What Is Anarcho-Syndicalism?

They have taken untold millions that they never toiled to earn
But without our brain and muscle not a single wheel can turn
We can break their haughty power, gain our freedom when we learn that
The union makes us strong -- Solidarity Forever, lyrics by Ralph Chaplin

The Union Makes Us Strong

Anarcho-syndicalism calls for an anarchist revolution built around left-wing labor unions that will organize the economy through democracy after the overthrow of capitalism.  "Syndicalism" by itself is a group of economic theories that advocate labor union organization of an economy, but "anarcho-syndicalism" specifically calls for the immediate overthrow of the state and the wage system.

Historically, anarcho-syndicalism has been the most powerful of all anarchist traditions.  It was central to the anarchist zones that flourished during the Spanish Revolution before being crushed by fascists (and Stalinists).  Anarcho-syndicalism is the central ideology of the Industrial Workers of the World and was a popular strain in the U.S. during the Great Depression, helping popularize such heroes as Eugene V Debs and Emma Goldman.  World-renowned linguist and political activist Noam Chomsky is a well-known anarcho-syndicalist.

Practically every building of any size had been seized by the workers and was draped with red flags or with the red and black flag of the Anarchists; every wall was scrawled with the hammer and sickle and with the initials of the revolutionary parties[...] Every shop and café had an inscription saying that it had been collectivized[...] Waiters and shop-walkers looked you in the face and treated you as an equal. Servile and even ceremonial forms of speech had temporarily disappeared. -- George Orwell, Homage to Catalonia

So How Does It Work?

Anarcho-syndicalism uses labor unions to organize a revolution, building the revolutionary consciousness of the workers, bringing them together, and building solidarity with the workers of the world by unifying them to fight for their interests while capitalism still exists.

Once a revolutionary period occurs, the unions are ready to act.  The strength of this idea showed itself in the Spanish Revolution.  Because the anarcho-syndicalists had already been making decisions democratically and organizing the overthrow private property and the wage system, they were able to quickly overtake the economy and run it democratically.  While the figures are hard to pin down, the local records suggest that productivity rose sharply under anarcho-syndicalism.

Anarcho-syndicalism believes that after the revolution, worker and general citizen unions become the decision making groups in society.  These groups elect delegates (always able to be recalled) who help organize the society at large.

Wildcat Strikes:  the Fight for Good Unions
 
So maybe you think unions are just corrupt, greedy clubs ran by mobsters, and maybe you think that isn't the best group to lead a revolution.  Anarcho-syndicalists are not naive, they know that most unions are not capable or willing to lead revolutions, and that is what led to Wildcat strikes.

A "Wildcat strike" is a strike action by unionized workers who plan, organize, and lead the strike on their own, without the union bosses.  This accomplishes several things all at once:  it improves worker conditions when the strike succeeds, it puts power in the hands of the workers, it shows the uselessness of union bosses, and it makes for good practice in group decision making and solidarity.

Further Reading:

• Anarcho-Syndicalism by Rudolf Rocker 
• Official IWW Literature and Documents

Capitalism Is Not Efficient

More Effective Exploitation Is Not Efficient

Have you wondered why raw materials from the US will be shipped across the world to factories with low wages and long hours, then shipped back and still be sold on the cheap?  It's because labor makes profit.

So what is economic efficiency?  Well, efficiency requires the speaker to figure out what will be considered as important for efficiency (like, most work for least energy, most production for least pollution, etc.)

We are often told that capitalism is an efficient system compared to socialism, but capitalism seeks maximum exploitation of labor.

Labor Theory of Value

This understanding of the source of profit in capitalism comes from the Labor Theory of Value.  It essentially says this:

• Raw materials have a certain value (M)
• Labor uses these materials to build a commodity (M + L)
• The commodity is worth more than the material because labor added value (M + L = C)

That is a simplified version.  This goes into the argument with a bit more depth.

What Do Radical Leftists Mean By Class?

What Is Class to the Radical Left?

A "class" is a group of people who have similar roles in the workplace, specifically in creating valuable goods.

How Is This Informative?

On the radical left, the word "class" isn't discussed in the same gradual levels, the way many people talk about economic classes.  We don't typically think about classes like "lower class," "lower middle class," "middle class," and so on.   Almost all radical leftists define classes in capitalism (our main focus of study) in two groups called the "proletariat" (the hip word for workers, most likely your class) and the "bourgeoisie" (the soft-g and the vowel crowded word for bosses).

The Bourgeoisie (not borg-ee-oh-ee-see, in case you're having problems)

The bourgeoisie are said to own the "means of production" under capitalism.  That means that individuals, by purchasing or inheriting, come to control the things that, when a worker runs the equipment or station, produce value and wealth (factories, restaurants, construction companies, etc.)

The term "bourgeois" can be confusing beyond pronunciation because it is another term with a specific meaning from the left and a looser definition otherwise.  The word comes from a group of middle class merchants under feudalism who started the revolution of capitalism (first in Britain with the factory system).  After the series of political revolutions that ousted Kings and weakened aristocracies, the bourgeois state became established in its few forms, favoring the republican model in the West.  So, in capitalism, the bourgeois are the wealthiest and most powerful.

Note:  many (usually non-leftists) use "bourgeois" as a term for uncultivated taste (from the mouths of aristocrats who were forever dumbfounded by the way these capitalist spent their new wealth).

Suffering engenders passion; and while the prosperous blind themselves, or go to sleep, the hatred of the unfortunate classes kindles its torch at some sullen or ill-constituted mind, which is dreaming in a corner, and sets to work to examine society. The examination of hatred is a terrible thing. --  Victor Hugo, Les Misérables

So Who Are the Proletariat?  Why Are They so Special?

