Anarcho-Syndicalism in the 20th Century (original) (raw)

Final Reflections: The Vicissitudes Of Anarchist And Syndicalist Trajectories, 1940 To The Present

The Praxis of National Liberation, Internationalism, and Social Revolution

Since the early 1990s the world has witnessed a remarkable resurgence of anarchist and syndicalist ideology, organisation, and methods of struggle. This resurgence is generally explained as a response to the imposition of neoliberal economic policies, the impact of increasingly globalized capital, the restructuring of state-society relations, the advent of new forms of authoritarianism and social control, and the collapse of world communism. 1 Rather than signal "the end point of mankind's ideological evolution," the post-Soviet period has been characterised by experimentation, reinvention and rediscovery on the part of progressive movements. 2 Anarchism and syndicalism have been part of this process of renewal. New movements have emerged in areas with little in the way of a revolutionary, libertarian socialist tradition; existing movements in areas of historic influence have revived, and a more diffuse anarchistic influence permeates a number of important social movements. The last two decades have seen new anarchist groups emerge in countries as diverse as Indonesia, Nigeria and Syria. In 1997, for example, several hundred gold miners registered a branch of the Industrial

JOURNAL: 2016, "Global Anarchism and Syndicalism: Theory, History, Resistance"

The discussion below is a lightly edited transcription of a talk given by the author at the Ay Carmela, Rua das Carmelitas, in São Paulo, Brazil, on 2 November 2010. This article provides a global perspective on the history and theory of anarchism and syndicalism, arguing against views that treat anarchism as simple ‘anti-statism’ or a natural human ‘impulse’, in favour of the argument that the current is a socialist, working class tradition dating to the International Workingmen’s Association (the ‘First International’), 1864-1877. An international movement in intent, conception and membership from the start, it drew on a range of modernist, rationalist socialist ideas, and developed a powerful base in many regions of the world by the 1940s. Spanish anarchism was undoubtedly important, as was the anarchist Spanish Revolution of 1936–1939, but Spain provided but one of a series of mass-based, influential anarchist and syndicalist movements. Barcelona was only one in a chain of red-and-black anarchist and syndicalist strongholds, and the Spanish Revolution only one of a number of major rebellions, revolutionary rehearsals and actual social revolutions in which anarchism/ syndicalism played a decisive role. Although public attention was drawn by the spectacular actions of the movement’s marginal ‘insurrectionist’ wing, it was the ‘mass’ anarchist approach – based on patient mass organising and education – that predominated. The movement’s immersion in mass movements – especially through syndicalism, peasant and civil rights struggles, fights against racism and women’s oppression, and anti-colonial and anti-imperialist struggles – can also only be properly appreciated from a global perspective – one in which the movement’s rich history in the colonial and postcolonial world is placed centre-stage. The real history of the movement should not be confused with the mythological, propagandistic history of anarchism that sections of the movement subsequently promoted, centred on claims that ‘anarchism’ existed across all human history, was ‘natural’ etc.

Anarchism - Essay for The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements

The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements, 2013

Anarchism refers to a tradition of social and political thought that in the 1860s emerged as an organized political force. Since then, anarchism has inspired protests, organizations and movements, mainly in Europe, Russia and the Americas, but also in other parts of the world. While it may be difficult to talk of ‘one’ anarchist movement, a distinct anarchist current within the history of the labor movement can be identified as well as anarchist tendencies and groups within other social movements. The term ‘anarchy’ comes from the Greek an-arkhos, meaning ‘without a leader or ruler’. It was first used in a positive sense, being identified as the ideal form of government, in Pierre- Joseph Proudhon’s (1809-1865) What Is Property? (1840). Proudhon, Mikhail Bakunin (1814-1876) and Pyotr Kropotkin (1842-1921) pioneered a broad tradition which has developed in a variety of forms. These range from varying interpretations of how to organize society in economic terms to the more basic distinction between social anarchism and currents farther removed from collective action (e.g. philosophical, individualist, and spiritual anarchism) as well as more specific variations around forms of organization, of action, the use of violence, and so on. In spite of this rich variety, anarchism can be identified by its strong commitment to individual freedom and sovereignty, the opposition to any form of oppression, domination and authority, the promotion of voluntary, decentralized and non-hierarchical associations, and the use of forms of direct action that prefigure a freer society with more solidarity and respect for individual self government.

'Anarchism as a Social Movement, 1870–1940', Sozial.Geschichte Online, 18 (2016), 15-62

The history of anarchism displays an alternation of activity and dis¬appearance. This article argues that actually there are two different patterns, one short-lived and the other having a much slower pace. Both patterns differ as to causes of disappearance and reasons for revival. According to modern social movement theory, anarchism with its weak organizational structure should have disappeared long ago. Therefore, this article tries to explain the staying power of anarchism. It highlights the importance of the individual anar¬chists, their networks and the flexibility of the anarchist groups. Anarchist culture plays a key role by nurturing an anarchist life¬style and keeping the movement attractive to new adherents. Social movement theory is of limited value when analyzing anarchism. Identity theories fail to capture it as a social movement and other social movement theories stay too much within existing political structures and / or focus on single-issue movements.

