Editing Syndicalism (section)

== Heyday ==
=== Before World War I ===
<!-- Information on struggles syndicalists were involved in:
-France: ...
-Australia:...
-New Zealand: 1912 Waihi miners' strike, 1913 Great Strike
-Netherlands: 1903 railway and general strike (Gerber, 36ff, also check: Hansen/Prosper, Wedman)

Also check Darlington: Syndicalism and Strikes, Leadership. -->
Syndicalists were involved in a number of strikes, labor disputes, and other struggles. In the United States, the IWW was involved in at least 150 strikes including the [[Goldfield, Nevada, labor troubles of 1906–1907]] by miners' strikes, the [[Pressed Steel Car strike of 1909]], the [[1912 Lawrence textile strike]], the [[Brotherhood of Timber Workers]]' strikes in Louisiana and Arkansas in 1912–1913, and the [[1913 Paterson silk strike]]. The most prominent was the struggle in Lawrence. Wobblie leaders brought together 23,000 mostly immigrant workers, many of whom did not speak English. They arranged for workers' children to be sent to live with sympathetic families outside of Lawrence for the duration of the strike so their parents could focus on the struggle. Unlike most IWW-led strikes, the struggle was successful.{{Sfnm|1a1=Darlington|1y=2008|1pp=62–63, 86–87|2a1=Dubofsky|2y=1969|2pp=120–125, 202–208, 210–220, 227–283}}<!-- To-do: Read up details on Southern timber strikes --> In Mexico, syndicalism first emerged in 1906 during the violent [[Cananea strike]] by miners and the even more violent [[Río Blanco strike]] by textile workers. In 1912, during the [[Mexican Revolution]] of 1910–1920, anarchists formed the syndicalist union [[House of the World Worker]] ({{lang|es|Casa del Obrero Mundial}}). It led a series of successful strikes in 1913 in Mexico City and central Mexico. After the [[Constitutionalist Army]] occupied the capital in 1914, syndicalists allied with the government it established to defeat rural forces such as the [[Liberation Army of the South|Zapatistas]] and therefore received government support. Once those forces had been suppressed, this alliance broke apart and the {{lang|es|Casa}} campaigned for [[workers' control]] of factories and the [[nationalization]] of foreign capital. It contributed to a rise in labor unrest that began in mid-1915. It led general strikes [[May 1916 Mexico general strike|in May]] and [[July–August Mexico general strike|in July–August]] 1916 in greater Mexico City. The latter was quelled by the army, marking the defeat of the {{lang|es|Casa}}, which was also suppressed.{{Sfn|Hart|1990|pp=188–199}}

In Portugal, the [[5 October 1910 revolution]] that led to the deposition of the king was followed by a strike wave throughout the country. After the police occupied the offices of an agricultural union, syndicalists called for a general strike. During the strike, Lisbon was controlled by workers and there were armed uprisings in several other cities. In 1912, the strike wave ebbed off.{{Sfn|Bayerlein|van der Linden|1990|pp=157–158}} <!-- The Spanish CNT, shortly after its first congress, participated in the [[1911 Spanish general strike]]. It was accused of having instigated the strike but is unclear to what extent it was responsible. In any case, the CNT was banned by the state for its role.{{Sfn|Bar|1990|p=122}} --> Italian syndicalists successfully organized agricultural workers in the [[Po Valley]] by uniting different parts of agricultural working class. They were most successful in areas where the reformist union [[Federterra]] had been thwarted by employers. Syndicalists led large strikes by farm workers in Parma and Ferrara in 1907–1908; these strikes failed as a result of employers' strikebreaking tactics and infighting among workers. In 1911–1913, syndicalists played an important role in a large strike wave in Italy's industrial centers. The syndicalist union confederation USI was formed in 1912 by veterans of both strike movements.{{Sfn|Levy|2000|pp=217–219}}

British Wobblies were involved in two major strikes in Scotland, one at [[Argyll Motor Works]] and the second at a [[Singer Corporation]]'s sewing machine factory in [[Clydebank]]. In 1906, several industrial unionists began to spread their ideas and organize workers at Singer's. The organized the [[1911 strike at Singer]] after a woman was fired for not working hard enough. The strike was cleverly defeated by management and most activists lost their jobs.{{Sfn|Challinor|1977|p=xxx}} The ISEL leader Tom Mann was also at the center of several labor disputes during the Great Labour Unrest, including the [[1911 Liverpool general transport strike]] where he chaired the strike committee.{{Sfn|Darlington|2013|p=42}} In Ireland, Larkin and the ITGWU led 20,000 during the 1913 [[Dublin lockout]]. After the ITGWU attempted to unionize the [[Dublin United Tramway Company]] and tram workers went on strike, the city's employers threatened to fire any workers who did not sign a pledge to not support the ITGWU, thereby turning the dispute into a city-wide conflict in late September. Workers' resistance crumbled in January 1914.{{Sfnm|1a1=Darlington|1y=2013|1p=42|2a1=O'Connor|2y=2010|2pp=205–207}}

