The Spanish Civil War from 1936 to 1939 was anarcho-syndicalism's greatest success and ultimate downfall at the same time. In places like Catalonia, the CNT union briefly ran worker-controlled factories and shared farmland. But these experiments faced overwhelming odds against Franco's fascist army, supported by Hitler's Germany and Mussolini's Italy.
The movement's leaders faced a difficult choice: either join the government (betraying their anti-government principles) or stay pure but likely lose the war. This impossible situation showed deep flaws in their strategy. Some leaders took government positions, angering their followers, while others refused to compromise and lost anyway. Neither approach worked against a well-organized military.
Too rigid to survive
Anarcho-syndicalism grew too inflexible as the world changed around it. While other movements adapted to new conditions, anarcho-syndicalists often rejected practical compromises as selling out. This stubbornness pushed potential supporters toward more flexible socialist and populist movements that could deliver real benefits.
In France, moderate members of the CGT union eventually abandoned anarcho-syndicalism for mainstream socialism. In Argentina, workers turned to Perón, who used state power to improve their lives immediately. The movement also focused too narrowly on factory workers. It failed to connect with farmers and the growing middle class.
Outsmarted by governments
As the 20th century progressed, governments became larger and more sophisticated. Welfare programs, labor laws, and social democratic policies took the revolutionary steam out of worker movements by addressing their immediate needs. Scandinavian countries delivered major benefits through reform rather than revolution, while dictatorships simply crushed independent unions.
I can't help but wonder if anarcho-syndicalists fundamentally misunderstood how power would operate in the modern era. Even democratic governments used surveillance and repression against anarcho-syndicalist groups. The American IWW was destroyed during the Red Scare. European anarcho-syndicalist organizations faced constant police harassment, infiltration, and legal restrictions. The movement simply couldn't withstand such coordinated opposition.
Internal contradictions
Anarcho-syndicalism's commitment to decentralization and rejection of leadership created serious organizational problems. While these principles reflected their core values, they made quick decision-making nearly impossible. In Spain, endless arguments between moderate and radical factions often paralyzed the movement at critical moments.
This strikes me as a classic case of admirable principles undermining practical effectiveness. Without clear leadership structures, anarcho-syndicalist movements struggled to maintain coherent strategy against more centralized opponents. Their organizational model proved effective for local activism but struggled to scale nationally or internationally in a way that could challenge state power.
They had no chance
Post-World War II prosperity further weakened all revolutionary movements. Rising living standards in Western democracies reduced worker anger, while the Cold War pushed aside political positions outside the capitalism-communism divide. By the 1950s, anarcho-syndicalism had basically disappeared as a significant political force.
Today, organizations like the Spanish CNT still exist but with tiny influence compared to their "glory" days. Modern unions mostly focus on workplace conditions and wages rather than revolutionary change. The movement failed due to external repression, internal contradictions, and changing historical circumstances. Despite its inspiring vision of worker self-management, anarcho-syndicalism ultimately couldn't overcome the powerful military, economic, and political forces aligned against it.
image source: CNT, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons