đŸ Archived View for library.inu.red âș file âș alex-the-beginner-s-anarcho-syndicalism.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:42:37. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
âĄïž Next capture (2024-06-20)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: The Beginner's Anarcho-Syndicalism Author: Alex Date: August 29th, 2022 Language: en Topics: anarcho-syndicalism; introductory Source: https://alexansynd.wordpress.com/2022/08/29/the-beginners-anarcho-syndicalism/
Anarcho-syndicalism is a political, social, and economic movement which
organizes for the achievement of communism (defined as a classless,
stateless, moneyless society) through consensus-based, decentralized,
and explicitly revolutionary labor unions.
These labor unions, called 'syndicates', are essential to the ideology,
given that they factor into both the syndicalist revolution, and the
practicalities of syndicalist communism.
To begin, syndicalists believe that the revolution should be organized
through unions. This is due to two main factors: The closeness of unions
to the working class, and the ability of unions to use direct action.
The first is quite simple; the proletariat is often quite amicable
towards unions, as even most non-revolutionary unions push pay up, in
accordance with the capitalist law of wages. This allows syndicates to
radicalize people at higher rates than something as contentious and
inherently hot-button as a political party. The second reason arises
partially from the first; in accordance with their relationship with the
workers (and thus the workplaces, the means of production), syndicates
can organize for direct action more efficiently than any other
revolutionary group. Strikes are as simple as the workers agreeing on a
date; sabotage is as simple as everyone agreeing to look the other way.
This allows syndicates to empower the worker, by showing the strength of
the proletarian class.
The practical means of syndicalist revolution arise from this ability
for direct action; once the working class has amassed enough power
through syndicates, a general strike is called through all industries,
immediately crippling the bourgeois. Next, the workers take over the
means of production, and begin producing; but under the structure of the
syndicates, rather than capitalists. These goods are distributed
throughout the syndicates to insure for the needs of the people. Through
this process, the state and the bourgeois are disempowered; their only
tool to maintain class dominance is violence, by way of the army and the
police. The syndicates are aware of this; a militia is created, or has
already been formed, to both fight off the advances of the state (and
any counter-revolutions), and to advance against the state, fighting for
both the abolition of it, and the bourgeois. This process will be made
easier by military defectors; the class consciousness created by the
advancement of syndicates makes this a necessary and healthy step of any
revolution. They should be accepted and allowed to help.
Once the syndicates have, together, abolished the state and ended the
bourgeois as a class (easier said than done, but the path gets too fuzzy
for an introductory text after the point where I left off), an
anarcho-syndicalist society may begin. As stated previously, this
society allows for complete free association of producers, without need
for money or exchange. Syndicates still exist; but not as a governing
body. Rather, syndicates, now even further decentralized, exist mostly
to facilitate relationships between fields of production. For example,
to produce a computer, a syndicate will need a chip; perhaps one which
isn't manufactured in the place where theyâre producing. So, they reach
out to a syndicate which can transport this chip to the computer
factory, and that transportation syndicate contacts a location which
produces this type of chip.. Theyâre then shipped to the first
syndicate, enabling them to continue production. Once theyâve finished
producing the computers, they can give them to a distribution syndicate;
which then ships them to people who've ordered our computers recently.
Syndicalism runs on a gift economy; which means that you can simply ask
for something, and it will be given to you. This is possible through the
fixing of over- and under-production, the increasing of efficiency, free
organization of necessary labor, and automation. To begin, the most
significant fix is that of over- and under-production.
Overproduction is a flaw in capitalism, where perfectly good items are
wasted simply because they won't sell at a market price. Underproduction
is a similar issue- capitalists will produce too little of certain
goods, simply to drive up the price, so that the profits can increase.
Syndicalism fixes these problems by producing for use value instead of
market value. Instead of making items based on how much theyâll be worth
when theyâre sold, syndicates will produce items at their own pace, and
send them to distribution syndicates to be distributed as the items are
wanted. This allows for an efficient and simple flow of production,
where no one is required to produce more than they want, and everyone is
able to get what they want.
An objection often raised to this idea is that of efficiency. If workers
are allowed to produce as much or as little as they want at a time,
wonât they all simply never work? Syndicalists, and anarchists in
general, hold that this is false. When free to produce how they wish,
people will choose to produce, simply because there is production which
they enjoy. This cannot truly be called work- because work is a system
of exploitation by capitalists, which syndicalism overthrows- but
nonetheless, societyâs needs are met. Is there not some job you would
love to have? Syndicalism allows everyone to do whatever they love,
through free association and movement about syndicates. And since people
naturally enjoy different things, this alone can fulfill most human
needs.
This is not to say that there arenât some jobs which nobody enjoys.
Obviously very few people, if any, are passionate about cleaning sewers;
so some other structure is needed to correct for this. Thankfully, we
have two; in the forms of automation and communal labor.
Automation is quite simple. In a society where people donât need to work
to live, automation becomes not a demon employed by the bourgeoisie to
save money, but a blessing, which can help with manual labor. Automation
is already developed enough so that some menial tasks would no longer
need human input (beyond perhaps the occasional repair); and in other
fields, its development will be sped up by the sudden end of the
workersâ need to suppress it. We already occasionally see robots working
in places like diners, or putting car parts together- all we need is to
apply that technology to other workplaces. Eventually, we may even have
enough advancement to no longer need communal labor- although weâre
under no illusion that that point will be soon.
âCommunal laborâ (an imperfect term) refers to the idea of people
organizing voluntarily (probably through syndicates) around things no
one really wants to do. People will do communal labor without profit
incentive, simply because it fulfills a need. What incentive is greater
than that of, for example, having a functioning sewer system? So, people
will organize, creating entirely voluntary syndicates; one for each hard
and unwanted task. They will assign shifts, and decide who works when;
not through force and authority, but through free agreement.
Syndicalism has shown itself to have real revolutionary potential in
history. The CNT in Spain is a syndicalist labor union which actually
had a revolution, in 1936. Based on first-hand accounts, they seem to
have meaningfully improved material conditions for Spanish workers.
Sadly, they didnât last very long, as they lost the Spanish Civil War to
a fascist counterrevolution. They might have been able to defend
themselves, but the leaders compromised their principles in cooperating
with the state- which we must not do in the future. Other syndicalist
organizations of note include the IWW, who played a large role in the
Occupy movement.