19th century to 1914
Anarcho-syndicalism is a distinct school of thought within anarchism. It seeks to abolish the wage system and private ownership of the means of production which lead to the class divisions in society. The three important principles of anarcho-syndicalism are solidarity, direct action and workers’ self- management. It focuses on the labour movement more than other forms of anarchism and looks to unions as a potential force for revolutionary social change, replacing capitalism and the State with a new democratically self- managed society.
The origins of anarcho-syndicalism can be traced back to the First International, also known as the International Workingmen’s Association (IWA), formed in 1864. The First International was a socialist organisation which aimed at uniting a variety of different left-wing political groups and trade unions that were based on the working class and class struggle. Anarcho- syndicalism was a development of the social aspirations most strongly held by the libertarian or anarchist wing.
After a period of repression following the defeat of the Paris Commune in 1871 and the fall of the International in 1876-7 there was a move by some anarchists towards propaganda by deed to bring about change. At the same time Marxist political parties settled into a crude determinism that saw them simply waiting for capitalism to collapse under the weight of its own internal contradictions.
Many anarchists though saw the futility of individual action that had alienated them from the working class and sought to re-enter and influence a re-emerging labour movement.
These syndicalists were industrial activists, ordinary workers concerned with the day-to-day problems that confronted them. Syndicalism was not the creation of one particular writer, or group of writers, rather it was the name given to the practice of a group of social movements that emerged, in many parts of the world, between the 1890s and the 1920s.
All of these movements, “revolutionary syndicalist”, “anarcho-syndicalist” or “industrial unionist,” had a common aim, the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism based on economic organisation and using direct, as opposed to political (electoral) action. They sought to establish a new social order, free from economic and political oppression. This, they believed, would only be achieved by action from below, so they discarded notions of capturing state power through parliamentary or revolutionary means.
They rejected the idea of “theorising” as an abstract exercise. They did however develop a theory of syndicalism in another way, which was through the experience and practice of the workers under capitalism.
This was an important aspect of syndicalist thought. The workers through their own experiences saw the true nature of capitalist society; that it is divided into two naturally antagonistic camps constituting class struggle. Syndicalists believed that any overlapping between the classes must be prevented; that the working class must become sufficient unto itself. This characteristic has been called “ouvrierism” — coming from the French word for “workers,” which can be described as the rejection of intervention by outside “experts” and parliamentary intermediaries within the socialist struggle, and an exclusive reliance on mass working class experience and action.
This is why the syndicalists saw the revolutionary union as the form of organisation to achieve change. The union should be, unlike the political party, wholly working class in character. It unites workers in their very quality as workers. Syndicalists took literally the slogan of the First International; “the emancipation of the workers must be the task of the workers themselves” seeing, in the strike, the means to achieve this.
Every strike, whether successful or not, was seen to increase hostility between the classes and so stimulating further conflict. Strikes encourage feelings of solidarity and are a training ground for further struggles. The climax would be, after a long series of strikes growing in breadth and intensity, the revolutionary general strike.
The anarcho-syndicalists also saw the need to combine the political and the economic struggle into one. They rejected pure economic organisation and insisted that the revolutionary union should have a clear political goal, the overthrow of capitalism and the state.
The anarcho-syndicalists saw themselves as presenting a consistent programme of action. The strike, the natural form of conflict, was also the form of revolution. The union, the natural formation for battle in the class struggle, was also the core of the new society. Every strike was a step on the way to the final conflict; while the class war is waged, the future is being created. Anarchists realised they could not wait for the workers to come to them but had to go out into the labour movement themselves and take an active part in unions and in their affairs and participate in all strikes and agitations.
Anarcho-syndicalism is often presented by many historians as a foreign idea that has no place within the working class movement. While syndicalism attained its first manifestation in France with the founding of the Confederation Generale du Travail (CGT) in 1895, similar ideas were spreading in Britain which paralleled the French development.
These ideas were taken up as early as 1894. An anarchist monthly, The Torch, was arguing against “plots and conspiracies” and that “spontaneous insurrection was an impossible event” calling instead for a general strike encompassing all workers.
In parallel, weekly anarchist paper Commonweal, run by former Socialist League members, had urged direct action by miners during their strike in 1893 — and during 1894 it became increasingly concerned with tactics for the labour struggle.
Criticisms were made of unions which it said were either too small to be effective or too big, with apathy in the branches and “uncontrolled officialism.”
There was also fierce criticism of the Social Democrats who captured positions in the unions and then used them as a base for their political career. It was argued that they undermined the ability of the union to fight.
In 1902, after the end of the Boer War, propaganda activities increased and in London Sam Mainwaring, an anarchist veteran of the Socialist League published the pamphlet General Strike. In it he used his experience as a member of the London Trades Council to denounce trade union bureaucracies.
In 1907 John Turner, a trade union activist with the Amalgamated Shop Assistants Union, launched the Voice of Labour as a weekly. It was to be used as a base around which to organise “Direct actionist and anarchist groups” and its policy was outlined in the first issues:
The Voice of Labour advocates Direct Action, the General Strike. Direct Action may be defined as that means of gaining an end which relies on its own power and organisation instead of the state. The General Strike is one great means to this end.
The Voice of Labour, February 9th, 1907
The paper argued for revolutionary propaganda within existing unions as a way of promoting industrial unions and of overcoming divisions — based on different trades — within workers’ organisations.
