By RM
(My source of information on the history of anarcho-syndicalism I recieved from http://www.solfed.force9.co.uk/SelfEd/units.htm#Unit%201:%20Introduction%20-%20The%20origins%20of%20Capitalism)
Within France, after the demise of the First International, much of the working class of the time became somewhat dissillusioned by authoritarian leftism which contributed to the developement of an anti-authoritarian ideas. Although workers movements were active all over the world, France, due to the unique economic conditions of the timeas well as the organizational methods of the workers which were created to protect themselves somewhat from the exploitation of capital and the ruling classes, were to develope a certain from of 'anarchism' what would be come to be known as 'industrial anarchism' or 'revolutionary union anarchism'. Economic factors were influential in making France an ideal place for the early rise of 'revolutionary' unionism. The industrial revolution took a very different form then those in the rest of Europe and the USA. In Britain, Germany, and the USA particularly, industrialization had resulted in economic centralization, leading to the rapid growth of industrial towns and cities based on particular industries. By 1911, Britain had over 47 towns with over 100,000 inhabitants while Germany had 45 towns. In 1911, France had only 15 towns with more than 100,000 inhabitants while being twice the size of Britain. Due to such a more decentralized capitalist system, workers far greater flexibility was required on the part of the workers organizations and the workers themselves. Local and regional worker's federations could adopt the basic ideas and tactics to suit their needs themselves, rather thatn wait from orders from a central party or committee. Such anti-state attitudes by the workers fueled by state slaughter of the Paris Commune helped create the French anti-authoritarian movement. One of the 'anti-authoritarian' strands were that of revolutionary unionism or anarcho-syndicalism. The early attempts at unions were developed by socialists which anarchists would later join and influence. After the growing distrust with socialist parties groups of anarchists who were also active in the trade union movement began to put forward the idea of creating local union federations, called Bourse du Travail' which were organized along anarchist aims and principles and later started anarcho-sydicalist organizations which were spread throughout the western world.
Such unionism is where I see a problem. By joining with unions and creating 'anarchist' unions, anarchists had unintentionally trapped themselves into attempting to make a revolutionary break from capitalism in modes of organization which generally had its roots designed in the negotiation of the bosses and thus only a lesser form of exploitation. Anarcho-syndicalism, of all the forms of anarchy is the main form which continues the role of industrialism and the worker and thus much of the exploitation of capital. Anarcho-syndicalism in general questions very few institutions of oppression. Institutions such as religion, marriage, the family, the role of work, will still continue within many anarcho-syndicalist societiesand thus the capitalist social relationships that they were designed to reproduce. Anarchy is the absense of rulers and therefore exploitation. Anarcho-syndicalist societies, assuming they will be using large scale technological systems as well, will always continue to exploit due not only to the social relationships created by technology, the state and capital but the extraction of resources needed for the technological system to continue which will alwayse exploit; seperating certain peoples from their conditions of existence such as the remaining hunter-gatherers. Thus an anarcho-syndicalist society would be one of the ruling class of those whom are taking part in the technological system and the extraction of resources needed for the technological system at the expense of the exploited classes thus contradicting the meaning of anarchy.
'Anarcho-syndicalism' therefore cannot be a form of anarchy as it will not only continue to exploit by continuing social relationships created by capital and thus continuing the system of capital, but will, assuming anarcho-syndicalist societies will continue the technological system, will destroy environments for resources needed for the technological system to continue; therefore seperating certain peoples form what they need in order to live their lives as they wish.