For the Organization of the Printing Workers

Translated from “Per l’organizzazione dei tipografi,” L’Agitazione (Ancona) 1, no. 30

(October 7,
1897).
We have been passed, and are reprinting below, a letter that a Propaganda Committee of the
Federazione fra i lavoratori del libro307 addressed to some printing workers in Ancona.308
We avail of this opportunity to express our wishes, too, that the Marches may see the end of
this disgrace: the absolute disorganization of the printing class and consequently the utterly
wretched conditions the printing workers endure.
Actually, in Ancona, a few young workers have taken the initiative and formed a union; but
so far, regrettably, the senior workers, the “men,” rather than encouraging the young and
joining them, stand aside, say that the thing is impossible, and spread mistrust by recalling a
certain treasurer who, back when there was a union, absconded with the funds.
Moreover, it is very painful for us to note that among these “men” there are some comrades
of ours, some anarchists who, aside from the issue of the printers’ union, are otherwise active,
committed to the cause, and filled with spirit of sacrifice.
We heard someone say that he will join in when things go well. How could things go well,
though, if the good men stand aside? It would be like saying: I will be an anarchist once
Anarchy has been achieved! What does it matter that once there was a treacherous treasurer?
Or do these people stop being anarchists if an anarchist happens to act out of weakness or
commit an evil deed?
How is the organization of the laboring masses that we preach supposed to be made unless
each of us starts spreading and building it among his fellow workers? We hope that these
comrades of ours will overcome their inertia and will not force us to say that the lads are
more men than the bearded men. [Followed by the Committee’s letter]

Anarchism in the Workers’ Movement

Translated from “L’anarchismo nel movimento operajo,” L’Agitazione (Ancona) 1, no. 30
(October 7, 1897).
We would draw our readers’ attention to the Toulouse (France) workers’ congress, which we
report in this edition, and to the speech delivered to said congress by our comrade Delessalle,
which we are reprinting under the heading “Workers’ Resistance.”305 The Toulouse
congress was a significant victory for our persuasion and tactics—a victory that was
predictable from the stance of the majority of the French delegation at the recent London
International Congress and that was made that much easier for our friends in France by the
authoritarian, intolerant behavior of the marxists.306 To be sure, the Toulouse congress was
no anarchist congress—and it is a good thing that this was the case. Anarchist congresses
should be held by anarchists, not by the workers at large… unless the latter have already
become anarchists, in which case anarchy would have carried the day and no more
congresses would be held for propaganda and struggle purposes, but only technical
congresses to thrash out practicalities arising in the life of society.
It is not our intention to impose our program on the masses who have yet to be persuaded,
much less are we out to put on a show of strength by using ambush and more or less clever
intrigues to get workers to vote through statements of principles that workers have yet to
embrace. We are not out to have our party take the place of the life of the people; but we
strive to ensure that said life may be comprehensive, thoughtful, and thriving and so our party
can bring to bear upon it whatever influence may naturally derive from the activity and
intelligence it can inject into its propaganda and its entire action as a party.
And one of the main reasons for our most recent fall-outs with the democratic socialists was
their ambition to take over the workers’‐ movement, in defiance of our demand for full
freedom for all, to foist their democratic socialist creed upon it and harness it for their own
electoral purposes—an ambition that has received a severe set-back in Toulouse, as far as
France goes, and that will be utterly defeated, we believe, the world over at the great
international congress in preparation for 1900. For us, it is enough if workers learn to do for
themselves, acknowledge the conflict of interests between them and the masters, and seek,
through union and all manner of resistance, to shrug off the state of degradation and
wretchedness in which they find themselves. Conscious, systematic socialism and anarchism
will come little by little, as the conflict widens and deepens and as the need for radical
organic remedies becomes apparent to all. The Toulouse congress shows that the thoughtful
part of the French proletariat, even though it may not understand or may not accept our
general principles, can discern the path that must lead to the ending of human exploitation—
and we are proud to record the important part that our comrades have played in this.
May their example spur us on.
***
The short-term practical means of struggle embraced by those attending the Toulouse
congress—striking when possible and appropriate, boycotting traders and masters as
circumstances allow, and easing up on the quantity and quality of work, squandering raw
materials, and ruining machinery and tools until such time as the master caves in to the
demands put by the workers—may appear (especially those last two) ill-suited to the social
conditions in Italy and to the state of public opinion.
This is because, up until a few years ago, workers not entirely brutalized by poverty and
ignorance fell in behind bourgeois parties and looked for improvement to the kindness of the
masters or to the arrival in power of one or the other faction of the bourgeoisie. There was no
collective awareness of class antagonisms, and only now the first inklings of it are breaking
through. At a personal level, every worker has always thought of the master as his enemy,
and has sought to give him as little work as possible and often to do him as much harm as he
could; but, lacking the illumination of an ideal, lacking the purpose of the general good, such
feelings were merely the instinctive and almost unthinking backlash against hurt. They were
unable to generate any lasting, general impact and boiled down to personal hatreds and
rivalries, which, for the most part, led to barbarism in practices, falling levels of sociability,
and a debasement of everybody’s level of morality. It is up to us, up to the socialists
generally, to cultivate in the proletariat a consciousness of the class antagonism and the need
for collective struggle, and a yearning to have an end of struggle and to resolve differences by
establishing equality, justice, and freedom for everyone. And as that new consciousness and
those new ideals spread, the tactics advocated in France and already being practiced in
England will be feasible and useful even here in Italy, through adaptation to changing
circumstances of time, place, or person.
The odd friend of ours may think this small potatoes: and there will be no shortage, either, of
voices calling us “legalitarians.” This is mere rhetoric, the sort of thing we have not yet
completely outgrown!
As individuals and as a party, we have grown up under the sway of admiration and craving
for the classic, traditional forms of revolution: barricades, armed bands, gunfire, etc. And we
are still of the view that those are superb forms… as long as they do not have the drawback of
not being practicable and of remaining pious wishes.
We also say: such education and desire of ours will prove greatly useful to us come the day of
final crisis, and it would be a mistake and a sin to let them fall into disrepute and oblivion.
But let us remember that neglecting small means when greater means cannot be deployed,
and wallowing in inertia on the pretext of wanting to only engage in big things, eventually
leads to our becoming impotent and incapable of doing a lot or a little.
This is how the legalitarians, the parliamentarists have managed to make headway. The
revolution is a beautiful thing, they say; but since you do not make it, allow us to do what we
can: enter Parliament. We, on the other hand, have to demonstrate that even while waiting
for the revolution to arrive, we can fight, and fight to some effect, without dragging the
masses down the unwinnable byways of parliamentarism. Once we pull that off,
parliamentary socialism’s days will be numbered. Moreover let us not forget that, even when
they are possible, barricades erected without a measure of awareness in the people lead only
to the replacement of one government by another—and that such awareness can only develop
gradually, through the day-to-day struggle, which cannot be barricade warfare.
So let us not scorn the “petty means.” They will hoist us into a position where we can deploy
major ones.