In Britain the progress of anarcho-syndicalism took a different course compared to continental Europe due to the development of British trade unionism, which predated both anarchism and Marxism.
Britain was the first industrialised nation and it was here that the first working class developed.
As early as 1799 and 1825, Combination Acts were passed to try to prevent the growth of working class organisation.
The first trade union with an explicit aim to overthrow capitalism was created in Britain in 1834. The Grand National Consolidated Trade Union (GNCTU) was formed with the aim of the complete replacement of capitalism and the system of competition with a co-operative system based on workers’ control.
The GNCTU also developed the earliest incarnation of the social general strike — a “Grand National Holiday.” The idea was that on a set day all the workers would put on their Sunday best and cease work. This would bring the capitalist system to a halt and enable the working class to gain control.
The Grand National eventually collapsed before it could attempt to put its plans into action but its ideas were carried on within the union movement.
Many working class activists within the Chartist movement (1836-48) saw the weapon of strike actionas a way of gaining political change, some even argued for a “Parliament of Industry” to replace the House of Commons.
So the basic ideas of anarcho-syndicalism can be seen as a definite trend and by the beginning of the 20th century its activists were starting to gain ground.
Discontent within the Marxist Social Democratic Federation (SDF) was growing due to increasing reformism (the belief that tweaking existing capitalist mechanisms through Parliament is the best way to build social change) and the neglect of, even hostility to, industrial struggle, of its leaders. Activist workers attacked “opportunist and chauvinist” backsliding from the controlling group.
They felt their suspicions were confirmed by attempts to unify socialists under the predominantly non- revolutionary Independent Labour Party (ILP) and by qualified support being given to the idea of socialist participation in capitalist governments.
Many working class socialists, contemptuous of the cautious approach of the newly-formed Labour Party and hostile to the SDF, became attracted to the idea of anarcho-syndicalism. It seemed to offer them a way of using workplace organisation to positive effect in the fight against capitalism.
The Labour Representation Committee formed in 1900 and changes its name to the Labour Party in 1906. Many working class activists were disgusted with the performance of the party’s first MPs as well as “top- hatted trade unionists” that ran the unions, supported Labour and worried about their own social standing rather than the needs of members.
There was a gap between workers and the union bureaucracies. Anarcho-syndicalists worked both within existing unions and in alternative industrial groupings to argue for a new form of union, based on direct action and control by ordinary “rank and file” workers.
An example of this thinking came from famous union leader Tom Mann, who had been an organiser in the 1889 London Dock Strike which effectively established industrial unionism in Britain.
Mann wrote The Way to Win in 1909, a pamphlet which argued that socialism could only be achieved through trade unionism and co-operation, suggesting parliamentary democracy was inherently corrupt.
Having met with the French CGT in 1910, he also published Industrial Syndicalist to create some sense of co-ordinated syndicalist dialogue. This aim was realised with the establishment of the Industrial Syndicalist Education League (ISEL) in December 1910. At its inaugural conference in Manchester many prominent syndicalists were in attendance and notably they included many anarcho-syndicalists.
There were differences between the anarcho-syndicalists and the non-anarchist syndicalists, as well as those who simply preferred to call themselves industrial unionists. The anarcho-syndicalists argued strongly that alternative unions needed to be created, although the majority were opposed to setting these up immediately.
Attempts were made by industrial unionists to set up a union organisation based on the American syndicalist model of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) but these were unsuccessful — the IWW was a response to a particular set of circumstances.
Anarcho-syndicalists called for activists to remain members of existing unions and work within them to push forward syndicalist thinking. They would also work outside the constraints of the union structures to develop ideas and strategies.
They saw a need for workers to organise on industrial (workplace-based) rather than craft (skills-based) lines, and combined this with a very specific approach to power and decision-making. This approach was to keep ordinary workers in control.
These ideas were in keeping with the practices of continental syndicalist movements, especially the Spanish CNT with whom there were many contacts. Anarcho-syndicalism was also developed and strengthened by Jewish immigrants who brought anarchist ideas and applied them to union organising. Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, and especially London’s East End had active groups and provided a support base.
ISEL would offer syndicalists a point of reference for the next three years until it was dissolved in 1913. It ended the isolation experienced by syndicalists and helped to spread syndicalist ideas during the labour unrest of the following years.
As industrial conflict grew syndicalism became a national issue.
The period 1910-1914 saw an unprecedented wave of strikes across mines, docks, the transport and building industries, eventually pushing the government to use troops against strikers and sparking a general strike in Liverpool.
In these conflicts initiative was often taken by rank and file workers who often pushed unions at a faster pace than their “leaders” found acceptable. They formed strike committees which took control of the strikes away from union bureaucrats.
The syndicalist influence was felt throughout this time and anarcho-syndicalists were prominent, for example in the Liverpool transports strikes of 1911.
Syndicalists were especially influential on the railways and after the national strike of 1911 quite a number of branches gave active support to syndicalist policies.
In the autumn of 1911 a monthly journal, Syndicalist Railwayman, showed the increasing extent of influence in that industry.
One of the main themes in its outreach was an attack on left-wing nationalisation calls. Syndicalist rail workers maintained that it would not greatly improve the lot of the railwaymen.
Real emancipation would only be achieved when railwaymen themselves had control over the industry. And this could be achieved only through industrial unity and “direct action.”
In 1912 the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants (ASRS) went so far as to declare in favour of the syndicalist demand for workers’ control of industry.