Anarcho-syndicalism

I know they are similar terms at the very least, but are I dont actually understand if they are supposed to be synonyms

Excluding false fascist syndicalism like national syndicalism, is syndicalism supposed to always be anarchist, or is there non-anarchist syndicalism?

Salutations! I am what you would probably call a reactionary, but I seek to understand Anarchist ideologies better, specifically Anarcho-Syndicalism right now. Since my research is biased by my own views, I thought it best to ask the adherents themselves. From what I understand, it describes a system where the state is abolished, the means of production are controlled by the working class, and resources are allocated by a system of horizontally organised trade unions. I ask you then, what is Anarcho-Syndicalism according to you?

I ask this because there are disagreements within the anarchist community on how the shift of power should happen: I.e., gradually or rapidly (Revolution).

In regards to unionism, correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't unionism foster the same reformism as social democracy?

We can say they are "revolutionary unions" as much as we want but when workers win small victories against capital doesn't that foster a belief in the system?

A "they are not so bad" mentality.

Much like when a leftist politician does one good thing?

Shouldn't we instead just forget about strikes (unless they are general strikes for system change) and focus on spreading the truth as much as possible?

Hey everyone, so i am more of a market anarchist, but i am trying to understand more about Anarcho-communism, what do you guys think that is the steps to communism? Do you guys think that these 2 branches of anarchism are the main steps to ancom? The labor vouchers and all the trade unions as a transitional stage and a way to achieve an established commune?

Or there are other types of steps that are praxis specifically to communism? Also does different syndicates trading with each other are inherently markets or there are other ways that unions can work together beyond markets or planning together?

Thanks everyone

To clarify some definitions. By I mean that neighbourhoods and workplaces would be run as direct democracies through popular assemblies in the absence of a state. And by Environmentalism I mean the desire to create 'harmony' between the natural world and human constructed environments (like cities and farmland).

If you had community groups that would be aware of proposals to construct environmentally damaging projects nearby (since people who live in a community tend to know more about what's being built and done around them) you could either block its proposal (since they control the surrounding land) or carry out direct actions against it (as seen in or in ). If workers controlled industry, communities could contact unions and ask for help (as happened in Australia across the 1970s with the '', saving numerous areas of the natural environment from destruction) not to mention that workers' control could bring with it its own wave of sustainability, see the and as examples.

You could argue that direct democracy isn’t a guaranteed method to stop environmental destruction, as a majority of the community might want to destroy the environment. But if everyone in a community wants to destroy the land they live on, how would literally any other system stop this? Any government agency regulating the area would just be bought off by corporations (as they are now) or wouldn't risk the political losses of making such an unpopular move.

Or maybe an anarchist community would pollute in a way that punishes other communities (like dumping pollutants into a river that flows into a lake that supplies another community, but then that other community would just negotiate through the confederation with them to stop or if things got too bad, could just carry out direct actions and sabotage to stop it. It might sound bad, but it’s worst case scenario resembles the best examples of environmental action under the current system, and at it’s best it creates a sustainable civilisation.

So, environmentalists (who aren't anarchists or socialists), what do you think of this approach? What are some criticisms you have of it? What other systems could do the job better?

Also, if you're not an environmentalists and are just here to attack anarcho-syndicalism I'm not going to respond because you've missed the point of the post.

I recently learned that Valve is more or less an anarchist style business and people within the company even openly supported anarcho-syndicalism. I am attracted to the idea of the workers controlling the business and people getting paid what they deserve rather than through a fixed wage.

But, it seems to me like communists are the ones who use the words "anarcho-syndicalism". Can someone who is in favor of private property rights support anarcho-syndicalism? What about someone who is not in favor of private property rights but is in favor of the free market (something along the lines of mutualism)? Can they support anarcho-syndicalism or is it a strictly communist ideology?

I'm not a socialist, but if I were, I would abide for anarcho-syndicalism. The little I heard about it is that it's an anarchist society where workers and sindicates rule, not the government. That seems great to my eyes, because every attempt of socialism ended up being authoritarian regimes. With no government this would not happen.

My question: is my definition wrong? Can it be possible to achieve socialist goals through anarcho-syndicalism? Can it be done?

I was in a small debate about whether or not someone can be a wobbly without paying dues to the international, or a chartered local.

My belief is that you don't have to pay dues to be a wobbly. At all.

Anarcho roughly means the absence of enforced hierarchy. The International does not stand one centimeter above any rank and file member. It simply doesn't have the power to revoke memberships, or charters, or grant them, outside of the voluntary acceptance of the participants. That's the revolutionary concept.

That's exactly how anarcho-syndicalism is meant to function. Participation is 100% voluntary. Dues? Voluntary. Should you decide that paying dues does not benefit you enough to do so, then you stop. You don't stop being a Wob, you simply don't believe your dues money is beneficial enough to you as an individual or group, and that's it. You don't have to pay, but you don't somehow get kicked out of the OBU. That's ludicrous.

If someone comes up to you and says "I'm a Wobbly!", well they're a Wobbly, card or not.

A lot of us might consider taking some time to really consider how much impact living in a capitalist society, steeped in capitalist propaganda might impact the way we look at the world.

Hello everyone. I don't know much about anarcho-syndicalism and was wondering if anyone had resources they would recommend? Any help is greatly appreciated.

Just triggering the libs, lol