cooperatives, Anarchism. I speak obviously only about the large

currents, the powerful organizations. I am obliged to somewhat neglect a

crowd of groups which however have their very great utility in a mass

movement. I will then examine them all...

Free-thought

Initially, it could appear unusual that I regard as a force of

Revolution the free-thought. Indeed, I am very saddened by it . The

movement has been prostituted so much for the last twenty-five years! It

fell into this mess from the electoral game playing. It was used as

springboard with quantity of profiteers who thought only of making

political fortune on the back of free-thought. And noble aspirations

were thus confiscated by go-getters and conspirators. The weakness, I

will say even the impotence of freethinking, comes from the fundamental

error into which it fell. It reduced the fight which it proposed to

pettiness and meanness. One saw in the free-thought only one assertion

especially anti-clerical and anti-Catholic. I recognize that this

weakness was contained a little in the nature of the things opposed. The

free-thinker always finds opposite him the representative of the Church.

The one who is Master, who makes the law, who is listened to, it is him

which, every Sunday goes up to the pulpit and teaches his flock what

they must think, that which they must do. It was natural to counter this

smothering power.

But the sphere of activity of free-thought should have widened and

developed... The free-thinkers did not understand that thought can be

free only in the condition which the man himself is free. They did not

understand that one can apply the word of Latin here: Lie sanatorium in

corpore sano, — a healthy spirit in a healthy body. One can apply it

here with a light modification in the following way: Free thought in a

free body. It is this ignorance of the truth which caused weakness and

impotence of the free-thought movement.

With this old formula “free-thought”, (libre pensé ed.) I oppose the

formula — which is new only of its opposition to the preceding one —

“free thinking” (penseé libre ed.) ... Thus understood, the current of

the free thinking, being attached to the social problem, could be a

force of revolution of great value.

A differently important force of revolution, is the Socialist Party. The

Socialist Party organizes on the political ground the working mass and

its friends. I add with intention “friends”, because there is not, in

the Socialist Party, any workingmen. The Socialist Party places the

economic problem at the head of its concerns; I will even say that the

Socialist doctrines are before all economic doctrines. The Socialists

know that under capitalism, the economic situation dominates the

political situation, that the authorities are only the political

expression of the economic power of the bourgeoisie... Simply, the

Socialist Party says: “There are two organizations: a specifically

worker and, consequently, specifically economic organization, the

General Confederation of Labor (CGT ed.); it thus rests with the

Socialist Party to represent the political effort in the great movement

which pushes humanity towards new destiny.”

Just as trade unionism is to put the hand on the means of production and

exchange, in the same way the purpose of the Socialist Party is to take

possession, by all of the means, of Government, the State, of Authority.

I knew a brief thirty-five years ago — that does not make me young

person — a Socialist Party which was then like me, full of heat, full of

ardor. I kept mine somewhat. Alas! The Socialists lost almost all of

theirs. That moment, one did not split hairs; the social system was

fought, one wanted to get rid of it at all costs, and one was taken by a

mad hope. The Socialist Party was then impetuously revolutionary. It was

young. Alas! It aged...it became old and somewhat petty bourgeois.

(Faure then lays out how the party fell into ministerialism, compromise,

weak-kneed reformism all as a result of parliamentarianism. He also

notes how some members inspired by the example of the Russian Revolution

seek to re-invigorate the Party and sees hope there. ed.)

Another considerable force of revolution, is trade unionism. Trade

unionism groups the workers specifically on an economic basis. Trade

unionism has a very particular advantage: it is a natural grouping, and

which I will to some extent describe as instinctive. A grouping made up

not by heterogeneous elements, but, on the contrary, by homogeneous

elements. There are, within trade unionism, the employees, men on which

the life depends on an owner, or a director, or an administration, and

who, consequently, belong truly by their situation, by their daily

labour to the working class. There is a very special advantage in this

fact that trade unionism is a natural grouping, instinctive,

homogeneous, When animals — and we are only animals having the claim to

be higher animals, but I am not of course clear that this claim is

justified, — when animals are threatened, they approach each other. They

do not need to give each other the word... It is enough that the enemy

is there and then, immediately, all the ants, all the bees, all the

birds which form to part of the same species, of the same family,

feeling a danger to threaten them, all get together, are linked, and

thus is created a force allowing resistance and incalculable defense.

Trade unionism is this natural grouping, an instinctive association

against the enemy who is, the owner, the exploiter, the capitalist...

Trade unionism is governed by the legislation of 1884, whose author is

Waldeck-Rousseau. Do not believe however, that trade unionists and

guilds only go back to this time. They were there before him, and, here

like always, the legislator simply recognized them in order to regulate,

to channel, to hold it in some way under his dependence, his domination,

the movement which existed already. Only, hitherto, the labour movement

was absolutely guild like; each group had special claims concerning its

working conditions, its habits, according to the places or the type of

work or industry. One occupied oneself very little with one’s neighbor.

Pelloutier came. He rendered to the trade unionism this inappreciable

service... he came to bring to trade unionism doctrines, an

organization, a method.

(Here Faure lays out the doctrine, organization and methods of

anarcho-syndicalism — class struggle unity, federalism, direct action,

abolition of the wage system. ed.)

Thus conceived and practiced, what a force of revolution trade unionism

could be! Here as in the Socialist Party, we also await an effort of

goodwill achieved by a certain number of men who have the resolution to

return to the trade unionism of pre-war period, to return to class

struggle trade unionism, with direct action, the former revolutionary

trade unionism.

Here still, I say: Bravo! I assist with great joy, this movement of

rectification; and in the weak measurement of my means I am very ready

to give my support, if as well is as it can have some utility, with

those which make effort in this direction. Only, I will allow myself to

give them a council of certain dangers. It is not a question, in a

movement as vast as the trade unionism, to modify the personnel, to

change purely and simply the men. If you change only the men, you will

not have done anything, In fact the methods must be changed, If the

machine squeaks, if it does not function well, if it does not move

towards the goal; if it does not carry out what it must carry out, it is

necessary to see from which this defect comes from the machine, in order

to bring the remedy necessary, essential there. It is not in the men

that the vice of the trade unionism resides. Today, trade unionism

became a powerful machine and, because of this formidable power, it took

on a massive, heavy, character. It suffers from a centralism which moves

it away from the federalist base that Pelloutier created. This

centralism requires a formidable army of bureaucrats. And see sometimes

language is enough to indicate a whole situation: they are called the

“permanent ones”, which wants to say that they are there permanently and

encrust themselves there so a long time that one cannot get rid of them.

...When they remained five years, ten years in the same function, they

became, to some extent, bureaucrats, civil servants of the C.G.T., not

going to the “job”. Their hands end up becoming white; not manipulating

tools, they do not know any more the vicissitudes of the workers....

They can let pass unemployment, their position doesn’t change, they eat

nevertheless. They are to some extent a worker aristocracy...

Interruption: “But what will one put in their place?”

Here is a comrade who asks me: “What one will put their place?” If you

want to understand me listen more attentively than this comrade, or it

would be better really that I ceased speaking altogether. I already said

and repeated that it is not a question of changing the men and that if

you change simply that without transforming and amending, you will not

have done anything... And I say that if those who hold a mandate or

exert a function because they have the confidence of their comrades,

either because of their competence, or because they are active, or

because they have particular aptitudes, were obliged to give up this

mandate or to give up this function at the end of a given time — one

year, eighteen months or two years, for example — I suggest this, it is

up to you to make it practical; it is quite obvious that you would not

have this army of permanent functionaries...

Trade unionists, return to the honest and constant practice of

federalism; and then, assign a term for the mandate of your office

holders. Then, you will have a movement that is flexible, alive,

combative, always young.... You will then have fewer doubtful elements

and you will give to the trade unionism an incomparable force of

revolution.

Another force of revolution: the cooperatives.

When one examines how the majority of the co-operatives function, one

wonders to think that cooperatism can be a revolutionary force. But as

well as trade unionism, co-operation could be an incalculable force of

revolution. On the same basis? Why? Because co-operation has the aim of

grouping the working world on the ground of consumption, like trade

unionism has the aim of grouping the working class on the ground of the

production. Workers, you are not only producers, — and in this moment

even, there are those among you who, struck by unemployment, cannot

produce, — but you are above all, always and necessarily consumers. Do

you understand well the importance there is to organizing you on this

ground, like the enormous importance to group you around production? Ah

well! This is precisely the role of co-operation.

(Faure then describes how Charles Fourier laid the groundwork for

cooperatives in France) Then the idea came to him (Fourier ed.) to

remove all this mass of parasites which are intermediaries between the

producer and the consumer. It is this idea, comrades, that is at the

base of the co-operative idea. The co-operatives have as an aim to get

directly for the profit of their members, or those who buy on their

premises, the products which these customers need, without supporting

all the intermediaries... large merchants to small retailers — and you

know how numerous they are. You see, comrades, there is a thought which,

made in a spirit of social transformation and not only in a spirit of

economy or lucre, could become the starting point of a force for

revolution...

