Collectivist or Marxian Socialism would have us believe that it is distinctly a LABOR Movement; but it is not so.Neither is Anarchism.The one is substantially bourgeois; the other aristocratic, plus an abundant output of book-learning, in either case.Syndicalism, on the contrary, isindubitably laborist in origin and aim, owing next to nothing to the``Classes,'' and, indeed,, resolute to uproot them.The Times (Oct.13, 1910), which almost single-handed in the British Press has kept creditably abreast of Continental Syndicalism, thus clearly set forth the significance of the General Strike:
``To understand what it means, we must remember that there is in France a powerful Labor Organization which has for its open and avowed object a Revolution, in which not only the present order of Society, but the State itself, is to be swept away.This movement is called Syndicalism.It is not Socialism, but, on the contrary, radically opposed to Socialism, because the Syndicalists hold that the State is the great enemy and that the Socialists' ideal of State or Collectivist Ownership would make the lot of the Workers much worse than it is now under private employers.The means by which they hope to attain their end is the General Strike, an idea which was invented by a French workman about twenty years ago,[27] and was adopted by the French Labor Congress in 1894, after a furious battle with the Socialists, in which the latter were worsted.Since then the General Strike has been the avowed policy of the Syndicalists, whose organization is the Confederation Generale du Travail.''
[27] In fact the General Strike was invented by a Londoner William Benbow, an Owenite, in 1831.
Or, to put it otherwise, the intelligent French worker has awakened, as he believes, to the fact that Society (Societas) and the State (Civitas) connote two separable spheres of human activity, between which there is no connection, necessary or desirable.Without the one, man, being a gregarious animal, cannot subsist: while without the other he would simply be in clover.The ``statesman'' whom office does not render positively nefarious is at best an expensive superfluity.
Syndicalists have had many violent encounters with the forces of government.In 1907 and 1908, protesting against bloodshed which had occurred in the suppression of strikes, the Committee of the C.G.T.issued manifestoes speaking of the Government as ``a Government of assassins'' and alluding to the Prime Minister as ``Clemenceau the murderer.'' Similar events in the strike at Villeneuve St.Georges in 1908 led to the arrest of allthe leading members of the Committee.In the railway strike of October, 1910, Monsieur Briand arrested the Strike Committee, mobilized the railway men and sent soldiers to replace strikers.As a result of these vigorous measures the strike was completely defeated, and after this the chief energy of the C.G.T.was directed against militari** and nationalism.
The attitude of Anarchism to the Syndicalist movement is sympathetic, with the reservation that such methods as the General Strike are not to be regarded as substitutes for the violent revolution which most Anarchists consider necessary.Their attitude in this matter was defined at the International Anarchist Congress held in Amsterdam in August, 1907.This Congress recommended ``comrades of all countries to actively participate in autonomous movements of the working class, and to develop in Syndicalist organizations the ideas of revolt, individual initiative and solidarity, which are the essence of Anarchism.'' Comrades were to``propagate and support only those forms and manifestations of direct action which carry, in themselves, a revolutionary character and lead to the transformation of society.'' It was resolved that ``the Anarchists think that the destruction of the capitalist and authoritary society can only be realized by armed insurrection and violent expropriation, and that the use of the more or less General Strike and the Syndicalist movement must not make us forget the more direct means of struggle against the military force of government.''
Syndicalists might retort that when the movement is strong enough to win by armed insurrection it will be abundantly strong enough to win by the General Strike.In Labor movements generally, success through violence can hardly be expected except in circumstances where success without violence is attainable.This argument alone, even if there were no other, would be a very powerful reason against the methods advocated by the Anarchist Congress.
Syndicalism stands for what is known as industrial unionism as opposed to craft unionism.In this respect, as also in the preference of industrial to political methods, it is part of a movement which has spread far beyond France.The distinction between industrial and craft unionismis much dwelt on by Mr.Cole.Craft unionism ``unites in a single association those workers who are engaged on a single industrial process, or on processes so nearly akin that any one can do another's work.'' But``organization may follow the lines, not of the work done, but of the actual structure of industry.All workers working at producing a particular kind of commodity may be organized in a single Union....The basis of organization would be neither the craft to which a man belonged nor the employer under whom he worked, but the service on which he was engaged.This is Industrial Unionism properly so called.[28]
[28] ``World of Labour,'' pp.212, 213.
