About the Work
“Syndicalism” is an essay by Emma Goldman, the prominent Anarchist writer and activist. The work serves as both an exposition and a defense of Syndicalism, the revolutionary labor philosophy that emerged from the workers’ movement in Europe. Goldman writes from the perspective of a participant and observer, drawing on her direct experiences with the movement in France and her involvement in Anarchist congresses. The text is structured as a series of arguments and explanations, addressing the origins, principles, methods, and positive activities of Syndicalism, while also contrasting it with the state of the labor movement in America. The book is not a detached academic study but a passionate advocacy piece, aimed at educating American radicals and workers about a movement Goldman believed held the key to labor’s emancipation.
Context
Goldman wrote this work at a time when Syndicalism was gaining attention in America and England, though it had been practiced consciously by workers in France, Italy, and Spain since 1895. She notes with amusement that people in America and England treated Syndicalism as a new idea, when in fact its concepts had been part of the workers’ struggle for half a century. The author situates the movement within the broader history of labor organizing, tracing its roots back to 1848, when a large section of workers in France realized the futility of political activity for economic struggle. Even earlier, in England, Robert Owen had propagated similar ideas. The first convention of the Internationale in 1867 incorporated the principle that the economic emancipation of workers must be the principal aim of all revolutionists. This radical stand caused a split into two factions: one under Marx and Engels aiming at political conquest, and the other under Bakunin and the Latin workers forging along industrial and Syndicalist lines.
Goldman’s personal involvement frames her authority. In 1900, as a delegate to the Anarchist Congress in Paris, she first came in contact with Syndicalism in operation. She learned of Fernand Pelloutier, who had directed Syndicalism into definite working channels, though she could not meet him as he was already ill with cancer. In 1907, as delegate to the Anarchist Congress at Amsterdam, she met active Syndicalists in the Confederation Generale du Travail, including Pouget, Delesalle, and Monatte, and saw Syndicalism in daily operation in its most constructive forms. The American context is central to her argument: she describes Americans as naive, crude, and immature in international matters, lagging behind European workers in ideas and methods. She criticizes the American radical mind for its indefiniteness, which permits contradictory ideas and produces an “intellectual hash” without taste or character.
Structure of the Book
The work is organized into three main parts. The first part establishes the historical and philosophical foundations of Syndicalism, tracing its origins in the workers’ struggle and distinguishing it from political socialism. The second part explains the fundamental principles of Syndicalism, its differences from old trade unionism, and its main methods of action. The third part focuses on the positive and constructive aspects of Syndicalism, including its educational work and mutual aid societies. Throughout, Goldman interweaves her personal observations and experiences with theoretical exposition, moving from the general to the specific and back again.
Detailed Section-by-Section Summary
Part 1
Goldman opens by arguing that Syndicalism’s ideas have been practiced by workers for the last half century, though without a background of social consciousness. She notes that in America, five men paid with their lives for advocating Syndicalist methods as most effective in labor’s struggle against capital. The author finds it amusing that people in America and England now treat Syndicalism as new, when it has been consciously practiced by workers in France, Italy, and Spain since 1895. She criticizes Americans as naive, crude, and immature in international matters, noting that despite boasting practical aptitude, the average American lags behind European workers in ideas and methods. The American mind, she argues, seems never to grow, mature, or crystallize its views.
This explains, she says, why an American revolutionist can also be a politician, and why leaders of the Industrial Workers of the World (I.W.W.) continue in the Socialist party, which is antagonistic to I.W.W. principles and activities. A rigid Marxian may propose Anarchists work with the faction that began by bitter persecution of Michael Bakunin, pioneer of Anarchism. The American radical’s indefinite, uncertain mind permits contradictory ideas, producing a sad chaos. Syndicalism is currently the pastime of American so-called intellectuals, who accept it only because authorities like Sorel, Lagardelle, and Berth stand for it; Americans need the seal of authority. Bourgeois magazines publish dissertations on Syndicalism, and a conservative college published a student’s work on it with a professor’s approval, not because it is a force, but because of official sanction.
