ism and other pluralistic movements, even though at many points they are not in complete agreement. The core of the philosophy of the syndicalists seems to be an insistence upon the desirability of continuous, voluntary action in all spheres of human endeavor. The necessity of motion and the idea of ceaseless change or flux goes back as far as Heracleitus and has persisted in one form or another ever since. With this conception as a bond of union, the syndicalist philosophers have been able to concoct in the crucible of French labor conditions' an ingenious mixture of the ideas of Bergson, Nietzsche, Kropotkin, and Karl Marx. The result has been that the demand for freedom, both in the means and the end of human activity, has been characteristic of all syndicalistic writers, whether Sorel writing on ethics,3 Berth writing on economics, or Louis writing on politics." Speculation regarding the nature of the ultimate good is carefully avoided by all the writers in this movement, although occasionally some reference to the necessity of individual development shows the difficulty of ignoring this fundamental question. In general, the pragmatic test for goodness is accepted 1 The influence of French conditions and temperament has been thus described: "The leading British Trade Unions were too reflective, too cautious, too anxious for self improvement and economic inquiry to stake their fortunes on a single throw of the dice. The French workman, on the contrary, is far less deeply read in economics than are the elite of the British labour leaders. He is inspired by the leaders of the Revolution rather than by the pundits of Socialism. In some cases he will run before he leaps. He is full of grand projects of internationalism and anti-mili. tary propaganda rather than with nationalization of industries, or with the munici palization of gas and water."-J. II. Harley, Syndicalism (London, 1912), p. 30. *The debt of syndicalism to Marx and Bergson is frankly admitted by the foremost writer in the group, Georges Sorel, in L'Avenir socialiste des syndicats (Paris, 1908). The influence of Kropotkin and Nietzsche is not generally admitted by the syndicalists, but it is none the less a very important element in the composition of their system.-Robert Hunter, Violence and the Labor Movement (New York, 1919), pp. 185, 229-230; Louis Levine, The Labor Movement in France (New York, 1912), p. 146; Georges Guy Grand, La Philosophie syndicaliste (Paris, 1911), pp. 71–75. 'Georges Sorel, Reflections on Violence (Trans. by T. E. Hulme, New York, 1912). Edmund Berth, Les nouveaux aspects du socialisme (Paris, 1908). 6 Sorel, Reflections on Violence, p. 65. -1 and the attempts of philosophers to generalize regarding its nature are discountenanced. On the other hand, there is abundant discussion of the means by which ethical development may be obtained, voluntary individual action being considered the most satisfactory. Since progress can come only as the result of self-help, reason the syndicalists, all improvement of the working class must result from a spontaneous movement within the working class itself. Proletarian violence is therefore the most important means by which the workers can improve themselves, because it not only strikes fear to the hearts of the enemies of labor, and not only serves to solidify the workers, but it is also something the workers themselves can effectively use. The chief implement of this violence is the general strike, which is considered as having the moral value of developing both enthusiasm and individual initiative,3 Furthermore, the syndicalists say, it makes but little difference if the conception of the general strike is only a "myth," for it will serve its purpose of uniting and solidifying the workers by the ideal which it presents regardless of whether it ever actually occurs. The anti-Socratic nature of this philosophy thus becomes apparent. Because knowledge is always a false ethical guide, it is much better to put reliance on intuition, sentiment, enthusiasm, passion, or even religious fervor, than on human wisdom. Likewise, inasmuch as enthusiasm can be more easily created for a general ideal than for a detailed plan of social reconstruction, there is an almost universal tendency to criticize the present political and economic system in a destructive manner, with but little or no attempt to construct a superior social organization. 1 Sorel, Reflections on Violence, pp. 240–251. * Ibid., p. 151. 3 Ibid., p. 143. The doctrine of the “myth " as a means of moral improvement is elaborated by Sorel.-Ibid., pp. 129-139. See also A. D. Lewis, Syndicalism and the General Strike (Boston, 1912). In this regard it is noteworthy that the syndicalist system calls for a complete reorganization of education along entirely practical and technical lines to the exclusion of the theoretical and classical studies-Émile Patuad and Émile Pouget, Synsicalism and the Cooperative Commonwealth (trans. by Charlotte and Frederick Charles, Oxford, 1913), pp. 179-184. Economic Theory of the State The state originated, say the syndicalists, solely as the result of economic factors. When one group became economically stronger than another group, it organized a government to protect its economic interests. Thus when economic life evolved, the governmental machinery had to change to meet the new conditions, and when economic power shifts from one group in the state to another, political power of necessity shifts with it.' The state is looked upon, then, as not only having its origin in economic oppression, but as also being perpetuated in order that the capitalist system may be buttressed by the machinery of government. The primary functions of the state are therefore summarized as the protection of property and the preservation of either aristocratic or economic class distinctions. The conduct of both foreign relations and war is aimed at the protection of the economic interests of the state. Consequently the syndicalists refuse to support the army and navy and have even gone so far as to threaten a general strike in case war is declared. If that will not prevent hostilities, a general mutiny has been prophesied. This portion of their doctrine was held in abeyance during the World War, partly because the reformist wing of the Confédération Générale du Travail had gained control of the movement, and partly because of the nature