[[File:Congress london 1913.jpg|thumb|A session of the [[First International Syndicalist Congress]] in 1913]]
There was no international syndicalist organization prior to World War I.{{Sfn|Thorpe|1989|p=1}} In 1907, CGT activists presented the Charter of Amiens and syndicalism to an international audience a higher form of anarchism at the [[International Anarchist Congress of Amsterdam]] in 1907. Discussions at the Congress led to the formation of the international syndicalist journal {{lang|fr|[[Bulletin international du mouvement syndicaliste]]}}.{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=2010b|1pp=32, 34|2a1=Altena|2y=2010|2p=185}} The CGT was affiliated with the [[International Secretariat of National Trade Union Centers]] (ISNTUC), which brought together reformist socialist unions. Both the Dutch NAS and the British ISEL attempted to remedy the lack of a syndicalist counterpart to ISNTUC in 1913, simultaneously publishing calls for an international syndicalist congress in 1913. The CGT rejected the invitation. Its leaders feared that leaving ISNTUC, which it intended to revolutionize from within, would split the CGT and harm working-class unity. The IWW also did not participate, as it considered itself an international in its own right.{{Sfnm|1a1=Lehning|1y=1982|1pp=77–78|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2pp=53–54}} The [[First International Syndicalist Congress]] was held in London from 27 September to 2 October. It was attended by 38 delegates from 65 organizations in Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Cuba, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.{{refn|group=note|The CGT's absence led the ''[[New Statesman]]'' to liken the Congress "to playing ''Hamlet'' without the Prince of Denmark".{{Sfn|Thorpe|1989|p=69}}}} Discussions were contentious and did not lead to the founding of a syndicalist international. Delegates did agree on a declaration of principles describing syndicalism's core tenets. They also decided to launch an International Syndicalist Information Bureau and to hold another congress in Amsterdam. This congress did not take place due to the outbreak of World War I.{{Sfnm|1a1=Lehning|1y=1982|1pp=78–80|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2pp=69, 72, 75–76, 79–80}}
<!-- Information on reformist tendencies in CGT (maybe other groups?), analysis of split in the international movement:
Darlington 2008, pp. 127-...
Thorpe 2010b, pp. 30-...
Lehning
Thorpe 1989. -->

=== World War I ===
{{Further|1917 French Army mutinies}}
Syndicalists had long opposed interventionism. Haywood held that "it is better to be a traitor to your country than to your class". French syndicalists viewed the [[French Army]] as the primary defender of the capitalist order. In 1901, the CGT published a manual for soldiers encouraging desertion. In 1911, British syndicalists distributed an "Open Letter to British Soldiers" imploring them not to shoot on striking workers but to join the working class's struggle against capital. Syndicalists argued that patriotism was a means of integrating workers into capitalist society by distracting them from their true class interest. In 1908, the CGT's congress invoked the slogan of the First International, proclaiming that the "workers have no fatherland".{{Sfn|Darlington|2008|pp=45–47}}

[[File:Christian-cornelissen.jpg|thumb|[[Christiaan Cornelissen]], a Dutch [[anarcho-syndicalist]] who supported World War I]]
When World War I broke out in July 1914, socialist parties and trade unions{{spaced ndash}} both in neutral and belligerent countries{{spaced ndash}} supported their respective nations' war efforts or national defense,{{refn|group=note|Russian, Serbian, and Italian socialists were the exception.{{Sfn|Eley|2002|pp=125, 127}}}} despite previous pledges to do the opposite. Socialists agreed to put aside class conflict and vote for [[war credits]]. German socialists argued that war was necessary to defend against what they termed Russia's "barbaric [[Tsarism]]", while their French counterparts pointed to the need to defend against Prussian militarism and the German "instinct of domination and of discipline". This collaboration between the socialist movement and the state was known as the {{lang|fr|[[union sacrée]]}} in France, the {{lang|de|[[Burgfriedenspolitik|Burgfrieden]]}} in Germany, and ''{{ill|godsvrede|nl|Godsvrede}}'' in the Netherlands.{{Sfnm|1a1=Eley|1y=2002|1pp=125–127|2a1=Thorpe|2y=2006|2p=1005|3a1=Thorpe|3y=2010a|3pp=24–27}} Moreover, a number of anarchists led by [[Peter Kropotkin]], including the influential syndicalist Christiaan Cornelissen, issued the ''[[Manifesto of the Sixteen]]'', supporting the Allied cause in the war.{{Sfnm|1a1=Darlington|1y=2008|1p=47|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2p=89}} Despite this, most syndicalists remained true to their [[Internationalism (politics)|internationalist]] and [[anti-militarist]] principles by opposing the war and their respective nation's participation in it.{{Sfn|Darlington|2006|p=983}}