Goldman emphasizes that Syndicalism was not discovered by Bergson’s philosophy or the discourses of Sorel and Berth; it existed among workers before these men wrote. Its distinguishing feature is that it is the revolutionary philosophy of labor, conceived and born in workers’ actual struggle and experience, not in universities, colleges, libraries, or scientists’ brains. As far back as 1848, a large section of workers realized the futility of political activity for economic struggle, and the demand arose for direct economic measures. This occurred in France, and even prior to that in England, where Robert Owen, the true revolutionary Socialist, propagated similar ideas. After years of agitation, the idea was incorporated by the first convention of the Internationale in 1867: the economic emancipation of workers must be the principal aim of all revolutionists, to which everything else is subordinated.
This radical stand caused a split into two factions: one under Marx and Engels aiming at political conquest; the other under Bakunin and the Latin workers forging along industrial and Syndicalist lines. The first wing centralized into a machine for conquering political power within the capitalist State; the other became a vital revolutionary factor, dreaded as the greatest menace to its rule. In 1900, the author, as a delegate to the Anarchist Congress in Paris, first came in contact with Syndicalism in operation. Anarchists had discussed it theoretically for years, but those in America knew only the theory. She saw Syndicalism’s effect on French labor — strength, enthusiasm, hope — and learned of Fernand Pelloutier, who had directed Syndicalism into definite working channels. All spoke of love and devotion for him, agreeing he had gathered discontented forces in the French labor movement and imbued them with new life and purpose. On returning to America, the author propagated Syndicalist ideas, especially Direct Action and the General Strike, but met no understanding, even among radicals, and indifference in labor ranks. In 1907, as delegate to the Anarchist Congress at Amsterdam, she met active Syndicalists in the Confederation Generale du Travail and saw Syndicalism in daily operation in its most constructive forms.
Part 2
Goldman establishes her authority by stating her knowledge of Syndicalism comes not from theorists Sorel, Lagardelle, or Berth, but from direct contact with Parisian workers in the Confederation. She notes that the American press only covers Syndicalism’s resistive methods — strikes, sabotage, labor conflicts — but its chief value lies in constructive and educational effects on workers’ lives and thought.
The fundamental difference from old trade unionism is that old unions operate within the wage system, accepting capitalism as inevitable, while Syndicalism condemns present industrial arrangements as unjust and criminal. Syndicalism fights for immediate gains but refuses to pretend humane conditions can come from inhuman economic arrangements. Its ultimate purpose is the complete overthrow of the wage system and liberation of labor from every institution not serving free production for all humanity — reconstructing society from centralized, authoritarian state to free, federated workers’ groupings.
Syndicalism works in two directions: undermining existing institutions, and educating workers in solidarity for post-capitalist life. Goldman calls Syndicalism “the economic expression of Anarchism,” explaining Anarchists’ presence in the movement. Both prepare workers as conscious factors in struggle and reconstruction along autonomous industrial lines, opposing centralization and political parties’ corruption. Syndicalism rejects the contract system because labor and capital are not equals; rejects negotiations because they give the enemy time to prepare; stands for spontaneity to take the enemy unawares. It opposes large union treasuries because money corrupts labor as it does capitalism — citing America’s conservative, leader-corrupted movement — and because treasuries create class distinctions and jealousies within labor ranks.
The chief ethical value of Syndicalism is eliminating dissension, parasitism, and corruption; cultivating devotion, solidarity, and enthusiasm over money. Syndicalism grew from workers’ disappointment with politics, seeing the State, representative system, army, and church as capitalism’s supports. Historic experience shows that Proudhon, Dutch revolutionist Nieuwenhuis, and John Most withdrew from political office; those who remained betrayed their trust. Anti-militarism stems from armies shooting strikers and inculcating patriotism to divide workers; the ruling class fears soldiers refusing orders. The main methods are Direct Action (conscious economic power assertion), Sabotage (obstructing production, giving according to what one receives — during the 1910 French railroad strike, perishable goods were sent slow or misdirected), and the General Strike.
Part 3
Goldman defends sabotage as a sensible act of “common humanity,” despite being legally a crime. Examples include handling cut glass, china, and precious wines with care so as to damage them, disarranging a loom in a weaving mill, and Italian railway men obeying the letter of the law with all its red tape to cause confusion. Sabotage is called “a weapon of defense in the industrial warfare,” effective because it touches capitalism in its most vital spot, “the pocket.”
