Northern Seleucia wrote:Kubra wrote: In its heyday, anarchism was generally the radical wing of the trade union movement, largely pushing for those who worked in a place of business to own where they worked and also to themselves make the decisions on the running of the business, which is why the only extant international anarchist org left purports to be a labour union and concerns itself largely with, you guessed it, unionising.
Hence the whole idea of anarcho-syndicalism?
yes, but in its heyday "anarcho-syndicalism" would have been regarded as a strange term, since it was the only thing calling itself anarchism that a person was liable to encounter outside of, say, strange and secretive political cells involving Russians.
In any case, the big defining aspect of anarchism was largely that it's internal bureaucracy involved a lot of procedural rules, largely on the matter of voting, that of course we're so even for the smallest administrative units. A joke would be that a household of anarchists would not be able to make breakfast without calling a special sitting of the household executive committee to decide on eggs or porridge before sending it down the greater household assembly for ratification.