The majority of the French CGT and a sizable minority in the Italian USI did not.{{Sfn|Darlington|2006|p=984}} The CGT had long had a moderate, reformist wing, which gained the upper hand. As a result, according to historians like Darlington or van der Linden and Thorpe, the CGT was no longer a revolutionary syndicalist organization after the start of World War I.{{Sfnm|1a1=Darlington|1y=2006|1p=990|2a1=van der Linden|2a2=Thorpe|2y=1990|2p=5}} It followed the French president's call for national unity by agreeing to a no-strike pledge and to resolve labor disputes through arbitration and by actively participating in the French war effort. Most of its members of military age were conscripted without resistance and its ranks shrank from 350,000 in 1913 to 49,000 dues-paying members in 1915. CGT leaders defended this course by arguing that France's war against Germany was a war between democracy and republicanism on the one side and barbaric militarism on the other.{{Sfn|Darlington|2006|p=992}} Italy did not initially participate in World War I, which was deeply unpopular in the country, when it broke out. The [[Italian Socialist Party]] and the reformist [[Italian General Confederation of Labour]] opposed intervention in the [[Great War]]. Once Italy became a participant, the socialists refused to support the war effort but also refrained from working against it. From the start of the war, even before Italy did so, a minority within USI, led by the most famous Italian syndicalist, [[Alceste De Ambris]], called on the Italian state to take the Allies' side. As part of [[left-interventionism]], the pro-war syndicalists saw Italian participation in the war as the completion of nationhood. They also felt compelled to oppose the socialists' neutrality and therefore support the war. Finally, they gave similar arguments as the French, warning of the dangers posed by the "suffocating imperialism of Germany", and felt obliged to follow the CGT's lead.{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=2001|1pp=11–13|2a1=Darlington|2y=2006|2p=994}}

[[File:Die einigkeit.PNG|thumb|August 1914 edition of {{lang|de|[[Die Einigkeit]]}}, a German syndicalist newspaper, protesting the outbreak of war]]
USI's pro-war wing had the support of less than a third of the organization's members and it was forced out in September 1914. Its anarchist wing, led by Borghi, was firmly opposed to the war, deeming it incompatible with [[workers' internationalism]] and predicting that it would only serve elites and governments. Its opposition was met with government repression, and Borghi and others were interned by the end of the war.{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=2001|1pp=13–14|2a1=Darlington|2y=2006|2p=995}} Instead, the anti-war faction in the CGT was a small minority. It was led by the likes of [[Pierre Monatte]] and [[Alphonse Merrheim]]. They would link up with anti-war socialists from around Europe at the 1915 [[Zimmerwald conference]]. They faced considerable difficulties putting up meaningful resistance against the war. The government called up militants to the Army, including Monatte, who considered refusing the order and being summarily executed; he decided this would be futile.{{Sfn|Darlington|2006|pp=992–993}} Syndicalist organizations in other countries nearly unanimously opposed the war.{{Sfnm|1a1=Darlington|1y=2006|1pp=983–984|2a1=Thorpe|2y=2001|2p=22}} In neutral Spain, [[José Negre]] of the CNT declared: "Let Germany win, let France win, it is all the same to the workers." The CNT insisted that syndicalists could support neither side in an imperialist conflict.{{Sfnm|1a1=Darlington|1y=2006|1p=985|2a1=Thorpe|2y=2001|2p=10}}

A wave of pro-British sentiment swept Ireland during the war, although the ITGWU and the rest of the Irish labor movement opposed it, and half of the ITGWU's membership enlisted in the British military. The ITGWU had also been significantly weakened in 1913 in the [[Dublin Lockout]]. After Larkin left Ireland in 1914, [[James Connolly]] took over leadership of the union. Because of the organization's weakness, Connolly allied it along with its paramilitary force, the [[Irish Citizen Army]], with the [[Irish Republican Brotherhood]]. Together, they instigated the [[Easter Rising]], seeking to weaken the British Empire and hoping that the insurrection would spread throughout Europe. The uprising was quickly quelled by the British army and Connolly was executed.{{Sfn|Darlington|2006|pp=987–989}} In Germany, the small [[Free Association of German Trade Unions]] (FVdG) opposed the socialists' {{lang|de|Burgfrieden}} and Germany's involvement in the war, challenging the claim that the country was waging a defensive war. Its journals were suppressed and a number of its members were arrested.{{Sfn|Thorpe|2001|pp=6–7}} The United States did not enter the war until the spring of 1917. The start of the war had induced an economic boom in the United States, tightening the labor market and thereby strengthening workers' bargaining position. The IWW profited from this, more than doubling its membership between 1916 and 1917. At the same time, the Wobblies fervently denounced the war and mulled calling an anti-war general strike. Once the United States became a combatant, the IWW maintained its anti-war stance, while its bitter rival, the AFL, supported the war; however, it did not launch an anti-war campaign, as it feared the government would crush it if it did, and wanted to focus on its economic struggles. The IWW's practical opposition to the war was limited, 95% of eligible IWW members registered for the draft, and most of those drafted served.{{Sfnm|1a1=Dubofsky|1y=1969|1pp=349–355, 357|2a1=Darlington|2y=2006|2pp=997–999}} Syndicalists in the Netherlands and Sweden, both neutral countries, criticized the truce socialists entered with their governments in order to shore up national defense. The Dutch NAS disowned Cornelissen, one of its founders, for his support for the war.{{Sfn|Thorpe|2001|pp=8–9}}<!-- Maybe add Australia: Burgmann. -->