The General Strike is defined as a stoppage of work, cessation of labor. It need not wait for all workers to be ready; it may be started by one industry. The passage cites Pelloutier, Pouget, and “recent events in England” as sources for this view. The strike is compared to one man crying “Stop the thief!” — others take up the cry, spreading like wildfire. Politicians object that workers would suffer for necessaries, but the text answers that workers are “past masters in going hungry”; a General Strike is surer of prompt settlement than an ordinary strike, citing the transport and miner strikes in England, where “lords of State and capital” were forced to make peace quickly. Syndicalism also recognizes the right of producers to the things they have created — the right of workers to help themselves if the strike is not settled speedily.
Regarding Sorel, the passage notes he maintains the General Strike is an inspiration giving life meaning — a thought Anarchists have emphasized. But the author does not hold with Sorel that the General Strike is a “social myth” never to be realized; it will become fact when labor understands its destructive and constructive value. Syndicalism has a directly positive aspect, with more time and effort devoted to it than to negative methods. Activities prepare workers for a new society, training them in mutual aid, brotherhood, initiative, self-reliance, and an esprit de corps of solidarity and international proletarian community.
The chief positive activities are the mutualitees (mutual aid societies) of French Syndicalists. Their object is to secure work for unemployed members and further mutual assistance. Citing Mr. L. Levine’s “The Labor Movement in France,” the passage states that in 1902 over 74,000 workers out of 99,000 applicants were provided work by these societies, without submitting to “employment bureau sharks.” Employment agencies are described as sources of degradation and exploitation, especially in America, where they are often masked detective agencies supplying workers to strike regions under false promises. The French Confederation had long realized employment agencies were “leeches” and “nurseries of scabbery.” By threat of a General Strike, French Syndicalists forced the government to abolish the employment bureau sharks; workers’ mutualitees have almost entirely superseded them.
French Syndicalists also assist workingmen journeying from place to place, instilling fellowship and security in oneness with labor. The author contrasts this with America, where the traveling workman (“blanket stiff”) is at the mercy of constables, vagrancy laws, and becomes material for “scabdom.” Goldman repeatedly witnessed at the headquarters of the Confederation workingmen with union cards from France and other European countries being supplied meals, lodging, and brotherly encouragement. This is why the French government is forced to use the army for strikebreaking — few workers will lend themselves to such service. Syndicalists established cooperation between city and country, factory worker and peasant or farmer. Farmers provide food during strikes or care for strikers’ children. This was first tried in this country during the Lawrence strike, with inspiring results.
Syndicalist activities are permeated with educational work — evening classes on vital subjects from an unbiased, libertarian standpoint, not public-school “adulterated knowledge.” The scope includes sex hygiene, care of women during pregnancy and confinement, home and children, sanitation, general hygiene, science, history, and art. It includes workingmen’s libraries, dispensaries, concerts, and festivals, in which the greatest artists and literati of Paris participate. Syndicalist organizations supply members with textbooks on every trade, making the worker an adept and master of his craft, familiarizing him with all branches of his industry, so that when labor takes over production and distribution, people can manage their own affairs. The Italian railroad men demonstrated this educational effectiveness: they mastered transportation details so well they offered the Italian government to take over the railroads and guarantee operation with greater economy and fewer accidents than the government.
Main Arguments
Goldman’s central argument is that Syndicalism is the authentic revolutionary philosophy of labor, born from workers’ actual struggle and experience rather than from intellectual theory. She contends that its ideas have been practiced by workers for decades, and that its recent popularity among American intellectuals is based on authority rather than understanding. The author argues that Syndicalism fundamentally differs from old trade unionism in that it condemns the wage system as unjust and criminal, rather than accepting capitalism as inevitable. Its ultimate purpose is the complete overthrow of the wage system and the reconstruction of society from a centralized, authoritarian state to free, federated workers’ groupings.
