AnCom/Sn opinions on National-Syndicalism?

What exactly is the issue that AnCom/Syn's have with National-Syndicalism?
Its basically the same economically as AnSyn except a state still exists
what actually differentiates NatSyn and AnSyn except for the fact a state exists and that a lot of NatSyn's are race spooked?

Other urls found in this thread:ñola_de_las_JONS

State, spooks, no desire for communism.


Anarcho Syndicalism is an oxymoron though


If I understand it correctly Syndicalism is a class society where the Proletarian working class is the ruling class.
How you can have a ruling class while simultaneously claiming to be an anarchy is beyond me.

wtf would this even mean? are you describing SOCIALISM?ñola_de_las_JONS

The proletariat will take control of political power so there is no master to abide to, it leads to classlessness.

They're fascists.
No, it's not.
Class collaborationism, nationalism, authoritarianism, etc.

You do realize the "syndicalism" of "national-syndicalism" has very little to do with the "syndicalism" of "anarcho-syndicalism", right? Fascists have always used "syndicalism" as a synonym of "corporatism".

Most National-Syndicalists are fascist in all but name. The Italian fascists called themsalves NatSyns, Not Socialist is a mistranslation of National Syndicalism, and the Spanish National Syndicalists betrayed the socialists and desired an orthodox Fascist, corporatist state.

National Syndicalism in its proper form is opposed due to the fact that its followers tend to be a little bit fucking nuts and take Georges Sorel's view on violence as a rejuvenating force way too literally. Sorel gets too bad a rap, but Sorelians in my experience tend to desire a highly violent, class collaborationist society, despite Sorel's writings. National Syndicalists usually pair this with totalitarianism.

In short, NatSyn is a specific, anti-libertarian form of state syndicalism, state syndicalists tend to lean more to DeLeon and take small aspects from Sorel, but National Syndicalists and Sorelians tend to take misunderstandings and the more spooked aspects of his philosophy and drive them to their logical extreme.
NatSyns tend to believe that class distinctions should be ignored, not abolished, occasionally even believe that class struggle should take a back seat to collaboration, and almost always believe in a "love it or die" totalitarian form of nationalism. Right wing monarchist groups like Action Française adopted National Syndicalism as a result of this, which should show immediately the difference between it and AnSyn

how though? surely there is a group of people that must behave subserviently to the proletariat working class.
how would a society where the workers are the masters automatically lead to classlessness?

Pure fascism

The National Syndicalists where syndicalists in the same way that the Nazis where NationaI Socialist, i.e. to fool the working classes to support them, as both syndicalism and socialism where really popular with the working classes of Europe at the time.
National Syndicalism ≠ State Syndicalism

If Falangists and national syndicalists actually care about class struggle, they would join the socialists instead of the fascists. It simply was never meant to be revolutionary.

who the fuck would form the new lower class when the proletariat has seized power, retard?

Remnants of the bourgeoisie?

without abolishing the bourgeois property form, it wouldn't, which is why a workers' state is a step towards communism, but not the step itself

doesn't democracy turn the majority of a given vote into the ruling class?

How do you figure

the ruling class are those with the claim to create and physically impose laws, which is what the majority or plurality does in democracy

Do you know what proletarian and bourgeois mean? The moment the bourgeoisie lose their property they become proletarians.

choosing the ruling class=/=democracy

It's not DeLeonism, therefore it's shit syndicalism. That being said it is the true 3rd Position tbh. Nazbol and Assism just reeks of nazi shit. At least natsyn tries to distance itself from that and comes from a different historical precedence. I can see natsyn becoming the new right as more Holla Forumstards become disillusioned and normies/centrists/liberals get turned off from all the racist Nazi shit. It has all the reactionary rhetoric with some materialist stuff sprinkled in, it could honestly pose a serious threat to the left if it caught on. There's a few natsyn websites out there but they're hardly active.

Falangists supported private property

Fuck off fash, kill all porky collaborationists.

Many Falangists today reject the alliance with the Carlists and see Franco's takeover of the Falange as the movement's mutation into a cultural restoration typical of the Right.

What people must understand about Fascism / true turd position is that historically, Fascism was born from context-driven pragmatism and the theory about National Syndicalism and "bridging between the Right and Left" came later, and none of the philosophers ever had their ideas put into practice, Hitler cucked to capitalists and industrialists and Franco said that the Falange "was entirely compatible with Capitalism". At least Corporatism got a chance in Italy and Portugal.

t. "REAL Fascism has never been tried"

Corporatism is capitalism.

eh, yeah, you're correct in that it exists within the capitalist mode of production, but it still serves the interests of the state and its citizens (in theory) more than it serves individual capitalists and their corporations.

Jose did nothing wrong
National-Syndiaclists did nothing wrong
Falange Española de las JONS did nothing wrong

There's also this

Not all Carlists are bad though



Nationalism is tribalism and feeding those impulses always invites racial/ethnic bigotry. Nationalism is not just "having a state". It's prioritizing the state.

Not Syndicalism is fascism rather than syndicalism within a state. If you're interested in the latter, read about syndicalist Marxism such as De Leonism.

fuck off nazi

Ancoms and syndicalists in general have issue with national-syndicalism in general because it was syndicalist in name only. It has much more in common with fascism, so much so that there isn't much distinction to be made, both are class-collaborationist and integral nationalist. The fact that the falangist party in Spain was founded by an aristocrat, sided with the coup in Spain, and argued that national-syndicalism was compatible with capitalism should show why it isn't well received by ancoms and the like.

National Syndicalism has nothing to do with syndicalism, it's just regular proto-fascism. The name was a PR move.

not even horizontal unions are, national syndicalism is nothing but nazi quackery to attract ignorant workers