Syndicalists from Spain, Portugal, Great Britain, France, Brazil, Argentina, Italy, and Cuba met at an anti-war congress in [[El Ferrol]], Spain, in April 1915. Although the congress was poorly planned and prohibited by the Spanish authorities, delegates managed to discuss resistance to the war and extending international cooperation between syndicalist groups.{{Sfn|Thorpe|2006|pp=1010–1012, 1016}} Argentine, Brazilian, Spanish, and Portuguese delegates later met in October in [[Rio de Janeiro]] to continue discussions and resolved to deepen cooperation between South American syndicalists.{{Sfn|Thorpe|2006|pp=1013–1014}} While syndicalists were only able to put up a rather limited practical struggle against World War I,{{Sfn|Darlington|2006|p=984}} they also looked to challenge the war on an ideological or cultural level.{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=2001|1pp=14–15|2a1=Thorpe|2y=2010a|2pp=23–24}} They pointed to the horrors of war and spurned efforts to legitimate it as something noble. German syndicalists drew attention to the death, injury, destruction, and misery that the war wrought.{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=2001|1p=15|2a1=Thorpe|2y=2010a|2p=34}} German, Swedish, Dutch, and Spanish syndicalists denounced nationalism with {{lang|es|Tierra y Libertad}}, a syndicalist journal in Barcelona, calling it a "grotesque mentality". The Dutch newspaper {{lang|nl|De Arbeid}} criticized nationalism, because "it finds its embodiment in the state and is the denial of class antagonism between the haves and the have-nots". German and Spanish syndicalists went further still by putting into question the concept of nationhood itself and dismissing it as a mere social construct. The Germans observed that most inhabitants of the German Empire identified not as Germans but in regional terms as Prussians or Bavarians and the like. Multilingual countries like Germany and Spain also could not claim a common language as a defining characteristic of the nation nor did members of the same nation share the same values or experiences, syndicalists in Spain and Germany argued.{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=2001|1pp=16–17|2a1=Thorpe|2y=2010a|2pp=32–34}} Syndicalists also argued against the notion that the war was a clash of different cultures or that it could be justified as a defense of civilization. They stated that various cultures were not mutually hostile, and the state should not be seen as the embodiment of culture, since culture was the product of the entire population, while the state acted in the interests of just a few. Moreover, they argued that if culture was to be understood as ''[[high culture]]'', the very workers dying in the war were denied access to that culture by capitalist conditions.{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=2001|1p=17|2a1=Thorpe|2y=2010a|2pp=34–37}} Finally, syndicalists railed against religious justifications for war. Before the war, they had rejected religion as divisive at best; support for the war by both Catholic and Protestant clergy revealed their hypocrisy and disgraced the principles they and Christianity claimed to uphold.{{Sfn|Thorpe|2010a|pp=28–31}}

As the war progressed, disaffection with worsening living conditions at home and a growing numbers of casualties at the front eroded the enthusiasm and patriotism the outbreak of war had aroused. Prices were on the rise, food was scarce, and it became increasingly clear that the war would not be short. In Germany, food shortages led to demonstrations and riots in a number of cities in the summer of 1916. At the same time, anti-war demonstrations started. Strikes picked up from around 1916 or 1917 on across Europe and soldiers began to [[mutiny]]. Workers distrusted their socialist leaders who had joined the war effort. Thanks in part to their fidelity to internationalism, syndicalist organizations profited from this development and expanded as the war drew to an end.{{Sfnm|1a1=Eley|1y=2002|1pp=131–133, 136–137|2a1=Thorpe|2y=2001|2p=19|3a1=Darlington|3y=2006|3p=1002}}