Probably you.  Proletarians are generally defined as people who have to sell their labor to gain money in capitalism.  The radical left thinks that since the proletariat makes all of the value and does all of the work, they shouldn't be dictated to by any boss (certainly not one that the workers didn't elect and who the workers can't recall at any time).  Often times, fear of losing your job keeps people in line, as most people couldn't imagine how they would afford missing out on a single week's paycheck.

Bosses make more money by paying workers less, so that most workers get paid just enough to come back into work to make the boss more profit.  One of the things pointed out in the Communist Manifesto, however, is that capitalism is building the foundation of its own demise.  Wealth concentrates through buyouts and acquisitions and closures, shrinking the amount of people that own the businesses.  The number people who work for a living increases as fewer and fewer people own private property, and the workers benefit from a change in society where they are put in charge of the lives and workplaces and governments.

I Can Think of People Who Aren't Either Bourgeois or Proletarian

It is important to remember that very few radical leftists believe that economies are as simple as workers and bosses. Every day, situations change.  What is important for leftists are class interests, because the different ways you interact with the economy and government, the different policies you'll support in both.  Many people don't work in factories but still share class interests with factory workers.  Underpaid teachers, custodians, drivers, etc. are all often seen as proletarian on the radical left.

Sometimes, other terms are used (like "lumpenproletariat," “labor aristocracy,” and "petit-bourgeoisie" among others) to define a position in capitalism more finely, but “proletariat” and “bourgeoisie” are seen as the most important for understanding how capitalism works and are also perhaps the only universal class terms on the radical left.

There Is Always an Exception

There are some people that don't emphasize classic working class proletarians as the revolution base (either generally or in a particular place and time).  These arguments are highly charged on the left and break with an argument for revolution that has permeated the radical left since it began.

Regardless, few would seriously argue that strictly proletarians can revolt and lead alone.  For example, indigenous populations in Central and South America (the EZLN, the election of Chavez, etc.) have been crucial members of radical left and broad left coalitions for fighting capitalism and building a more equal, safe, and healthy society.

What Do Radical Leftists Mean By Private Property? (and why do you want to abolish it?)

What Is Private Property to the Radical Left?

The radical left uses the words "private property" to describe ownership of the economy under capitalism.  Let's break down the words for simplicity, in reverse order for clarity.

Property:  anything that can combine raw material and labor to create value or the raw material itself.

Private:  owned by individuals or small groups of owners who have final say in how the property is used (within the law, most of the time) without any means of recourse for the workers or affected communities (again, as long as activity is within the law or the bribes came early and often).

To be a radical leftist means seeking to abolish private property as defined above.

Wait, What?  Abolish Property?  I Don't Want to Share Everything

The proletarian liberates himself by abolishing competition, private property, and all class differences. --  Frederick Engels, The Principles of Communism

Most people think of personal possessions when they hear the phrase "private property" (in their defense, that seems like what those two words should mean stuck together).  So when you hear us say, “Abolish private property!” we mean let's let the workers run their own affairs democratically with input and collaboration with the community.  Deciding together, and even electing their own leaders and managers if they see fit.

So you can stop worrying about sharing your toilet paper with anyone who asks (although it rarely comes up, takes a second, and it's the right thing to do).

But This Boss Earned His Way

Many people who own businesses, especially ones they built themselves, have worked incredibly hard to succeed.  No doubt.  No question.  When radical leftists argue that business owners exploit workers, business owners sometimes think we dismiss the work they had to do.  We don't.  Many people have met or had bosses that worked alongside employees, sometimes harder or longer.  So how can we still believe in abolishing private property?

Hard work does not mean you can disregard the workers.  People have to make money to eat and house and take care of themselves and their dependents, and people rarely have the wealth or opportunity to start a successful business.  So workers give a set amount of labor, they are always paid back less and usually just enough to make by or worse.  And no matter how difficult financing a start-up or finding talented workers or finally paying off all the debt was, no one has the right to pollute without seeking consent of anybody, and leaving communities to clean up, if they are lucky enough to be able to, the mess of the private property owner.

How, When, and in What Order Are We Abolishing?

The radical left thinks a government cannot be democratic when a small minority can control society with enormous wealth.  Private property leads to the inevitable gap between rich and poor in capitalism, and that means in leads to the lack of democracy in society.  So the radical left all agrees we should abolish private property, but we don't all agree on how to abolish private property, at what point during the revolution, and in what order.

As for how to abolish private property, everything has been done from union's running out the bosses and running the factories themselves, using governments to start land reform, gift economies, command economies, etc.

Some people seek to experience life without private property right now.  Squatters fix up abandoned buildings and live for free, some people start collectively ran enterprises.  For most people, though, such adventures are romantic but do not fix the problem for everyone.  The Bolsheviks pursued worker direct democracy (in units called Soviets) during and just after the Russian Revolution before pursuing state management and ownership.

And, of course, there is the issue of order.  As you can imagine, many radical leftists would love to see private property abolished and democratized all at once and as fast as possible.  Other ideas have been put forward, though, such as seizing only the major bulwarks of the economy, allowing consumer goods, artisan shops, and the like to exist in a market while the government controls the largest parts.  Many actual revolutions of the radical left begin with land reform along with a gradual increase in social services before collectivizing (sometimes forced, sometimes voluntarily) other sectors.

Property Is Not Your Comrade, We Are!

Property is theft! -- Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, What is Property?

"Abolish private property!" and the always popular (above mentioned) "Property is theft!" call against the rich controlling society and their employees as dictators.