Australia, Rebel Worker Vol.23 No.1 (184) April-May 2004 - Review of A History of the French Anarchist Movement 1917-1945 - by David Berry From Jura Books Date Sat, 17 Apr 2004 10:37:08 +0200 (CEST) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________ A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E News about and of interest to anarchists http://ainfos.ca/ http://ainfos.ca/index24.html ________________________________________________ A pervasive manifestation of the panorama of the contemporary global employer offensive is the phenomena of employers and their state apparatuses constant taking the initiative in the class struggle via the ever tightening web of restrictive industrial legislation, the rapid pace of the restructuring of work processes to create new industrially in-experienced and atomised workforces and the launching of new speed up waves to raise productivity and paralyse grass roots militant organisation. Concurrently most of contemporary international anarchism has displayed an inability amongst its diverse groupings to develop and implement strategies involving adopting long term programs of work in industries of strategic importance in their respective countries to check this offensive. A key step leading down the track to the eventual establishment of the structures of alternative direct action oriented labour movements. Instead, many of these groups are either absorbed in chasing after anti-globalist spectacles or involvement in campaigns in a kaleidoscope of often exotic single issues or aimless industrial activism – responding to perceived opportunities rather than taking action inspired by strategic insight The importance of the book under review is the light it throws on the chief causes of this parlous state of contemporary international anarchism through examining a critical transitional phase in the history of international anarchism in one key country. A phase when anarchism became accommodated with the left subculture of party/sect building in an unsuccessful attempt to rival its opponents on the Left for control of the French Labour movement Two momentous and explosive events in the history of the 20th Century – the Russian Revolution of 1917-21 and the Spanish Revolution and Civil War of 1936-39 which sparked major crises in the French Anarchist Movement are particularly focused upon in this volume. In discussing the context in which the movement of this period emerged, the author fails to adequately explain the reasons for the sharp diverging of the C.G.T. (General Confederation of Labour) leadership away from the traditional syndicalist stance of anti-militarism and commitment to the revolutionary project. As graphically highlighted with its support of the French State and ruling class war effort following the outbreak of World War One. The author neglects to provide an account of the campaigns of the revolutionary minority in various key CGT union affiliates against domination by the “reformist tendency” which avoided direct action and sought to improve workers situation within the capitalist set up - lacking a revolutionary perspective. The author proceeds to examine the impact of the Russian Revolution on French anarchism. He shows how widespread enthusiasm for the Russian Revolution and the mushrooming of “soviets” or councils - political assemblies based on workplaces, neighbourhoods and military units in Russia, inspired the emergence of a new political current in France and elsewhere – “Sovietism” and its interpretation by many as “Council Anarchism”. This new current proved to have unrealistic objectives – forming a new revolutionary bloc uniting all anti-capitalist forces to affiliate with the Comintern (international communist party organisation) and carry out a social revolution in France. Particularly, the post WWI strike wave failed to generalise into an insurrectionary General Strike and different Left factions failed to unite. The author does a particularly thorough job discussing the multiplicity of “Communist Parties/Federations” and their publications which emerged largely from the French anarchist movement in the post WWI period. He shows how these groupings emphasised the ultra democratic nature of the soviets in their early days. However, lacking the “Communist Party” franchise from Moscow which was obtained by a split from the French Socialist Party, and the re-emergence of explicit anarchist groupings and publications, these formations dissolved. The author sketches how this turbulence on the political scale was reflected on the industrial front in the French labour movement, with the eruption of a disastrous splitting process affecting the largest union confederation – the General Confederation of Labour (C.G.T.) It focused upon a clash between different tendencies – the social democratic current associated with senior officials of the C.G.T, known as the “reformists” who had swerved from the revolutionary syndicalist path toward brazen collaboration in the French ruling class war effort during WWI, and an opposition movement composed of anarcho-syndicalists and extreme socialists/Leninists. The upshot of this struggle, the author shows to be considerable disarray amongst anarchist forces in the labour movement characterised by its marginalisation and the rise in influence of the Moscow oriented French Communist Party with its seizure of power in the C.G.T.U. (General Confederation of Labour United), the major split off from the C.G.T. Similar processes occurred internationally at this time, associated with the rise in influence of the new phenomena of Communist Parties, with an increasing Stalinist orientation and a renewed employer offensive . In France and elsewhere the author argues that the emergence of this new force led to a generalised crisis and decline in morale within the anarchist movement. This demoralisation was characterised by a retreat into a range of “lifestyle” issues, and a lack of focus on the class struggle. He sees the period of 1924-34 particularly characterised by this malady. To overcome this crisis, there was a move in anarchist circles to devise a more efficient organisation to compete with this new virile phenomena of French Stalinism in various arenas. The author shows how the anarchist exile community in France, particularly the Russian anarchist exile groups played a critical role in the debate for forging an “anarchist vanguard” which would unite all anarchist forces. Such an organisational formula was provided by the “Arshinov Program” devised by the Dielo Trouda Group, which encouraged concepts of “collective responsibility”, a strong emphasis on building a cell structure, membership recruitment and “tactical unity” to out complete the Communist Party. It was criticised by a “syntheticist tendency” which favoured multi-tendency anarchist federations with looser membership requirements. The author goes on to show that the upshot of this debate was a push to restructure the existing organised anarchist movement in France along “Arshinov Program” lines which led to the transformation of the UA (anarchist union) into the Revolutionary Anarchist Communist Union (U.A.C.R.) which lasted from 1927-30. Subsequently, the U.A.C.R. became again the U.A. with its official adoption of a syntheticist approach. However, according to the author, many key personnel who were Arshinov Program enthusiasts remained in the organisation. They played a critical role in the next phase of large scale anarchist activity - the building of a revolutionary grassroots “anti-fascist front” (to compete with the bureaucratic “Popular Front” of the French Socialist, Radical and Communist parties), associated with involvement in the strike wave/factory occupations of 1936 and support for revolutionary forces during the Spanish Revolution and Civil War, particularly the anarcho-syndicalist C.N.T.-F.A.I. (National Confederation of Labour – Iberian Anarchist Federation ). The author provides ample evidence of the growth in membership of the largest anarchist grouping - the U.A. and other smaller anarchist groupings during the mid thirties. He also shows that several important U.A. and C.G.T.S.R. (General Confederation of Labour Syndicalist Revolutionary) (an anarchist inspired split from the C.G.T.U. in 1926) militants got elected to important positions in C.G.T. unions and set up new C.G.T.S.R. affiliates, during the June 1936 strike wave. Whilst the author shows dramatic surges during this period in the print runs of publications such as a special 1937 May Day edition of the U.A.’s “le Libertaire” of 100,000 copies and regular weekly print run of 38,000, enormous book and pamphlet publishing activity and a general “higher public profile” of anarchist grouping activity, he recognises that the anarchist movement in France during the period under review was ultimately a failure. This failure particularly consisted of its inability to assist the extension of the revolutionary wave from Spain to France and other parts of Europe. The author shows that the C.N.T.-F.A.I. had some particularly apposite ideas regarding how this revolutionary wave might spread and how the revolutionary forces in Spain would be assisted - via the establishment of workers control of transport and armaments industries in France and workers directly supplying the revolutionary forces in Spain with weaponry. Given the apparent absence of any industrial strategy focusing on such strategic industries amongst French anarchist groupings and an unsuccessful attempt to have the UA adopt a policy supporting the formation of factory committees “to disseminate anarchist ideas, encourage direct action and foster the formation of revolutionary militias”, which was initiated by some UA members following the reunification of the CGT and CGTU in Mar.1936, and the continuing predominant influence of the “reformists” and Stalinists in much of the French labour movement, the basis did not exist for any likelihood of realising the workers control/direct action measures advocated by the CNT-FAI. Certainly, anarchist groupings were unable to assist the initiation of a direct action movement in industry similar to the campaign for the 8 hour day inspired by revolutionary syndicalist forces in the C.G.T. before WWI. According to the author, in place of such activity, the U.A. via various committees and organisations such as CEL (Comite pour l’Espagne Libre) and SIA (Solidarite internationale antifasciste) the largest anarchist grouping was drawn into ineffectual measures such as regular solidarity/information meetings/rallies on the Spanish Revolution throughout much of France, the small scale provision of soldiers, supplies and munitions for the revolutionary forces in Spain. This activity is similar in its ineffectiveness to the mass rallies/marches held in Australia and elsewhere to oppose the recent US and its allies invasion of Iraq in 2003 which proved useless in achieving their objective. The type of action which would have paralysed or precluded the invasion such as internationally coordinated direct action by workers in strategic sectors was not forthcoming. The author emphasises the absence of “tighter organisation” as a major contribution amongst others for the failure of the French anarchist forces to take better advantage of the more favourable circumstances of the mid 1930’s. However, without a revolutionary strategy, and the critical “invisible” well coordinated, long range industrial organising in strategic sectors, the establishment of an alternative revolutionary labour movement and major direct action/workers’ control campaigns was highly unlikely. In this way anarchist groupings would act as a catalyst for workers self organisation, rather than focusing on the propagandising, single issue campaigning and “membership recruiting” of sects/parties. With the lead up to and outbreak of WWII and the defeat of the Spanish Revolution and a rising wave of state repression, the author sketches the decline in morale and disintegration of the major anarchist groupings. He goes on to do a good job dispelling various myths regarding the supposed inactivity of anarchist groupings during WWII and the Nazi occupation of France and their moves toward reorganisation. In conclusion, the author certainly has done an excellent job in his research concerning French anarchism in the period under discussion, providing many new details. However, the author, like those French anarchists who sought to compete with the Communist Party is to a degree hypnotised by the mystique of “organisation”. When the more relevant issue of “strategy” and the associated development of a scientific climate of debate/research, is neglected in regard to his discussion of the chief problems of French anarchism and revolutionary syndicalism in the period of 1917-1945. Mark McGuire ======================================== From "Rebel Worker" Vol.23 No.1 (184) April -May 2004, Paper of the Anarcho-Syndicalist Network, Subscriptions: $12 pa in Australia, and $25 airmail pa overseas. Address PO Box 92 Broadway 2007 NSW A History of the French Anarchist Movement 1917-1945 by David Berry, Greenwood Press.