82 lines
4.2 KiB
Plaintext
82 lines
4.2 KiB
Plaintext
[ From the Libertarian Labor Review ]
|
|
|
|
The Workers Themselves: Revolutionary Syndicalism and International
|
|
Labour, 1913-1923. By Wayne Thorpe, Kluwer Academic Publishers
|
|
(101 Philip Drive, Norwell MA 02061)
|
|
|
|
Review by Jeff Stein
|
|
Libertarian Labor Review #10 (Winter 1991)
|
|
pp. 38-39
|
|
|
|
Wayne Thorpe has written one of the most detailed accounts of the
|
|
events leading up to the founding of the IWA in 1922. Contrary to
|
|
historical treatments which see the purpose of the International
|
|
Workers Association as a rival to the Communist-dominated RILU (the
|
|
trade union wing of the Comintern), Thorpe traces its beginnings to
|
|
before the Russian Revolution. In 1913 there was an international
|
|
syndicalist congress held in London which aimed at building
|
|
stronger ties between the existing syndicalist unions and
|
|
propaganda groups. Present at the congress were delegates from the
|
|
FVdG (Germany), the NAS (Holland), the SAC (Sweden), the USI
|
|
(Italy) and the ISEL (Britain)> Observers attended from the IWW,
|
|
the CNT (Spain), the FORA (Argentina) and the CGT (France).
|
|
Unfortunately the Congress' outcome was inconclusive, beyond
|
|
drawing up a declaration of principles and setting up a short-lived
|
|
information bureau. Within a year Europe was plunged into the First
|
|
World War and communications between the syndicalists became
|
|
impossible.
|
|
|
|
One important reason why so little was accomplished at the London
|
|
Congress was the obstruction by the French CGT. The French
|
|
syndicalists, advocates of the 'boring from within' strategy, were
|
|
affiliated to the ISNTUC (the trade union wing of the reformist
|
|
Second International). The CGT opposed the formation of a
|
|
syndicalist international since this might alienate both the ISNTUC
|
|
and the reformist members of their own union confederation. It is
|
|
interesting to note how the French syndicalists, the historically
|
|
most successful 'borers from within,' had to tailor their policies
|
|
to appease their reformist allies. This raises the question: When
|
|
revolutionaries choose to 'bore from within' conservative
|
|
movements, just who is boring into whom? At any rate the
|
|
opportunity to form a syndicalist international was lost until
|
|
after the war.
|
|
|
|
When the war ended, however, conditions were different. Russia had
|
|
been taken out of the war by a social revolution, but the
|
|
usurpation of the revolution by the Communists was not well known
|
|
outside of Russia. When the Communists set up their new
|
|
international, the syndicalists were invited to join. The aura and
|
|
prestige of the first 'successful' workers revolution caused many
|
|
syndicalists to abandon their skepticism towards 'proletarian
|
|
dictatorship.' It was only after the Communists made it clear that
|
|
a requirement of belonging to the RILU was accepting Communist
|
|
party domination that the syndicalists decided to form their own
|
|
international organization. Thus, the main effect of the RILU and
|
|
the Comintern was not to provoke the formation of the IWA, but to
|
|
delay by several more years something already begun in 1913.
|
|
|
|
Thorpe's book covers not only the historical facts, but also the
|
|
various ideological debates within the syndicalist movement. If
|
|
unity was a long time coming, it was as much a fault of the
|
|
syndicalists themselves as it was from outside interference. Had
|
|
the movement been less divided, perhaps the opportunities which
|
|
existed immediately after the war would have been reaped by
|
|
syndicalists instead of Communists. Of course, this remains an
|
|
historic 'what if?'
|
|
|
|
My only objection is to some gratuitous remarks in Thorpe's
|
|
conclusion about how the centralization of industry made the
|
|
decline of syndicalism 'inevitable.' Nowhere does he provide any
|
|
evidence to back up this claim. Indeed syndicalism's decline did
|
|
not come about until the 1930s (Thorpe's narrative ends in 1923),
|
|
when syndicalist unions were crushed through a combination of state
|
|
repression and collusion between employers and the conservative
|
|
trade unions. If Thorpe's connection between industrial
|
|
centralization and syndicalist decline were true, how does it
|
|
explain the decline of the industrial unionism of the IWW instead
|
|
of a disappearance of the craft unionism of the AFL? Fortunately,
|
|
this bit of standard academic bias is the only weakness in what is
|
|
otherwise a good book.
|
|
|
|
|