textfiles/politics/SPUNK/sp000706.txt

       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)