=== Russian Revolution and post-war turmoil ===
[[File:Golos Truda, Sept 14 (Sept 1).jpg|thumb|14 September 1917, issue of {{lang|ru-latn|Golos Truda}}. The headline reads: "To the workers of the world."]]
Disaffection with the war condensed in the [[post-World War I revolutions]] that began with the [[Russian Revolution]] of 1917.{{Sfn|Eley|2002|p=138}} In February 1917, strikes, riots, and troop mutinies broke out in [[Petrograd]], forcing the [[Nicholas II]] to abdicate on 2 March in favor of the [[Russian Provisional Government]]. Immediately, anarchist groups emerged. Russian syndicalists organized around the journal {{lang|ru-latn|[[Golos Truda]]}} (''The Voice of Labor''), which had a circulation of around 25,000, and the Union of Anarcho-Syndicalist Propaganda.{{Sfnm|1a1=Avrich|1y=1967|1pp=115, 123–125, 139–140|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2p=96}}{{refn|group=note|Most syndicalists were exiled to Western Europe or America before the revolution and started returning in the summer. The most prominent syndicalists who returned to Russia were [[Maksim Raevskii]], {{ill|Vladimir Shatov|ru|Шатов, Владимир Сергеевич}}, [[Alexander Schapiro]], a participant in the 1913 syndicalist congress in London, and Vseolod Mikhailovich Eikhenbaum, known as [[Volin]]. They were joined by the young local [[Grigorii Maksimov]]. In their New York exile, Raevskii, Shatov, and Volin had worked on the syndicalist journal {{lang|ru-latn|Golos Truda}}, then the organ of the [[Union of Russian Workers]]. They brought it with them proceeded to publish in Petrograd looking to spread syndicalist ideas among workers by introducing them to French movement and the general strike. Outside of Petrograd, syndicalism also gained followers in [[Vyborg]], Moscow, and in the south among the miners in the [[Donets Basin]] and cement workers and longshoremen in [[Ekaterinodar]] and [[Novorossiisk]].{{Sfnm|1a1=Avrich|1y=1967|1pp=137–140, 146–147|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2pp=71, 96}}}} Anarchists found themselves agreeing with the [[Bolsheviks]] led by Lenin, who returned to Russia in April, as both sought to bring down the provisional government. Lenin abandoned the [[theory of historical trajectory]], which represented the idea that capitalism is a necessary stage on Russia's path to communism, dismissed the establishment of a parliament in favor of that power being taken by [[Soviet (council)|soviets]], and called for the abolition of the police, the army, the bureaucracy, and finally the state{{spaced ndash}} all sentiments syndicalists shared.{{Sfn|Avrich|1967|pp=127–129}} Although the syndicalists also welcomed the soviets, they were most enthusiastic about the [[factory committees]] and [[workers' councils]] that had emerged in all industrial centers in the course of strikes and demonstrations in the [[February Revolution]]. The committees fought for higher wages and shorter hours but above all for workers' control over production, which both the syndicalists and Bolsheviks supported. The syndicalists viewed the factory committees as the true form of syndicalist organization, not unions.{{refn|group=note|Volin derided the unions, which were dominated by [[Mensheviks]], as a "mediator between labor and capital" and as "reformist".{{Sfn|Avrich|1967|p=144}}}} Because they were better organized, the Bolsheviks were able to gain more traction in the committees, with six times as many delegates in a typical factory. Despite the goals they had in common, syndicalists became anxious about the Bolsheviks' growing influence, especially after they won majorities in the Petrograd and Moscow soviets in September.{{Sfnm|1a1=Avrich|1y=1967|1pp=140–147, 152–153|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2p=97}}