Goldman argues that Syndicalism works in two directions: undermining existing institutions and educating workers in solidarity for post-capitalist life. She presents Syndicalism as “the economic expression of Anarchism,” explaining why Anarchists are present in the movement. The rejection of political action is a key argument: Syndicalism grew from workers’ disappointment with politics, and historic experience shows that those who entered political office betrayed their trust. The author defends methods that critics condemn — sabotage and the General Strike — as legitimate weapons of defense in industrial warfare, effective because they touch capitalism in its most vital spot, the pocket. She argues that the General Strike is not a “social myth” as Sorel maintains, but will become fact when labor understands its destructive and constructive value.
Key Concepts
Direct Action is presented as the conscious assertion of economic power by workers, as opposed to political or parliamentary methods. Sabotage is defined as obstructing production, giving according to what one receives. It is called “a weapon of defense in the industrial warfare,” effective because it touches capitalism in its most vital spot, “the pocket.” Examples include handling goods with care so as to damage them, disarranging a loom, and Italian railway men obeying the letter of the law with all its red tape to cause confusion. The General Strike is defined as a stoppage of work, cessation of labor. It need not wait for all workers to be ready; it may be started by one industry and spread like wildfire. The mutualitees are mutual aid societies of French Syndicalists, whose object is to secure work for unemployed members and further mutual assistance. Anti-militarism stems from armies shooting strikers and inculcating patriotism to divide workers.
Themes
A central theme is the contrast between European and American labor movements. Goldman portrays European workers as more advanced in ideas and methods, while Americans are naive, crude, and immature in international matters, lagging behind despite boasting practical aptitude. The American radical mind is described as indefinite and uncertain, permitting contradictory ideas and producing an “intellectual hash” without taste or character. This explains why American revolutionists can also be politicians, and why I.W.W. leaders continue in the Socialist party, which is antagonistic to their principles.
Another theme is the corruption of money and centralized power. Goldman argues that large union treasuries corrupt labor as they do capitalism, creating class distinctions and jealousies within labor ranks. The chief ethical value of Syndicalism is eliminating dissension, parasitism, and corruption; cultivating devotion, solidarity, and enthusiasm over money. The theme of education runs throughout the work: Syndicalist activities are permeated with educational work, preparing workers for a new society by training them in mutual aid, brotherhood, initiative, self-reliance, and an esprit de corps of solidarity and international proletarian community. The educational scope is broad, including sex hygiene, care of women during pregnancy and confinement, home and children, sanitation, general hygiene, science, history, and art.
The Author’s Conclusions
Goldman concludes that Syndicalism is a vital, constructive force in the labor movement, far more than the resistive methods that the American press focuses on. Its chief value lies in its constructive and educational effects on workers’ lives and thought. The movement prepares workers for a new society, training them in mutual aid, brotherhood, initiative, self-reliance, and solidarity. The mutualitees have proven their effectiveness, providing work for tens of thousands of workers without submitting to exploitative employment agencies. The educational work of Syndicalism makes the worker an adept and master of his craft, familiarizing him with all branches of his industry, so that when labor takes over production and distribution, people can manage their own affairs. The Italian railroad men’s offer to take over the railroads and guarantee operation with greater economy and fewer accidents than the government demonstrates the effectiveness of this education. The General Strike, far from being a myth, will become fact when labor understands its destructive and constructive value. Syndicalism, in Goldman’s view, is the path to the complete overthrow of the wage system and the liberation of labor from every institution not serving free production for all humanity.
Significance
The work stands as a significant articulation of Syndicalist philosophy from an Anarchist perspective, written by one of the most prominent radical figures of her time. It serves as both an introduction to Syndicalism for American audiences and a defense of its methods against critics. Goldman’s personal authority — her direct contact with Parisian workers in the Confederation, her participation in Anarchist congresses, and her firsthand witness of Syndicalism in operation — gives the work a grounded, experiential quality that distinguishes it from purely theoretical treatments. The essay also documents the historical split in the Internationale between the political wing under Marx and Engels and the industrial wing under Bakunin, providing insight into a crucial moment in the history of revolutionary movements. By presenting Syndicalism as “the economic expression of Anarchism,” Goldman bridges two major currents of radical thought and argues for their essential unity. The work’s critique of American labor and radical movements, its defense of sabotage and the General Strike, and its emphasis on the constructive, educational aspects of Syndicalism make it a distinctive contribution to radical literature of the period.