of the war's causes and the way in which it came about.3 Since the signing of the Treaty of Versailles there have been evi 1 Sorel, Reflections on Violence, p. 200. * Victor Griffuelhes, L'Action syndicaliste (Paris, 1908). The reason that war is opposed, however, is not because it is essentially wrong, but rather because it is a means of strengthening the government and increasing the power of the middle class. -Sorel, Reflections on Violence, pp. 52-60. Several observers have noted the fact that the conservative wing of the movement was gradually gaining control. Ernest Dimnet, "Syndicalism and its Philosophy", Atlantic Monthly, Jan., 1913; E. C. Fairchild, "Syndicalism", English Review, Oct., 1919. During the war the General Secretary of the C. G. T. served on the government committee of relief, and after the armistice he represented French labor officially at the Peace Conference at Paris. Raymond Leslie Buell, Contemporary French Politics (New York, 1920), pp. 239-240. One of the demands of the syndicalists was that boundaries be determined on an economic, rather than a racial or political, basis. Paul Louis, in "Une Europe Nouvelle ", L'Europe Nouvelle (Paris, 1915). dences, however, that the radical element is again recovering its position. Consequently the peace program of syndicalism may be pushed to the front. But the syndicalists are not only opposed to war; they also protest against standing armies and navies, which they look upon as causing war directly by fostering a narrow patriotism and indirectly by aiding in the imperialistic designs of the capitalistic régime. Moreover, the army is especially to be opposed because the soldiers are often called in as strike breakers, and in this way the capitalist government is enabled to prevent the workers attaining better working conditions.3 Universal military training is likewise opposed because the government may call the workers to the colors in case of a threatened general strike, thus putting them under military discipline and making much harder the organization of an effective strike. The work of the government within the country also demonstrates to the syndicalist its essentially economic function. It is pointed out that economic classes have been fostered and their wealth and privilege protected by the state. Since government is organized to preserve economic inequality, it can do only those things which tend toward that end. The reason why so little social legislation has proved really effective is that a bourgeois state is inherently incapable of protecting any but its own interests. If the reforms seem to be of real benefit to the working class, it is only because they are sops thrown to the proletariat to prevent it from asking more. Even these re 1 Among the causes for the swing toward the left since the war was the prevention by the government of the May Day parade of 1919, and the judicial action taken by M. Millerand to dissolve the C. G. T. Sidney Huddleston, "French Politics Today", New Europe, Aug. 5, 1920. That the control of the movement has actually passed into radical hands is evidenced by the fact that M. Jouhaux, its General Secretary, has been forced to resign his governmental position and that certain radicals who favor the general strike, e. g., MM. Sirolle and Monnousseau, have come into power. Buell, Contemporary French Politics, pp. 239–257. Paul Louis, Syndicalisme contre l'État, pp. 93-101. They point to the fact that both French and German armies guarded the steel works at Longwy during the strike in 1905. Harley, op. cit., p. 39. Patuad and Pouget, op. cit., pp. 50-54. Louis, Syndicalisme contre l'État, pp. 58-73. forms, it is pointed out, are frequently rendered practically useless by the difficulties of administration. The number of civil servants, already very large in France, would have to be increased if any considerable scheme of social amelioration were to be undertaken.' It is urged, furthermore, that much legislation, e. g., that regarding factory conditions, can best be enforced by the workers, because they are in the best position to know the conditions. It is evident that laws of this nature will not be enforced by the workers unless they demand them, and the best evidence of such a demand is a struggle on the part of those affected to obtain them. The attempts to replace this violence by parliamentarism, maintains Sorel, have resulted in a degeneration of the middle class,3 and the paternalistic attempts at social legislation in recent years, except in so far as they have been forced upon the government by the workers themselves, will prove both ineffective and enervating to the proletariat. By a similar method of reasoning it is contended that even the courts and machinery of justice are purposed and maintained largely to secure the capitalist in his exploitation, and the slight benefit which may rebound to the workers from them is only incidental. The function of the present political organization, in all of its activities, is regarded, therefore, as 1 Louis, Syndicalisme contre l'État, pp. 78-83. 'Sorel, L'Avenir socialiste des syndicats, p. 50. Sorel, Reflections on Violence, pp. 82-87. Laws which are passed as the result of insistent demand on the part of the workers voiced "directly " in May Day demonstrations etc., are of course merely the codification of the will of the proletariat and hence an exception to the rule.-Sorel, L'Avenir socialiste des syndicats, p. 60. "Direct action" as a means of securing indirectly what is usually done directly by means of the ballot seems to be on the ascendant.-Raymond Leslie Buell, "Political and Social Reconstruction in France", American Political Science Review, Feb., 1921. Twenty-seven groups of topics for consideration at the Congress of Lyons, 1919, were submitted by the national headquarters of the C. G. T. with the request that the syndicates choose four. The groups included "pensions, accident compensation, and foreign labor." The topics chosen show clearly the interest the movement has in legislation in spite of its philosophy. James W. Sullivan, "Varying Forms of Labor Organization, Methods and Purposes in the United States, Great Britain and France". The Labor Situation in Great Britain ana France (Report of the Committee on Foreign Inquiry of the National Civic Federation, New York, 1919), pp. 222-225. 5 Sorel, Reflections on Violence, pp. 111-112. |