Raw class struggle

"Syndicalism" is a small book mostly forgotten today, but it was extremely notorious during the 1910's. Attributed to Earl C Ford and William Z Foster, it was actually written by the latter. The book functioned as an introduction to the ideology of the Syndicalist League of North America (SNLA), a relatively small group founded by Foster, Ford and others. Foster later became a Communist, died in Moscow in 1961 and received a state funeral attended by Soviet leader Khrushchev. According to newspaper accounts at the time, Foster's ashes were interred in the Kremlin Wall, but are we to believe James R Barrett's new introduction to this edition of "Syndicalism", Foster lays buried in Chicago! On several other points, too, Barrett's introduction strays from what I've read in other sources, so diligent research is recommended for those who really are interested. Originally published in 1912, this modern reprint edition of "Syndicalism" was published in 1990 by Charles H. Kerr Publishing Company. Curiously, it has a Communist drawing on its front cover. Or not so curiously, since Charles H. Kerr Publishing was associated with the Proletarian Party for an extended period (a competitor to the official Communist Party).

"Syndicalism" was written during a period of intensive labour unrest in the United States, or hard class struggle if we quit the euphemisms. The two main socialist organizations were the Socialist Party and the militant dual union IWW. Foster rejected both in favour of his own version of French revolutionary syndicalism. On one point, Foster's line was seemingly less militant than that of the IWW. Foster opposed dual unions, and called on revolutionary syndicalists to transform the existing unions through "boring from within". On all other issues, Foster was just as militant as the IWW, perhaps more so - on many issues, he sounds proto-Communist, which perhaps eased his later transition to Communism and doctrinaire Stalinism.

Foster's rhetoric is uncompromising. Might is right, scabs are vermin to be ruthlessly exterminated, the ends justifies the means, violence is necessary. The gloves are clearly off, as the author rejects political (parliamentary) action in favour of the general strike, sabotage, obstruction and anti-militarism. He is in favour of organizing a "militant minority" within each union, since among all human groups some are natural leaders and others a more inert mass that simply follows the leadership of others. The future syndicalist society is undemocratic, with superintendents and foremen selected on the basis of fitness for the function, not on the basis of suffrage. (Each industry is semi-autonomous, hence the emphasis on foremen, rather than on classical politicians.)

Majority rule is "unscientific" and based on the temporary whims of the electorate, rather than on "facts and figures". "Syndicalism and democracy based on suffrage do not mix". Foster is also explicitly Neo-Malthusian (Foster's term), preaching "race suicide" (Foster's quotation marks) with workers voluntarily abstaining from having more children, thereby lowering the population. However, the rationale doesn't seem to be any real interest in the population question, rather Foster believes that Neo-Malthusianism will hurt the military. He also regards children as an unnecessary hindrance in the revolutionary struggle.

The similarity between Foster's revolutionary syndicalism and Communism are striking. However, the ideas about militant minorities, direct action, representation by industry and anti-democracy can also be squared with very different political philosophies. One wonders about Mussolini's leftist background, or Georges Sorel's curious political turns...

Foster's book seems to have suffered a pretty strange fate. The SLNA dissolved itself after only a few years, with Foster becoming more moderate, becoming a paid union organizer for the AFL-CIO. During the steel strike of 1919-20, Foster was summoned to appear before a Senate Committee, in front of which he disavowed his revolutionary past in general and "Syndicalism" in particular. One of the senators grilling him even read aloud from the book during the hearing. Meanwhile, the steel companies published and distributed thousands of reprints of "Syndicalism" in order to discredit Foster in the eyes of the AFL-CIO officialdom! In a curious twist, AFL-CIO moderate Samuel Gompers actually endorsed Foster in front of the Senate Committee, vouching for his moderate credentials. It's not clear to me whether Foster really did break with his past, or whether he was simply dissimulating. It's a fact that he joined the Communist Party only about a year later.

To the best of my knowledge, no libertarian socialist group has seen fit to reprint "Syndicalism" since these tumultuous events, and (of course) the Communists couldn't do it either. Charles H. Kerr should therefore be thanked for saving this little gem for posterity.