MIA > Archive > Foster > Syndicalism
Syndicalism originated in France. From there it has spread all over the civilized world. That France, though comparatively a backward country economically, should be the birthplace of this ultra-modern movement is not surprising.[22] For various reasons, which lack of space forbids enumerating here, France has ever been in the vanguard of social progress — the other nations sluggishly following in its wake, profiting by its social experiences. During the past 125 years it has been the scene of numerous revolutions, often embracing the most fundamental changes in social relations. It has passed through so many of these radical social changes that it has been well termed “the home of revolutions.” As a result of these revolutions, the French working class, which played a prominent part in all of them, has had the most varied experiences of any working class in the world. It is only natural that its labor movement should have reached the highest stage of development. To briefly cite merely a few of these experiences will show how extensive they have been and how natural it is that Syndicalism has resulted from them.
The Great Revolution.— The French working class, 120 years ago, saw the infamous tyrannies and class distinctions of the ancient regime overthrown, and “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity” established by the great revolution. Later it saw these tyrannies and class distinctions reappear in new forms. It learned that through the revolution it had merely changed masters and that the high-sounding equalitarian phrases of the revolution were but mockeries.
Utopian Socialism.— After this great disappointment its militants conceived the idea of Socialism as the solution of their problem. At first they drew up beautiful utopias of co-operative societies, believing that the capitalists and the workers had but to learn of their advantages to accept them. They even went so far as to establish offices to which the capitalists could throng to give up their property to the new society. These utopias naturally failed.
State Socialism From Above.— In 1848, after a long propaganda of socialistic ideas, the first serious attempt was made to establish Socialism. As a result of a sudden eruption, Louis Philippe was driven from the throne, principally through the efforts of the workers, who found themselves practically in control of the situation. The workers demanded the establishment of Socialism and agreed to starve three months while the government was inaugurating it. They finally forced the reluctant and weak government to appoint a committee “to bring about the revolution.” Among other “rights” eventually granted them, the workers were given the “right” to work, and great national workshops were established in Paris at which thousands were given employment. The capitalists, daily growing stronger, decided to put an end to this state Socialism. They abolished the workshops, giving the unemployed the option of starving or joining the army. The workers revolted and for three days held a large portion of Paris. They finally listened to the appeal of a politician and surrendered, only to see thousands of their best slaughtered in the terrible June massacres.
Co-Operatives.— Doubly disillusioned by this disastrous experience with state Socialism “from above” and political treachery, the militant minority of the French working class turned for emancipation to the co-operative plan. They built up a great co-operative movement, but after years of experiment with it they very generally gave it up as unsuccessful.
The Commune.— Then came the great spontaneous working-class revolt of 1871; the establishment of the Commune; the vain attempts of the workers’ government to serve as the directing force in the new Socialist society; the quarrels between the various political factions; the fall of the Commune and the horrible massacres, imprisonings, exilings, etc., that “decapitated the French working class.”[23]
Working Class Political Action.— After this lesson of the futility of trying to establish Socialism by a violent seizure of the State, a return was made for a few years to the co-operative plan and the political policy of “reward your friends and punish your enemies.” These makeshift programs were soon succeeded by the idea of gradually and “legally” gaining control of the State by working-class political action. The organization of the Socialist Party in 1879 followed as a matter of course.
Syndicalism.— After a long, varied and bitter experience with working-class political action, the progressive French militants cast this much-heralded program aside — even as they had the other tried and found wanting plans of “Brotherhood of Man,” state Socialism “from above,” co-operation, violent seizure of the State, “reward your friends and punish your enemies” political action, etc. And, finally, after veritably running the gamut of social experience; after trying out practically every social panacea ever proposed, and after finding them one and all failures, they at last turned to the labor union as the hope of the working class. Labor unions had existed and been the mainstay of the working class ever since the great revolution, but their worth was long unrecognized by the militant workers who spent their time experimenting with more promising organizations. But as these glittering competitors of the labor unions all demonstrated their worthlessness, the value of the latter finally came to be recognized. The Syndicalist movement resulted. Syndicalism is thus a product of natural selection.
The last and perhaps most interesting phase in the evolution of French working-class fighting tactics to Syndicalism was the repudiation of political action. Many causes contributed to it. One of the first — in addition to the growing knowledge of the ineffectiveness of political action — was the splitting of the Socialist Party, shortly after its foundation, into several warring factions. These factions carried their feuds into the labor unions, to their decided detriment. Many unions were either destroyed outright or degenerated into political study clubs.
A reaction soon took place against this devitalization of the unions, and to the cry of “No politics in the unions” they were placed on a basis of neutrality toward political action. This neutrality soon developed into open hostility, when the designs of the politicians to subjugate the unions became unmistakably evident. The Anarchists — whose movement was stronger in France than in any other country in the world — perceived this anti-political tendency in the unions, and, considering them a fertile field for their propaganda, during the ’90s made their celebrated “raid” upon them. This event — which Sorel says is one of the most important in modern history — may be said to mark the birth of Syndicalist movement proper.[24]
The revolt against political action and the development of Syndicalism were given a great stimulus when the Socialists gained a considerable degree of political power in 1900 as a result of the Dreyfus affair. Then the fundamental antagonisms between the Syndicalist and Socialist movements became clear. The Socialist representatives, either in their own interests or that of their party, deliberately betrayed the interests of the working class. The three Socialist ministers — Millerand, with his “social peace” schemes; Viviani, with his “old age pensions for the dead,” and Briand, with his soldier scabs — drove thousands of workers out of the Socialist and into the Syndicalist movement and made the rupture between the two movements complete.
Since the advent of the Socialists to political power the course of the Syndicalist movement has been phenomenal. Getting control of the C. G. T. and most of its constituent organizations, the Syndicalists have made modern French labor history a long series of spectacular strikes, etc., such as the eight-hour-day movement of 1904-6, the postal strike of 1909, the railroad strike of 1910, etc., which have shaken French capitalism to its foundations. And the successes of the Syndicalist movement have not been confined to France. The movement has been transplanted into practically every capitalist country and is everywhere making great headway. This is especially true of England, where the recent series of great strikes, instigated by the Syndicalists, has startled the world.
The working classes in these countries that have imported Syndicalism have not had the extensive experience of the French working class, so they did not spontaneously generate Syndicalism as the latter did. By importing, ready made, the Syndicalist philosophy, tactics, ethics, etc., so laboriously developed in France, they are skipping several rungs in the evolutionary ladder and profiting by the century and a quarter of costly experiences of the French working class.
[22] The economic backwardness of France is often used as an argument against Syndicalism.
[23] Marx and Engels in a late preface to the Manifesto of the Communist Party remark of the Commune: “One thing especially was proved by the Commune, viz., ‘the working class cannot simply lay hold of the ready made State machinery, and wield it for its own purposes.’ ”
[24] Syndicalism was not recognized as a distinct movement until the C. G. T. convention at Amiens, in 1906. One delegate thus announced it: “There has been too much said here as though there were only Socialists and Anarchists present. It has been overlooked that there are, above all, Syndicalists here. Syndicalism is a new social theory.”
Last updated on 20 March 2023