Unfortunately, with their success (because the co-operatives started to

be prosperous and successful), the state of mind of the co-operators did

not remain the same. Today, there is this powerful machine called the

Grand Store, which makes F140 or F150 millions business per annum; which

has a formidable organization and whose benefits rise each year with

tens of millions of francs! There is, around, a more or less high number

people who are attached to commercial prosperity (let us say the word)

in this establishment; so that the spirit of revolution, the spirit of

social transformation which should have directed the initiators of this

movement, this spirit almost completely disappeared. The practices

became defective and, the spirit of the co-operators became, alas!

“petty bourgeois”.

Here, I indicate the remedy: I am the adversary of what is called the

“rebate” or “refunded profit”. You know of what it consists: at the end

of each year, in each establishment, they do the accounts and one sees

the profits. These profits are, for example, of 10, 12, 20 %. They allot

a share to the members or to customers of the co-operative, by way of

refunding, a profit refunded. The remainder is for with the overhead,

the payment of the personnel, the reserve funds and, finally, with the

extension of the business. Ah well, I am opposed to the rebate of the

profit, and here is why:

The prospect for this profit, the need for allotting a part to the

members and for showing of it thus, this need involves the realization

of large benefit and, naturally, in this form, the co-operative makes a

return on the trade, the trade consisting in buying the cheapest

possible, to resell as expensive as possible. A co-operative company

which has the desire to refund its members an appreciable benefit makes

a return, without wanting it, instinctively, to commercial practices and

a mercenary attitude. Moreover, this rebate, this profit refunded

stimulates the love of the profit in the member, and maintains,

consequently, also the spirit of social conservatism...

This profit obliges one to maintain commercial prices: one sells like

the neighboring tradesman, only one says to the customer members: “Here,

you will not find immediately an economy, but at the end of the year,

you will find, in the form of profit which will be refunded to you, a

part of the benefit which we will have carried out.” Such are the

reasons for which I am against the refunded profit. And however I am of

opinion to maintain a light difference between the cost price and the

selling price, constituting a gross profit on which the overheads must

be taken, the reserves to be constituted and even the execution of the

projects of extension of the business even. The remainder would be

allotted to the social projects which the co-operatives must support.

When I think that in Paris, or in the Paris area, it is a million, — you

hear: it is a million, — which is the amount of benefit carried out by

the co-operative companies!... Notice that I find it only natural that

those who work in the co-operative live of this co-operative: they

devote to it their time, their activity, their knowledge, it is thus

perfectly normal that they live by it. But, that being said, and all

doing suitably and reasonably, you see from here, with the million

carried out each year in the Paris area, what admirable social projects

one could make! Where are social projects either created or supported by

the co-operative movement?...

I well agree that some large co-operatives give a few hundred or a few

thousands francs to these projects, but where is the effort comparable

with that which could, which should, be carried out? What immense

efforts of education could be especially accomplished in favour of women

and children, who one could interest thus in the revolutionary movement:

festivals given, schools founded, school colonies, holiday camps,

etc....penetrated of a new spirit, renouncing the defective practices,

moving away more and more from the commercial spirit, co-operation could

become, also, similar to trade unionism and a powerful force of

revolution. And here I arrive at the last of the forces of Revolution

which I want to study: Anarchism.

It is, in my opinion, the force of revolution par excellence, the

incomparable force of revolution. I hear well that one could say to me:

“Mr Josse, you are a goldsmith! It is not astonishing that you praise

your goods, i.e. anarchism, since you are anarchistic. It is very

natural!” Ah well, it is very natural. But if I did not believe that

anarchism is the best of all social doctrines, the purest and highest of

philosophies, if I did not estimate it as the noblest revolutionary

movement, and that I knew of some other purer and more fertile than

anarchism, I would go to this other! Anarchism, comrades, summarizes all

the forces about which I already spoke. It is, so to speak, the

synthesis...

Not only the bourgeoisie are not mistaken there, but all the eminent

sociologists, all the philosophers, all the thinkers who occupied

themselves of the social question, all the theorists, even those of the

schools which are not anarchistic, recognized very honestly that

anarchism was the point terminus, the climax of the social ideal and

that it was there, through thousands and thousands of difficulties,

humanity, finally released, would move one day. Integral Communism or

anarchism, it is the same thing. It is, indeed, towards this splendid

ideal that, whatever the school to which you belong, must direct your

thoughts and your desires for its realization.

