SYNDICALISM. "Syndicalism" is the name given to a form of socialist doctrine elaborated by, and born from the experience of, the members of the French syndicats or trade unions. The French word syndicalisme means originally no more than trade unionism and is still frequently used in that restricted sense. Syndication before the World War was a doctrine of wide in fluence, but it has now largely been absorbed within the Com munist Parties or other organizations. On the one hand it is a body of social doctrine or theory of social organization ; on the other it is a plan of action for the realization of this ideal. Of all the social theories competing for existence it is the most purely proletarian in origin. One writer indeed has described it as "work ing-class socialism" (le socialisme ouvrier) in contradistinction to the types of socialism originated and propagated by middle-class "intellectuals." The syndicalist starts from the assumptions common to most schools of socialist thought. He affirms the inherent injustice of the wage system and the fundamental immorality of capitalist society, which is based, in his belief, on the exploitation of labour. He accepts and pushes to its logical conclusion the Marxian dogma of the class war; he therefore affirms that solidarity of interests does not, and cannot, exist as between employer and employed, between capitalist and wage-earner. From these premises he draws the usual socialist conclusion, namely, that individual ownership of the instruments of production must be abolished and communal ownership and control substituted for it. But at this point syndi calism and socialism (as usually understood) part company. Whereas the orthodox socialist demands control by the consumers acting through the State and its dependent organs such as the municipalities, the syndicalist demand, until very recently, was for producers' control, acting through the organizations of their own creation—the trade unions.
State organization and control of industry are, in their view, incompatible with true working-class emancipation. The State is, and must be, an instrument of class domination ; it is indeed "the executive committee of the capitalist class." It exists to defend the interests of that class, and is consequently as much the enemy of labour as capital itself. To extend its powers would be to twine the bonds of wage slavery ever more firmly about the workers' limbs. The State is, moreover, hopelessly wedded to an uncreative
bureaucracy, incapable of initiative and ignorant of industrial technique. Its control, even if it were benevolent (which the syndicalist denies it could be), would necessarily be despotic and inefficient ; the spirit of routine would combine with inexperience to crush out the possibility of economic progress. Here, as will be seen, the syndicalist endorses the ordinary individualistic criti cism of State socialism. Producers' control, exercised through the syndicats, would combine freedom with efficiency.
The form of social organization in which this ideal could be realized was, until recently, conceived somewhat as follows : The unit of organization would be the local syndicat. This would be brought into touch with the local groups by means of the Bourse du Travail, the present function of which is to act at once as an employment agency and a general centre for trade-union activities. When all the producers were thus linked together by the bourse, the administration of the latter would be able to estimate the economic capacities and necessities of the region, could co-ordi nate production, and, being in touch through other bourses with the industrial system as a whole, could arrange for the necessary transfer of materials and commodities, inwards and outwards. A species of "economic federation" would thus replace the structure of capitalist industry, with which would necessarily disappear the political and administrative machinery of the State. Two features of this Utopia need to be emphasized ; consumers as such were excluded from any share in industrial control, and a localized system of industry was envisaged. This latter feature was a direct reflection of French economic circumstances; both industry and trade-unionism were much more local in range than in other and more highly developed countries. But the movement towards large-scale organization which has so profoundly affected every aspect of economic life in recent years has produced a correspond ing modification in syndicalist ideals. At the same time it has begun to be recognized by the theorists of the movement that the consumers' point of view cannot wholly be disregarded.