/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

I might be wrong here but i think the counter-agruement to synclists from an anarcho-communist view is that trade unions can form into state-like apparatuses, thereby restablising class relations.

>>2755256
The difference is in organisational forms and sometimes relations to existing anarchist-leaning communities, anarcho-communists mostly want to build an alternative societies or even abolish current one while (anarcho-)syndicalists mostly work with other socialists in order to defend workers or other people from private and state institutions, but those two don't have to exclude each other but in most of times when you meet (anarcho)-syndicalists they're rather a labour activists while anarcho-communists tends to work around squats or other community building stuff.

There was a distinction that mattered in 1910 and maybe 1930 but both movements are so hilariously small that it doesn't mean anything nowadays.

>>2755256
Classic Vanilla anarcho-syndicalist theory trusted the syndicalist Form to inherently lead to revolution and in some cases they had advocated for a more mutualist-type social form where there would still exist a market to a certain extent with small firms and artisans in "comradely" competition, and still nations and a global market but with the ideal of solidarity in mind, etc.
Anarcho-communist theorists (i.e. "Platformism", "Especifismo") argue that syndicalist structures alone are not enough as they could capitulate to reformist/opportunist tendencies by nature of serving as a union in the context of capital, and it insists on the importance of a parallel political organization (a "not a party" of the more or less Democratic Centralist variety but horizontally organized) to take the lead and ensure a libertarian communist trajectory in the anarcho-syndicalist unions and to work towards building hegemony in the proletarian cultural sphere.
It should be noted that these are broad generalizations and there exist major differences in perspective and praxis between groups, national orgs, and individual militants from the beginning till now. Just look at the IWA vs ICL debacle or the many schisms in the CNT over the years.

>>2758582
This analysis in large part correct, from what I remember of my anarchist youth.
>Just look at the IWA vs ICL debacle or the many schisms in the CNT
Seems this happened somewhere around the time where I shifted over to Marxist communist theory (and later practice), but I'm still interested to keep up with social anarchist developments. Do would you have the capacity to elaborate on this latter part?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Workers_Association#Later_developments_(1940%E2%80%93)
>By the 21st century, the IWA was experiencing an internal crisis. This process culminated in 2016, with the expulsion of the CNT (Spain), USI (Italy), FAU (Germany), which together represented 80-90% of the IWA's working membership. In 2018, the expelled sections of the IWA established a new international organisation, the International Confederation of Labour (Confederación Internacional del Trabajo; ICL-CIT).[11] Alongside the CNT, USI and FAU, other affiliated organisations included the North American Regional Administration of the IWW, FORA (Argentina), ESE (Greece), and IP (Poland).[12] As of its founding, the ICL-CIT counted more than 10,000 members, located in both Europe and the Americas; in contrast, by 2020, the IWA's membership had dwindled to less than 1,000 active members, mostly located in Europe
I'm noticing that the new org is explicitly naming "confederation" as a structure, while IWA always was a federation. I also remember there were some anarcho-syndicalist / CNT -> radical liberal republicanism going on during the Spanish civil war, could this be related?
I don't know how recently you read anarchist theory (for me it must've been a decade ago) but do you remember platformists ever writing directly on the federalism v confederalism debate in organizational social anarchism? I'm trying to figure out of one can glean if this was truly a radlib/platformist split in the international ansynd movement that happened or if it's different.

>>2758605
>Do would you have the capacity to elaborate on this latter part?
As I remember it, the FAU(D) had been kicked out earlier for collaborating with non-anarchist groups (the wobs!) while the minority Polish section ZSP who were seen as ideological puritans were heading the GS. The national sections with the largest volume of militants (also more reformist/pragmatic of course) were sore that a section who only represented a handful of militants could overrule and kick out a much larger section, also angry about how in the IWA statutes influence is not quantity proportional and each national section has the same (1) vote. For example in the case of CNT-F(s) the two competing orgs had to share a vote. I'm not sure how the ICL has changed structurally in that regard, Haven't been as close to that scene in recent years, but you could say these days the IWA is old timers and "ultras" and the ICL is more pragmatic and reformist.
> I also remember there were some anarcho-syndicalist / CNT -> radical liberal republicanism going on during the Spanish civil war, could this be related?
It's too much to explain, I'd suggest reading G. Munis, Augistin Guillamon, and Michael Seidman on this topic.
>do you remember platformists ever writing directly on the federalism v confederalism debate in organizational social anarchism? I'm trying to figure out of one can glean if this was truly a radlib/platformist split in the international ansynd movement that happened or if it's different.
I'm not in the condition for citing references atm but the whole Platformism vs Synthesim debate is probably where you would want to start.

>>2755256
>>2755256
Anarcho syndicalism is only concerned with class struggle not necessarily where it leads as the end goal (usually the debate between collectivism vs communism is invoked)