We believe that it is necessary to go there immediately; we think that

it is not necessary to take a diverted road and that we go straight

towards the goal, and I have the certainty that, all of you admire the

grandeur, nobility and beauty of this marvelous ideal. Anarchism is,

indeed, the meeting of all the forces about which I spoke this evening,

it is, I said, the synthesis: anarchism is with free-thought in the

fight it carries out against religion and all forms of intellectual and

moral oppression; anarchism is with the Socialist Party in the fight

which it continues against capitalism; anarchism is with trade unionism

in the fight which it carries out for the workers against employers and

exploiters of work; anarchism is with the co-operatives in their fight

against commercial parasitism and the intermediaries which profit from

this parasitism. Was I not right to say that anarchism is like the

synthesis, like the summary of all the other forces of revolution; what

condenses them, crowns and joins them all together? Yes, it is the

summary and crowning!

Anarchism rejects any form of the domination of the man by man, and no

form of the exploitation of man by man, since it tackles all forms of

authority:

Political authority: the State. Economic authority: Property. Moral

authority: Fatherland, Religion, Family. Legal authority: Courts, Laws

and Police Force.

All the (authoritarian) social forces receive the vigorous and incisive

blows that the anarchists attack them with. Anarchism, indeed, is

against all oppressions, all constraints, it does not assign any limit

to its action... From where do humanity’s sufferings come? ... I put

side the inherent suffering that arises from nature itself, but all the

other sufferings, all the other pain has to due with bad social

organization... Here is what the anarchist says to the oppressed, to the

suffering ones.

One could hope that such a developed philosophy, as pure a doctrine

would be saved from the harmful influence of the War. Alas! it was if

nothing. I say this in shame! Among the most notorious anarchists, among

those whom we regarded as spiritual advisers, — not leaders, there are

none on our premises, but you know as well as me as there are voices who

are listened to more than others and of the consciences which seem to

reflect the conscience of the other anarchists, — we were in pain to see

some of these, whom we regarded as our elder brothers, like our

spiritual advisers, undergoing a cursed failure! [1] They believed this

war was not like others, that France had been attacked and needed

defending vigorously; they became the collaborators of the “Union

Sacree” and made a pact with the defenders of the nation, they were

warriors right to the end...

And misfortune is that, since that time, they have not recognized their

error; they remain trapped there. Just ask somebody who believes himself

to have the bearing of a leader to repudiate itself! Ask somebody who

hitherto had proclaimed truths which we believed almost without

discussion, to ask this man to recognize that he made an error! This

man, who believed himself anarchistic, will look you top to bottom and

will never admit he could be mistaken. [2]

Like all the chiefs and the leaders of people, like all the drivers of

crowd, the anarchist-warriors were victims of their stupid pride, and

they placed their personal vanity above all. And yet, I imagine that

when an error is made, it is suitable and worthy to recognize it

honestly and that the only means of repairing it is to proclaim it

publicly. We did not have need, we anarchists, to exclude these

anarchist-warriors, to drive out them: they understood well that they

did not have anything in common with us, that it was necessary to

exclude themselves... After having betrayed, after having disavowed

their past, these men are alone today. Without taking sanctions against

them, they condemned themselves voluntarily to isolation and it is there

their punishment lies; they are surrounded today only with their

loneliness and their abandonment...

Of all the forces of revolution which I quoted, anarchism is perhaps the

smallest. We do not have illusions about our numerical power, we know

that we do not have the compact battalions, like the Socialist Party,

trade unions and the co-operatives: the anarchists were always a

minority and, — to point out what I say to you, — they will always

remain a minority. This is inevitable.

Ah! we too would like to recruit, but recruitment is not easy for us.

Initially, our ideal is so high and so broad! Moreover, it is a to some

extent an unlimited ideal which develops each day, with events, higher

and broader, so that, to embrace this ideal, to follow it and propagate

it, we are needed so to speak, to be more developed men.

It is rather immodest of me to say this, I know, however, I must say it

because it is the truth and that is my feeling; and then, there is no

vanity to speak about oneself and its comrades, when it is done frankly

and honestly. Yes, it is necessary to form part of the elite, it is

necessary to be a more developed man, to rise to such altitudes, to

where flies the anarchistic idea. What makes anarchistic recruitment

especially difficult, is that there is nothing to gain with us; nothing

to gain and much to lose... We have, indeed, neither offices, nor

functionaries, nothing... not even notoriety to be offered to our

followers.

