How would State Syndicalism work in practice?

Could it transcend production for exchange?

Other urls found in this thread:

deleonism.org/industrial-government.htm
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

It would work like this
deleonism.org/industrial-government.htm

Syndicates would eventually end up being just as dysfunctional and bureaucratic as a vanguard.
You have to ditch the idea of a party or group which spreads class consciousness because it isn't what you think it is. When people revolt it is spontaneously caused by the existing material conditions and contradictions of capital. It is not the result of someone preaching their bullshit to the proletariat like a religion, that's fascist demagoguery not socialism.

It wouldn't.

In the chaos that follows from Revolution, authoritarianism can very easily take root in the resulting power vacuum. That's exactly what happened with Lenin and the rest.

to be fair it is literally impossible to transcend production for exchange

Nazbol nigger I know its you

I think this is an oversimplification. It's not as if people stop being ideological when revolution breaks out.

If anything people become MORE ideological, if there's any lesson to take from the Syrian civil war it's that moderates don't last in war.

Yes I'm a dumb babby, but in this scenario, how would any given region get commodities it can't grow/make?

This. essentially a planned economy with elected managers who calculate how much of x is needed and can be recalled by workers, although that's just a very basic description for DeLeonism, other strands of syndicalism may differ. Also only if a syndicalist state was an autarky would it not need to produce for exchange. One could also argue that because full communism hasn't been achieved nor superabundance the syndicalist state would still need labour vouchers or money if this is what is meant by "production for exchange".

It's sounds more democratic than marxism leninism but probably gonna fall into the same shit again

Please elaborate

wtf im a DeLeonist now

Socialism…is not human nature, it will come about by people who know what it is. You can't expect revolution to happen and people just accidentally into a communism because the dialectic told them so.

Daily reminder that State syndicalism was the norm until after 1917, anarcho syndicalism was literally a meme created by bolsevicks to discredit syndicalists. Until the alliance of convenience between the CNT and FAI.

Catalonia was still a state, so that was probably the closest anyone's ever gotten to state syndicalism. It's a shame the Republican Popular Front was a cluster fuck even by the left's woeful standards


The real reason you shouldn't be a syndicalist is that trade unions have proven to be reformist at best, collaborationists at worse. Even shit like the IWW is now reformist idpol nonsense.

Not that much of that doesn't also apply to vanguards, lmao at larpers thinking their specific strain of leftism is going to lead the revolt.

Human nature's not real, material conditions are. Right now, in the developed world, the conditions simply aren't right for a revolution. But the systemic decay is certainly pushing us in that direction once again.

By all means organize and agitate, just don't expect the proles to join your specific tendency or group. Nobody can control a popular revolt, it comes down to material conditions.

I'm tired of all these anarkiddies and tankies with their special snowflake meme ideologies that think if only the proles could see the light of their tendency the Revolution would automatically happen and succeed, real life has never worked that way, read Rosa.

Two words: Circle Proudhon.

He's talking about the institutions of government and the economy post-Revolution.

So.. what happens when that doesn't have a strong socialist presence like in Egypt and the rest of the Arab spring? It turns to shit. Thats what happens

A specific strain eventually will. It won't be what has come before, because conditions are new, but it will be similar or have elements of past strains. Our goal should be organising around these new material conditions and developing that strain from there.

I GUESS IT WASN'T REAL SOCIALISM

The point is not to control the popular revolt but 1. shape the political consciousness for when it happens 2. Have an capable and prepared organization for when it happens. 3. Seize the opportunity establish/organize the new political power in the vacuum as a result of the revolt. 4. Defend the revolution. Organization and agitation helps for at least point 1 and 2.

Help me Holla Forums im turning into a syndicalist, give me some arguments why its no good

...

decentralized productive forces like syndicates necessarily operate under the law of value

Also, since we're only using historical examples, what happens when there IS a strong socialist presence? Does that not also always go to shit?

I hate leftcoms with all my heart. Material conditions influence ideas which influence what people do. Pure 100% materialism is retarted. It’s like saying the holocaust never happened because it wasn’t in the Nazi’s material interest.

Is also like to throw in that almost all spontaneous revolutions in recent history have turned out to be basically collectivist/syndicalists. All through Latin America auto defense squads are setting up co-op farms such as in Honduras in the aguan valley and Mexico in several places as examples