Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What do you think about Anarcho-Syndicalism?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 10:42 PM
Original message
What do you think about Anarcho-Syndicalism?
That is - not any party - but the political philosophy?

That is, that government, if it is to exist, should be built from the Syndicates/Unions up?

http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/82420/82420,1213720274,3/stock-photo-red-and-black-flag-symbol-of-the-anarcho-syndicalist-and-anarcho-communist-movements-13871059.jpg
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MedleyMisty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. When I showed some friends my result on the political compass
Edited on Tue Nov-22-11 10:48 PM by MedleyMisty
one of them said I was an anarcho-syndicalist. So I suppose I approve of it? :)

I will actually have to go to research it.

By the way, that result on the political compass - bottom left corner. As in actually down at the corner. I'm more left and more libertarian than Gandhi. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. That's me - and that's Anarcho-Syndicalism
Do what thou wilt, and fuck bosses!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PETRUS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Wondered how you'd label yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Socialist
remember that now!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PETRUS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Excellent. More info for your "file."
I'm trying to be Mr. Wait Until the Last Minute before committing, but Socialism is very tempting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Let it Be
None of us are as strong as all of us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #10
20. You do know "file" is an anagram for "life"
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Pretty sure that's where I fit in, too...
Unless, of course, I'm merely an anarchist/socialist... ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PETRUS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 10:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. It's a distant second to PETRUS-ism.
Seriously, I think I need to read more to give a thoughtful answer. But any ideas for a bottom-up system that distributes power broadly and involves transparency and democratic decision making deserve a fair hearing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarLeftFist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
4. I was huge into it in college. It would make CEOs obsolete and at the bottom of the totem pole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Throd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 10:57 PM
Response to Original message
7. I think of Michael Palin
"Come see the violence inherent in the system"!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Or Eric Idle ----->
"Listen -- strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony." --Monty Python and the Holy Grail
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deutsey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 10:58 PM
Response to Original message
8. I'm for it!
More serious, politically, that is where I feel most comfortable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deutsey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
14. You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship...a self-perpetuating autocracy
:evilgrin:

Seriously, what I know about it, I like. I wonder how well it could work, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Well the first one (Bolshivek Revolution) ended in Stalinism...
I don't know if that was a mistake, or the way things go

I would be willing to try it again, in a much more managed sense...

The Bolshevik Rev set up a Syndicate (aka Soviet) rule...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deutsey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 06:08 AM
Response to Reply #16
22. I read an interesting book called the Long Detour or something like that
in which the author said socialism was making great inroads in the US before 1917 because, according to Marx, socialism was the next logical step in industrialized democratic countries.

However, with the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, socialism was successfully derailed in America because of its authoritarian nature (especially with the rise of Stalin). The author said because Russia was not a democracy and was far behind in terms of industrialism, real socialism was impossible there.

Still, the elites in this country used the bogeyman of the USSR to smear socialism and batter it down here in the US.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
provis99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
15. what's the difference between anarcho-syn and socialism?
I'd call myself a socialist, because I like the idea of business being run by employee owned co-ops rather than capitalists, and I like the idea of credit unions rather than banks. Among a host of other things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Depends on the Socialism...
If we're talking Stalinism, then big diff

If we're talking the aims of the Bolshevik Rev...totally Anarcho Syndicalist...

The Soviets were the Syndicates/Unions

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PETRUS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. So can you point me to a cheat sheet
What are the similarities/differences between Socialism and Anarcho-Syndicalism?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-22-11 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Honestly, I would suggest Wikipedia
They have a very good section on both Socialism, as well as Anarcho-Synidcalism

After that, let me suggest Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
themadstork Donating Member (797 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 12:14 AM
Response to Original message
21. I would love it
As I would love any system that could ensure direct democracy (as much as possible) and prevent the concentration of power/capital.

I've been meaning to make a larger research project of figuring out what system could best do this, but there's such an intimidatingly large stack of political philosophy out there to think through and my work has been bringing in mostly rejection letters, so for-fun projects must wait. : (
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 06:23 AM
Response to Original message
23. for those interested in the history - here is a great 1979 documentary about the IWW
Edited on Wed Nov-23-11 06:33 AM by Douglas Carpenter
Industrial Workers of the World - also known as the Wobblies - a major anarcho-syndicalist union and movement that at one time was a genuine viable major movement in America.

In answer to your question. I think Anarcho-syndicalism or a mixture of Anarcho-communism and Anarcho-syndicalism would be the best of all possible worlds. However, I don't think at this time it is a viable movement. If events changed so that it did become a viable movement - that would be the best of all possible futures for humanity.

Anywhere here is the link on google videos to this wonderful 1979 film - the Wobblies:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-582501436157763581#


.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarCenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 09:54 AM
Response to Original message
24. It has the same problem as capitalism -- over time monopolies form
Capitalism under a democratic government attempts to control the coalesence of economic power by either breaking up monopolies with anti-trust laws or by allowing natural monopolies to form and regulating them as utilities. Whether completely effective or not, there is an attempt to separate political and economic power, and to use political power as a check on economic power.

If you combine political and economic power in syndicates, there is nothing to stop the syndicates from coalescing and eventually falling under control of a state monopoly. You get Stalinism or Maoism as a natural end result.

So a relatively free society is most possible when there are a lot of different types of power centers in society and where they compete and form coalitions to reduce concentrations of power in any given organization of any given type.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-24-11 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Then break them up - a million non-violent revolutions is necesarry!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
socialist_n_TN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-24-11 07:35 PM
Response to Original message
26. As a Bolshevik-Leninist I like the idea of them
But until you weather the inevitable bourgeois counterattack, you have to be more centralized (read: vanguard party). Otherwise the capitalist powers overthrow the syndicates one at a time.

Sometimes it's a little difficult to reconcile my Marxism with my anarcho-syndicalist tendencies, but the above is why I'm a Marxist and not a anarcho-syndicalist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 24th 2024, 05:20 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC