Category talk:National syndicalists

National syndicalists as non-syndicalists & as fascists
As it is shown on the national syndicalism page, national syndicalism was the earliest form of fascism. Furthermore, historically fascists have banned trade unions and attacked syndicalists (and socialists more broadly), such as in Spain & Italy. Italian fascist syndicalism specifically rejected the class struggle basis of syndicalism, and advocated for class collaborationism. National syndicalism is as syndicalist as "National Socialism" is socialist. Docktuh (talk) 20:13, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The page shows that National syndicalism is a older concept than Fascism is, Fascists banned trade union and syndicalists who were opposed to them, many Fascist movements had their own unions, and I don't see how Fascism's support for class collaborationism is relevant here. -- 177.19.68.62 (talk) 23:15, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * All of the national syndicalist organizations folded speedily into the fascist movement, and national syndicalism is about subjugating syndicalism to suit the needs of integral nationalism. Furthermore, national syndicalism developed on the lines of Sorel and Maurass (themselves proto-fascists) explicitly called for anti-democratic, anti-communist, and antisemitic ideas. Nothing about this is compatible with trade unionism or syndicalism. So the fact that national syndicalism was also older than fascism is of no importance. Docktuh (talk) 23:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I never denied the association between Fascism and National syndicalism, I was just pointing out that it is a older concept, and also that not all Fascist movements supported it, but anyway, why exactly are anti-democratic, anti-communist and anti-semitic ideas incompatible with trade unionism or syndicalism? With leftist strains, definitely, but that doesn't mean someone couldn't just set up a trade union defending said ideas, or that someone couldn't combine syndicalism with said ideas, your arguments for National syndicalism not being considered syndicalism seem to be POV more than anything, and this something that goes against Wikipedia rules. -- 177.19.68.62 (talk) 00:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Syndicalist unions are democratically run, antisemitism by definition excludes Jews from this democratic relation, and anti-communism goes directly against the basic goals of syndicalism in general. Syndicalists like Rudolf Rocker, Daniel DeLeon, and Lorenzo Kom'boa Ervin, as well as anarcho-communists like Peter Kropotkin and Errico Malatesta all point out that the endgame of syndicalism is libertarian communism. And the argument that not every fascist supported national syndicalism is a non-factor. Not every fascist was a Nazi, or a Falangist, or a Legionnaire, or a NazBol. This makes it no less fascist, and therefore no less anti-unionist, because again, national syndicalism is the subjugation of the syndicalist program for the purposes of far-right politics. Even a cursory look at the subject tells you this. Docktuh (talk) 02:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Once again, what you said apply to Leftist strains of syndicalism only, and anyway, National syndicalism isn't necessarily anti-semitic, and Anarchists were also once opposed to Communism as well, and many Syndicalists eventually supported Fascism, as is mentioned in the page itself, Nazism, Falangism, Legionarism, etc, wouldn't have existed if not for Mussolini and Italian Fascism whereas National syndicalism existed before it, so far your arguments have been POV only. -- 177.19.68.62 (talk) 03:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * That's because there aren't "rightist" strains. Because again, national syndicalism, as it says in the article, is an attempt to subjugate syndicalist operations to nationalist ends. And Maurass and Sorel openly set out to an antisemitic program. The Falangists carried out antisemitic programs. And again, so what if national syndicalism existed first? That means nothing if it all transformed into fascism. No one calls themselves a "national syndicalist" after the 1910s and not immediately follow that up as being some kind of fascist. Your attempt to frame this as a POV is silly, because all of this is stated within the article. Docktuh (talk) 03:04, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * National syndicalism is not inherently anti-Semitic, Maurras was an anti-Semite but him being an anti-Semite doesn't mean National syndicalism is anti-Semitic, using this logic you could say Anarchism is anti-Semitic because Bakunin was an anti-Semite, and Falangism is, also, not inherently anti-Semitic, there were many Falangists who were anti-Semites (such as Onesimo Redondo), but the ideology itself isn't inherently anti-Semitic like Nazism is, anyway, I'm saying it is POV because it clearly is, and so far you have not shown otherwise. -- 179.182.141.204 (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't say it was "inherently" (though thank you for putting words in my mouth). I pointed out it's been antisemitic since it's inception, and that plenty of people who've been national syndicalists have been raging antisemites (y'know, like fascists tend to be). But anyway, this is all beside the point. You keep insisting I'm using a POV stance, though you've yet to demonstrate how, despite the fact that, again, everything I'm saying is backed up in the article. So I suppose by your logic I should go list National Socialism as socialist, National Bolsheviks as Marxist-Leninists, and so on. Docktuh (talk) 03:32, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You said that "national syndicalism developed on the lines of Sorel and Maurass (themselves proto-fascists) explicitly called for anti-democratic, anti-communist, and antisemitic ideas", my point was that National syndicalism is not an inherently anti-Semitic ideology itself, it's relevant if many National syndicalists were anti-Semites, the ideology itself is not anti-Semitic. Your stance is clearly based on a Leftist POV, and nothing in the article supports what you're saying other than the lead which isn't even the original one, given this, I will have to revert your edits. -- 177.19.67.80 (talk) 23:18, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * OK this is becoming ridiculous, so I'm gonna go ahead and link articles, because apparently you want to not read. I'm not gonna quote anything specific with regards to national syndicalism being fascist, because it's right there in the article and no one really disputes this bit. The syndicalism article backs up the fact that syndicalism is a trade union movement. The articles on fascism, Nazism, and Falangism, as well as on the Imperial Rule Assistance Association will all show you that fascists banned trade unions, except for the nominal ones that they had direct control over. This is also backed up in the articles on Edmondo Rossoni and Fascist syndicalism. They also note that fascism, unlike syndicalism, had an official policy of class collaborationism, whereas syndicalism, conversely was in favor of class struggle. In addition, whereas syndicalism is anti-state, one of the founding principles of fascism is idolatory of the state. This is all out in the open. Knock this off before I report you for blatant edit warring. Docktuh (talk) 02:14, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * This is becoming ridiculous indeed, all your arguments here were already addressed so I'm not going to do it again, you're the one who is actually edit warring here, and also you're making a POV edit, both of which goes against Wikipedia rules, since you're not able to show a neutral argument, you should seriously stop deleting content. -- 186.213.2.97 (talk) 04:45, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
 * That was the first time I brought up those points, so now you're just being untruthful, not to mention that nowhere in this conversation have you made it clear how the accusations of POV editing are stable. I've made a RfC below so as to sort this out, since you keep at this. Docktuh (talk) 18:28, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

RfC on resolution for categorization
Given national syndicalism's connection with the far-right and antithetical positions to other forms of syndicalism, is it better described as a fascist ideology rather than a syndicalist one, much like "National Bolshevism" is not considered a form of Bolshevism or "National Socialism" is not considered a form of socialism? 03:59, 2 May 2020 (UTC)


 * No I don't have an issue with describing National syndicalism as a Fascist ideology, but I don't see why it shouldn't be described as a syndicalist one, just because it is opposed to left-wing forms of syndicalism. -- 177.42.141.224 (talk) 22:37, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes National syndicalism stands for everything syndicalism itself is against. Docktuh (talk) 03:11, 9 May 2020 (UTC)