The Petrograd Soviet established the 66-member [[Petrograd Military Revolutionary Committee]], which included four anarchists, among them the syndicalist Shatov. On 25 October, this committee led the [[October Revolution]];{{refn|group=note|Compared with the mass revolts in February, it was more of a [[coup d'état]]. According to its commander [[Leon Trotsky]], no more than 30,000 participated.{{Sfn|Avrich|1967|p=158}}}} after taking control of the [[Winter Palace]] and key points in the capital with little resistance, it proclaimed a Soviet government. Anarchists were jubilant at the toppling of the provisional government. They were concerned about the proclamation of a new government, fearing a [[dictatorship of the proletariat]], even more so after the Bolsheviks created the central [[Soviet of People's Commissars]] composed only of members of their party. They called for decentralization of power but agreed with Lenin's labor program, which endorsed workers' control in all enterprises of a certain minimum size. The introduction of workers' control led to economic chaos.{{Sfnm|1a1=Avrich|1y=1967|1pp=158–164|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2pp=97–98}} Lenin turned to restoring discipline in the factories and order to the economy in December by putting the economy under state control. At the [[First All Russian Congress of Trade Unions]] in January, the syndicalists, who had paid little attention to the unions, only had 6 delegates, while the Bolsheviks had 273. No longer depending on their help in toppling the provisional government, the Bolsheviks were now in a position to ignore the syndicalists' opposition and outvoted them at this congress. They opted to disempower local committees by subordinating them to the trade unions, which in turn became organs of the state. The Bolsheviks argued that workers' control did not mean that workers controlled factories at the local level and that this control had to be centralized and put under a broader economic plan.{{Sfnm|1a1=Avrich|1y=1967|1pp=165–170|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2p=98}} The syndicalists criticized the Bolshevik regime bitterly, characterizing it as [[state capitalist]]. They denounced state control over the factories and agitated for decentralization of power in politics and the economy, and syndicalization of industry.{{Sfnm|1a1=Avrich|1y=1967|1pp=181, 191–195|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2pp=99–100}}{{refn|group=note|{{lang|ru-latn|Golos Truda}} was suppressed and replaced with a new but short-lived journal, {{lang|ru-latn|Vol'nyi Golos Truda}} (''The Free Voice of Labor''). A first All-Russian Conference of Anarcho-Syndicalists was held August 1918, followed by a second in November, which established the [[All-Russian Confederation of Anarcho-Syndicalists]]. There is no evidence this confederation was effective in coordinating syndicalist activities.{{Sfnm|1a1=Avrich|1y=1967|1pp=190–191, 194–195|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2pp=98–100, 163}}}} The [[Russian Civil War]] against the [[White Army]] split anarchists. The syndicalists were criticized harshly because most supported the Bolshevik regime in the war even as they excoriated Bolshevik policy. They reasoned that a White victory would be worse and that the Whites had to be defeated before a third revolution could topple the Bolsheviks.{{Sfnm|1a1=Avrich|1y=1967|1pp=195–196|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2p=162}}{{refn|group=note|Schapiro served in the [[Commissariat of Foreign Affairs]] whilst remaining a committed syndicalist and moderate critic of the regime. Shatov fought in the [[Red Army]] and eventually abandoned syndicalism. A number of anarchists fell in the Russian Civil War.{{Sfnm|1a1=Avrich|1y=1967|1pp=197–199|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2pp=162–163}}}} Despite this, syndicalists were harassed and repeatedly arrested by the police, particularly the [[Cheka]], from 1919 on. Their demands had some sway with workers and dissidents within the Bolshevik party and the Bolshevik leadership viewed them as the most dangerous part of the libertarian movement.{{Sfnm|1a1=Avrich|1y=1967|1pp=222–225|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2pp=163–164}} After the Russian Civil War ended, workers and sailors, including both anarchists and Bolsheviks, rose up in what came to be known as the [[Kronstadt rebellion]] of 1921, with Kronstadt being a bastion of radicalism since 1905, against what they saw as the rule of a small number of bureaucrats. Anarchists hailed the rebellion as the start of the third revolution. The government reacted by having anarchists throughout the country arrested, including a number of syndicalist leaders. The Russian syndicalist movement was thereby defeated.{{Sfn|Avrich|1967|pp=228–231, 239}}

Syndicalists in the West who had opposed World War I reacted gushingly to the Russian Revolution.{{refn|group=note|Pro-war syndicalists in the CGT instead viewed the revolution as treason because the Bolsheviks withdrew Russia from the war. De Ambris and the syndicalist supporters of war in Italy also denounced the upheaval as a challenge to nationalism.{{Sfn|Thorpe|1989|pp=92–93}}}} Although they were still coming to grips with the evolving Bolshevik ideology and despite traditional anarchist suspicions of Marxism, they saw in Russia a revolution that had taken place against parliamentary politics and under the influence of workers' councils. At this point, they also had only limited knowledge of the reality in Russia. [[Augustin Souchy]], a German anarcho-syndicalist, hailed it "the great passion that swept us all along. In the East, so we believed, the sun of freedom rose." The Spanish CNT declared: "Bolshevism is the name, but the idea is that of all revolutions: economic freedom. ... Bolshevism is the new life for which we struggle, it is freedom, harmony, justice, it is the life that we want and will enforce in the world." Borghi recalled: "We exulted in its victories. We trembled at its risks. ... We made a symbol and an altar of its name, its dead, its living and its heroes."{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=1989|1pp=92–93|2a1=Tosstorf|2y=2009|2pp=14–15}} He called on Italians to "do as they did in Russia".{{Sfn|Darlington|2008|p=140}} Indeed, a revolutionary wave, inspired in part by Russia, swept Europe in the following years.{{Sfnm|1a1=Darlington|1y=2009|1p=187|2a1=Eley|2y=2002|2pp=138, 152–155}}

In Germany, strikes and protests against food shortage, mainly by women, escalated and by 1917 had eroded public confidence in the government. The [[abdication of Wilhelm II]] in November 1918 after the [[Kiel mutiny]] by sailors sparked an insurrectionary movement throughout the country that led to the [[German Revolution of 1918–19]].{{Sfn|Eley|2002|pp=136–138, 153–154, 165}} The syndicalist FVdG, which had just 6,000 members before the war and was almost completely suppressed by the state during the war, regrouped at a conference in Berlin in December 1918.{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=2001|1p=6|2a1=Bock|2y=1969|2pp=33, 86, 102–103}} It was active in the revolutionary events of the following years, particularly in the [[Ruhr area]]. It supported spontaneous strikes and championed direct action and sabotage. The FVdG started to be held in high regard for its radicalism by workers, particularly miners, who appreciated the syndicalists' ability to theorize their struggles and their experience with direct action methods. Starting in the second half of 1919, workers disappointed by the socialist party's and unions' support for the war and previously non-unionized unskilled workers who were radicalized during the war flocked to the FVdG.{{Sfn|Bock|1969|pp=105, 108–109, 118–120}} The revolution also saw the introduction to Germany of industrial unionism along the lines of the IWW with some support from the American organization but also with links to the left wing of the [[Communist Party of Germany]].{{Sfn|Bock|1969|pp=124–126}} In December 1919, the [[Free Workers' Union of Germany]] (Syndicalists) ({{lang|de|Freie Arbeiter-Union Deutschlands (Syndikalisten)}}, FAUD) was formed, claiming to represent over 110,000 workers, more than eighteen times the FVdG's pre-war membership. Most of the new organization came from the FVdG, although industrial unionists, whose influence was dwindling, were also involved. [[Rudolf Rocker]], an anarchist recently returned to Germany after spending several years in London, wrote the FAUD's program.{{Sfnm|1a1=Bock|1y=1969|1pp=105–106, 155–156|2a1=Thorpe|2y=2001|2p=19}}
<!-- Ideology,Radicalization: Bock, 105-108, 156-160, 167-179. -->

Class struggle peaked in Italy in the years 1919–1920, which became known as the {{lang|it|[[biennio rosso]]}} or red biennium. Throughout this wave of labor radicalism, syndicalists, along with anarchists, formed the most consistently revolutionary faction on the left as socialists sought to rein in workers and prevent unrest.{{Sfn|Bertrand|1982|pp=383–385}} The Italian syndicalist movement had split during the war, as the syndicalist supporters of Italian intervention left USI. The interventionists, led by Alceste de Ambris and Edmondo Rossoni, formed the {{ill|Italian Union of Labor (1918–1925)|lt=Italian Union of Labor|it|Unione Italiana del Lavoro (1918-1925)}} ({{lang|it|Unione Italiana del Lavoro}}, UIL) in 1918. The UIL's [[national syndicalism]] emphasized workers' love of labor, self-sacrifice, and the nation rather than [[anti-capitalist]] class struggle.{{Sfnm|1a1=Levy|1y=2000|1p=213|2a1=Roberts|2y=1979|2p=177}} Both USI and the UIL grew significantly during the {{lang|it|biennio rosso}}.{{Sfn|Bertrand|1982|p=383}} The first [[factory occupation]] of the {{lang|it|biennio}} was carried out by the UIL at a steel plant in [[Dalmine]] in February 1919, before the military put an end to it.{{Sfnm|1a1=Levy|1y=2000|1p=246|2a1=Bertrand|2y=1982|2pp=387–388}} In July, a strike movement spread through Italy, culminating in a general strike on 20 July. While USI supported it and was convinced by the workers' enthusiasm that revolution could be possible, the UIL and the socialists were opposed. The socialists succeeded in curtailing the general strike and it imploded with a day. The government, unsettled by the radicalism on display, reacted with repression against the far left and concessions to workers and peasants.{{Sfn|Bertrand|1982|pp=390–391}}

In Portugal, working class unrest picked up from the start of the war. In 1917, radicals began to dominate the labor movement as a result of the war, the ''[[Sidónio Pais]]'' dictatorship established that year, and the influence of the Russian Revolution. The [[1918 Portugal general strike]] was called for November but failed, and in 1919 the syndicalist [[General Confederation of Labour (Portugal)|General Confederation of Labour]] ({{lang|pt|Confederação Geral do Trabalho}}, CGT) was formed as the country's first national union confederation.{{Sfn|Bayerlein|van der Linden|1990|pp=159–161}}

[[File:São Paulo (Greve de 1917).jpg|thumb|The [[1917 Brazilian general strike]] in São Paulo]]
In Brazil, in both Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo, syndicalists, along with anarchists and socialists, were leaders in the [[1917–1919 Brazil strike movement]] and cycle of labor struggles. It included a general strike in 1917, a failed uprising in 1918 inspired by the Russian Revolution, and a number of smaller strikes. The movement was put down by increased organization by employers to resist workers' demands and by government repression, including the closure of unions, arrests, deportations of foreign militants, and violence, with some 200 workers killed in São Paulo alone.{{Sfnm|1a1=Batalha|1y=2017|1pp=92–98|2a1=Toledo|2a2=Biondi|2y=2010|2pp=387–391}} In Argentina, FORA had split into the [[anarcho-communist]] FORA V and the syndicalist FORA IX. While FORA V called for a futile general strike in 1915, FORA IX was more careful. It called off general strikes it had planned in 1917 and 1918. In January 1919, five workers were by the authorities during a strike led by a union with tenuous links to FORA V. At the funeral, police killed another 39 workers. Both FORA organizations called for a general strike, which continued after FORA IX reached a settlement. Vigilantes, supported by business and the military, attacked unions and militants. In all, between 100 and 700 people died in what became known as the [[Tragic Week (Argentina)|Tragic Week]]. Nevertheless, strikes continued to increase and both FORA V and IX grew.{{Sfn|Thompson|1990|pp=169, 174–178}}