I am mistaken: there is, on the contrary, much to gain among us; but

these profits of which I want to speak undoubtedly allure only a

minority, which is this elite about which I spoke. There is nothing to

gain like a situation nor money, but there is to much to gain, if one

wants to be satisfied, by way of compensation, of the pure and noble

joys of a satisfied heart, of the spirit, of a high conscience. And,

indeed, the anarchist finds joys incomparable and worth infinitely more

in his eyes than the material advantages that rattle the vanity.

We are thus a minority, but, such is the common fate of all new ideas;

such never joined together around them but a negligible minority. When

an idea starts to group around it an imposing minority, it is then that

the truth is in motion... Today, it is anarchism which joins together

this elite. Minority, yes: but it is not necessary to be numerous to do

much work; it is even better often, being fewer: quality here overrides

quantity. I like better a hundred individuals that one finds everywhere,

who go where there is work to do, where intelligence and activity are

deployed; I like good hundred individuals who speak, who write, who act,

in words delivered with heat, than a thousand who remain quietly on

their premises...

The anarchists are and will be thus always very few, but they are

everywhere. They are what I will call the leaven which raises the bread.

Already, you see them involved everywhere. At side of the few thousand

declared anarchists belonging to anarchist groups, we see thousands and

thousands in other groups: in the Free-thought Movement, in the

Socialist Party, and with C.G.T. I know great numbers of them, in such

small cities and the countryside, feeling the need to do something, and

desire to mix in the local fights and the propaganda which is done on

their region and around them. They adhere to the socialist movement; but

they do not give up their anarchistic ideas. They are also in the trade

unions, the co-operatives, they are everywhere... There are even those

who are unaware of it! Because once one explains to them what is

anarchism, they say: “But if it is that, I am anarchistic! I am with

you!” Yes, anarchism is everywhere...

Such are the forces of revolution of which it was essential to spend

this evening in review. I finish, because we have been nearly two hours

in attendance. One could have had the whole conference to study each of

these forces and we would not have even exhausted the subject. I devoted

myself this evening to a simple description of each current, of each

organization, a fast and short description. I neglected a certain number

of other currents, other forces, other groupings which are not without

value and who, on the day of the Revolution, would influence the general

movement; such are, for example, the feminist groupings and the birth

control movement, the anti-alcohol and antimilitarist groups, and the

Republican Association of ex-Servicemen which has the aim of grouping in

particular the victims of the last war. Lastly, we have the Socialist

Youth, trade unionist and anarchist youth, seedbeds of the active

militants of tomorrow. It is this youth which is all our hope and which,

will be the abundant harvest of tomorrow!

There is thus, as you see it, a whole legion of groupings full of

goodwill and eager to get moving. I spoke this evening only about the

large forces because I could not obviously talk about all the forces.

The large forces are autonomous and independent; each one of them

largely deploys its flag on the ground which is particular to it. The

enemy feels this threat, is organized and united: never was repression

as severe, never were the employers so firmly organized, never the

police so arrogant, never did the courts give so many judgments, never,

in a word, was the enemy more valiantly defended. It is thus a question

of engaging the battle with all our forces joined together. We do not

request any group to sacrifice its principles, its doctrines, its

methods, its actions: we wish, on the contrary, that each one, that each

grouping keeps and preserves its methods, doctrines, principles, so that

all can be used when the hour sounds, because we have a goal to reach,

major project to be achieved. All these associated forces will be

essential.

The social structure threatens ruin. It is not ready to collapse, I do

not mislead you there: there are cracks. However, the social structure

is still solid and will need a heavy blow to demolish it. What is

necessary, at the present time, is that a powerful breath of revolt

rises and passes through all men of goodwill, for the arrogance of our

Masters is made of our ignorance, their force is made of our weakness,

their courage is made of our failure and their richness is made of our

poverty! The spirit of submission degraded their characters, revolt will

raise them; the practice of obedience curved their spines, revolt will

straighten them; centuries of resignation undermined their humanity, the

revolution will save it. As for us, the anarchists, we do not want to

live any more as slaves. We declared a pitiless war against the System,

yes, a war with the knife! We know that it is necessary for us to win or

die. We have thus decided to battle, battle at every moment against all

obstacles and all constraints: Religion, Capital, Government,

Militarism, Police, etc.

And we are determined to carry out this battle until victory is

complete. We want to not only be free ourselves, but that all men shall

be free. As long as there will be chains, even if they would be gilded,

even if they would be light, even if they would be slack, nevertheless

they would bind us, we will not disarm: we want all the chains broken

off, all and forever!

[1] refers to Emile Pouget, Jean Grave and Peter Kropotkin who supported

WW1

[2] refers to Jean Grave who lead a faction of pro-war anarchists in the

1920’s.