Why did centralized planning take hold instead of syndicalism or something like it?

Why did centralized planning take hold instead of syndicalism or something like it?

Whats wrong with unionism that its not the obvious choice of model for a socialist government/economic model? Trade unions have secured the power of workers to assert their needs more succesfully and consistently than any other organizations in history. Right now labor unions are for the most part aligned with the bourgeosie. But the bourgeosie, their trade companies and burghers, were aligned with the monarchy until their own revolution. Speaking for the US at least, unions being the lapdogs of the bourgeois government is thanks to them having no leverage due to outsourcing jobs and importing desperate immigrants to work for less. A movement of unionism opposed to outsourcing, immigration, and government subsidized industry (if american subsidies didnt undercut foreign industries there would be far less economic refugees desperate to be exploited for scraps), at the same time that China is developing and sending industry back to the US anyway, there seems to be real potential there for a resurgence in unions.

Other urls found in this thread:


literally opportunism

Sounds like a great Socialist w/e.


I know value and the commodity wasnt abolished but Marxism-Leninism hasnt abolished it either, and even the many legitemate advances made by ML states have been done on behalf of workers and not through their own agency. Im referring to strike breaking and dissolution of soviet power and the like not liberal memes about big mean Bolsheviks.

Im not advocating anarchism either, I think there would have to be a governing body but its base of power would be syndicates democratically controlled by laborers instead of a parliamentary popularity contest.

Theres definitely a potential for inefficiency but provided syndicates are genuinely sovereign and permitted to bargain their terms at their own discretion, I imagine things such as more than enough food, electricity and healthcare at the very least would be in everyones common interest.

This is the most retarded shit I have ever seen. Any preconception of syndicalism being bad has been absolutely blown out of the fucking water by these images. If we were to view my disdain for syndicalism as a lake, you have singlehandedly revealed to me the true depths of my disgust, it was in fact an ocean.
Sage IS downboat on this cursed day.

Not even mad about the response maybe I am being a retard sure, please explain why and how even as briefly as you like tho I would appreciate something more substantial than "markets arent abolished so its counter-revolutionary" because we can play the accusations of counter revolutionary shit all day

The first revolution of the 20th century took place where there weren't any powerful unions and by the 40's unions had largely become non-revolutionary.

Because syndicalism was less an ideology than a means of collapsing the capitalist state via massive trade union action. Most early syndicalists were also Marxists, and later anarchists, seeking to utilize the increasingly radical unions. There is a reason why syndicalist theory is massively bare, and that is because it was more a means for achieving a revolution than a fleshed out ideology. Compare the ideology of DeLeon to Rocker to the writings of CNT-FAI members to Sorel and you'll see what I mean.

When most people mention syndicalism, they are thinking of DeLeon's model, which is one of the more fleshed out types, but is still entirely rooted in Marx. Syndicalist tactics and praxis failed in most of the world, whereas Lenin's system and what was based off of it managed to survive and spread.

Most modern syndicalists tend to completely forget its existence as a tactic and fill the blanks with their own, usually retarded ideology. I find that mostly syndicalists seem to think that if commodity production and exchange are given to democratic organizations welded together in a corporatist fashion, capitalism will suddenly end, completely forgetting that capitalism is more than just a method of management.

Tell me If I'm wrong in anyway (probably will be really wrong).

I see it since most Syndicalists (i know) just want workers owning the means of production then to basically leave it at that, still causing workers to be at each-others throats due to the left over remnants of capitalism and a "free market" since some factories make more goods and sell more. Meaning you have just transferred power from porkies and individuals to certain industries controlling society creating another class of rulers. Except if the new elected government formed from the basis of unions plan on redistributing wealth from more successful factories or totally destroying the market as we know and turning it into a "from each according to his ability to each according to his need " sort of thing

woops don't mind the ol mustache there, just posted some ussr destroying nazi Germans so that was appropriate

Modern syndicalists do, historical syndicalists do not. The CNT-FAI's remaining capitalism was from having to fight on several fronts, not because they ideologically wanted to keep markets and exchange. Anarcho syndicalists back then generally were either Marxists or AnComs. DeLeon is a great example of the prior, and you should definitely read him.

syndicalists, not anarcho syndicalists*

Just from the first paragraph of Wikipedia it sounds like exactly what I wanted, I like unions and the way they manage things and how they have done great work for the workers but I want it to transform into Communism eventually rather then simply have worker ownership in a capitalist sort of society. Thanks user I was thinking of something like this the other day.

And would you know if the IWW were de leonists or had large parts of them? Since I do like the Wobblies

DeLeon was technically one of the founding members of the IWW, and he splintered off due to ideological disagreements. The IWW banned explicit party involvement at one point, causing DeLeon's followers to split off themselves and form Worker's International Industrial Union.

Were the IWW mostly Marxist syndicalists like de leon and the reason for the split was political action or were they syndicalists comparable to my original post?

Or were they such a varied group it's silly to try call them one ideology Which I suspect is going to be the case. That is what will decide whenever if I like the IWW or love them.

From what I can see, they were extremely varied and had no clear ideology beyond socialism with libertarian or outright anarchist leanings. Given that certain members spoke out against wage labour entirely, I think it's safe to say that abolition of exchange may have been on the agenda, but I don't know enough about them to say for sure.

Thank you this is exactly what I wanted to know

Will definitely read DeLeon

Because there's no other way to manage production without private property.

The soviet system was supposed to be syndicalism+, but bolsheviks happened and that's how centralized planning began

tankie gets oddly revealing last 4 digits?!?!?!?!


Because the places socialists were able to seize complete power, Russia and China, were underdeveloped, and central panning is the best way to develop the basic productive forces of society.

The plan is to collapse Capitalism by going on strike, and then assumably not taking control of the state. The idea that people believe this goads me into wanting to read more theory just so I can draw on a wider source to attack this.

How about we break up the fucking state? Maybe that's a better idea and give it a minor Federation so locals can decide what they want to do. how does that sound?

Does anyone else see those two hills to the side as pants or is it just me?

It sounds dodgy. Weakening the state should be done carefully, and I don't know exactly what you mean when you speak of local autonomy. To what extent?

Unions need to be radicalized, they need to stockpile weapons.
And when the fbi inevitably cracks down on them, it will create an backlash from the work class, will give them something to unite against. This make take time, proper agitation and educational outreach but it is possible

Here, something to start with: deleonism.org/industrial-government.htm