The United States underwent an increase in labor militancy during the post-war period. 1919 saw the [[Seattle general strike]], large miners' strikes, the [[Boston police strike]], and the nationwide [[steel strike of 1919]]. The IWW had been nearly destroyed in the previous two years by local [[criminal syndicalism]] laws, the federal government, and vigilante violence. It attempted to take credit for some of the strikes, although in reality it was too weak to play a significant role. The [[First Red Scare]] intensified the attacks on the IWW; by the end of 1919, the IWW was practically powerless.{{Sfnm|1a1=Darlington|1y=2006|1pp=999–1000|2a1=Darlington|2y=2008|2pp=162–163|3a1=Dubofsky|3y=1969|3pp=452–456}} 1919 also saw the [[Canadian labour revolt]], leading to the formation of One Big Union, which was only partly industrial unionist.{{Sfn|Bercuson|1990|pp=221, 230}}
<!-- To-do:
German Revolution: Bock
Italian Biennio Rosso: ...
Spain: ...
France: ...
UK: Shop stewards movement
Ireland
Maybe Australia. -->

=== International Workers' Association ===
The Bolsheviks suppressed syndicalism in Russia but courted syndicalists abroad as part of their international strategy. In March 1919, the [[1st Congress of the Comintern]] was held in Moscow. The Bolsheviks acknowledged syndicalism's opposition to [[socialist reformism]] and saw them as part of the revolutionary wing of the labor movement. No syndicalists attended the founding convention, mainly because the [[Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War]], which included a blockade of Russia by the [[Allied powers of World War I]], made travel to Moscow near impossible.{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=1989|1pp=100–101, 104|2a1=Tosstorf|2y=2009|2p=15}} After long discussions, the CNT opted to join the [[Comintern]], although it classified its adherence as provisional as a concession to detractors of Bolshevism. USI also decided to join; some like Borghi had reservations about the course of events in Russia. In France, the CGT's radical minority that had opposed the war enthusiastically supported Bolshevism. They formed the [[Revolutionary Syndicalist Committees]] and attempted to push the CGT as a whole to support the Comintern.{{Sfn|Thorpe|1989|pp=112–116}} The General Executive Board of the IWW decided join the Comintern, although this decision was never confirmed by a convention.{{Sfn|Thorpe|2017|p=109}} German and Swedish syndicalists were more critical of Bolshevism from the start. Rocker declared already in August 1918 that the Bolshevik regime was "but a new system of tyranny".{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=1989|1pp=116, 122|2a1=Tosstorf|2y=2009|2p=15}}

Syndicalists became more estranged from the Comintern in 1920.{{Sfn|Thorpe|1989|p=125}} The [[2nd World Congress of the Comintern]] in the summer of 1920 was attended by numerous syndicalists. The Italian USI, the Spanish CNT, the British shop stewards, and the revolutionary minority of the CGT had official representatives, while others like [[John Reed (journalist)|John Reed]] of the American IWW, [[Augustin Souchy]] of the German FAUD, and [[Taro Yoshiharo]], a Japanese Wobbly, attended in an unofficial capacity. This was the first major international gathering of syndicalists since the end of the war. Western syndicalists' knowledge of the facts on the ground in Russia was at this point rather limited. They thought of the soviets as organs of workers' control over production and the Bolsheviks depicted them as such. Syndicalists were not aware of the extent to which they were in reality subordinated to the communist party. Instead, the congress revealed the irreconcilable differences between the syndicalist and the Bolshevik approach.{{Sfnm|1a1=Thorpe|1y=1989|1pp=126–129, 132|2a1=Tosstorf|2y=2009|2p=16}} Before the congress, the Comintern's executive committee arranged discussions with syndicalists to challenge the reformist [[International Federation of Trade Unions]] (IFTU). A document proposed by [[Solomon Lozovsky]] derided the apolitical unions as "lackeys of imperialist capitalism" for their betrayal during the war, to which syndicalists replied that of the syndicalist unions this only applied to the CGT. Throughout the preliminary meetings, syndicalists clashed with other delegates on the questions of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the conquest of state power as well as on relations with communists and the Comintern. Eventually all syndicalists agreed to the formation of a council tasked with spreading revolutionizing the trade union movement.{{Sfnm|1a1=Darlington|1y=2008|1pp=189–190|2a1=Thorpe|2y=1989|2pp=132–133|3a1=Tosstorf|3y=2009|3pp=16–18}} Disagreements continued at the congress itself.{{Sfn|Thorpe|1989|p=134}}<!-- The [[International Workers' Association – Asociación Internacional de los Trabajadores]], which was formed in 1922, is an international syndicalist federation of various labour unions from different countries. At its peak, it represented millions of workers and competed directly for the hearts and minds of the working class with social democratic unions and parties.

Thorpe, Lehning, Darlingotn. 
New movements emerged: Poland, Cuba, China.
 Bock 339-340: IWA retarded growth of RILU. -->