Anarchism and the Newest Social Movements

2019

Something new has been taking place around the world. Societies are in movement as never before—not with such tremendous numbers, consistent horizontal forms, uses of direct action over demands, in vastly disparate geographies and with such overarching global consistency. This chapter will delve into the specifics of the newer anti-capitalist movements, as well as ground them in many historical movements, both recent and with a longer view, that have similar forms and visions, such as the Zapatistas in Chiapas, Mexico, the Global Justice Movement and the Argentine assembly movements post-2001. In particular, the question of the similarities with an anarchist approach and vision will be discussed in relation to the newer movement forms and will ask the question of the newness of these forms.

Global Anarchism and Syndicalism: Theory, History, Resistance

2016

A preliminary note on termsPlease note that when I use the term 'syndicalism', here I am using it in the English sense of specifically meaning revolutionary syndicalism and/ or anarcho-syndicalism, not in the Romance language sense of meaning unions in general. And when I just say 'anarchism', I am usually including 'syndicalism' (both anarcho- and revolutionary syndicalism) because it's a variant of anarchism. Revolutionary and anarcho-syndicalism, are forms of anarchist trade unionism, rooted in the anarchist tradition, constituting strategies for anarchism, rather than a separate ideology or movement.One of the key issues that must be addressed for a project like this - a project which looks at anarchism and seeks to do so in a truly global and planetary way, rather than through a narrow focus on parts of Europe (which is how the history of anarchism is often done) - is that you have to think very carefully how you define the subject. So, if we are to ...

Black flame: the revolutionary class politics of anarchism and syndicalism

Labor History, 2013

In this first volume of a two-volume work, Michael Schmidt and Lucien van der Walt create a wide-ranging intellectual and political history that will surely stimulate debates about anarchist theory and practice. They wrote the book to make a case for the historical importance of the broad anarchist tradition, to challenge commonly held views about anarchism and syndicalism, to reexamine the key ideas of anarchism and syndicalism, and to promote an anarchist alternative for revolutionary social change today. The results of such an ambitious project that covers anarchism on six continents over a period of about 80 years are mixed and the inconsistency stems in large part from the book's dual purpose: to address debates within anarchist scholarship and to give direction to present-day anarchist politics. On the one hand, they synthesize a vast amount of primary and secondary source material on anarchism, their points are easy to follow, their arguments are clearly stated, they address key debates within anarchist politics and anarchist scholarship, and they take clear positions on those debates which are likely to generate even more debate. On the other hand, their scholarly or academic agenda sits uneasily with, and is sometimes undermined and overshadowed by, the polemics of a more partisan agenda that involves building a cohesive anarchist movement today. Their division of the book into three parts (Theory and Analysis, Strategy and Tactics, Social Themes) follows from their claim that there is overall coherence in anarchist thinking. They can make this claim because of the way they define anarchism: they emphasize its class politics and socialist roots and maintain that syndicalism is the most important strand of anarchism, not opposed to it as some scholars and activists contend, and that what defines people and positions as anarchist are specific core principles rather than strategies and tactics. Although critical of the orthodox prescriptions of Marxism-Leninism, in many ways this book argues for a kind of anarchist orthodoxy by stating that there is only one anarchist tradition, that of Mikhail Bakunin, Pyotr Kropotkin, and the International Alliance of Socialist Democracy. The authors use the principles of that tradition to give coherence to anarchist thought and practice and to provide a litmus test of what and who is anarchist and what and who is not. This boundary-making exercise is important to the activist agenda that animates a book which began as a short, didactic pamphlet for movment activists in late 1990s. The main arguments of the book, all of which challenge widely held views about anarchist history, theory, and practice are (1) the anarchist tradition begins in the 1860s as a response to the rise of capitalism and the modern state and emerged with, and was part of, modern socialist and proletarian movements; (2) not all philosophies that are hostile to the state or promote individual freedom are anarchist because anarchism is the libertarian wing of socialism which seeks to collectivize and self-manage production and replace the modern state with international self-management; (3) historians need a global perspective to counter the pervasive idea of 'Spanish exceptionalism' because major mass anarchist movements developed outside Spain in Argentina,

Anarchism: A Conceptual Approach (Edited by Benjamin Franks, Nathan Jun, and Leonard Williams)

2018

Direct Action A theoretical and practical notion that appears in revolutionary trade unionism and in libertarian communism in the 19th century, direct action is one of the most relevant contributions that anarchism offers to (anti-)political science and social practice. However, we come across many difficulties when attempting to grasp anarchist direct action, which are mostly related with its constant hybridisation, diversity and multifaceted nature. My particular concern here is to show how and why direct action is for anarchists the prefigurative, unmediated activity initiated by the oppressed to overcome, albeit perhaps only temporarily or partially, repressive conditions. I argue that direct action is not an attack on the enemy: above all, it is an examination of what is human, a commitment to individual and collective possibilities.

Anarchism and Political Modernity

2011

Anarchism and Political Modernity looks at the place of 'classical anarchism' in the postmodern political discourse, claiming that anarchism presents a vision of political postmodernity. The book seeks to foster a better understanding of why and how anarchism is growing in the present. To do so, it first looks at its origins and history, offering a different view from the two traditions that characterize modern political theory: socialism and liberalism. Such an examination leads to a better understanding of how anarchism connects with newer political trends and why it is a powerful force in contemporary social and political movements. This new volume in the Contemporary Anarchist Studies series offers a novel philosophical engagement with anarchism and contests a number of positions established in postanarchist theory. Its new approach makes a valuable contribution to an established debate about anarchism and political theory. It offers a new perspective on the emerging area of anarchist studies that will be of interest to students and theorists in political theory and anarchist studies.