What we mean by "Direct Action"

Direct Action is a notion of such clarity, of such self-evident transparency, that merely to speak the words defines and explains them. It means that the working class, in constant rebellion against the existing state of affairs, expects nothing from outside people, powers or forces, but rather creates its own conditions of struggle and looks to itself for its means of action. It means that, against the existing society which recognises only the citizen, rises the producer. And that that producer, having grasped that any social grouping models itself upon its system of production, intends to attack directly the capitalist mode of production in order to transform it, by eliminating the employer and thereby achieving sovereignty in the workshop - the essential condition for the enjoyment of real freedom.

The Negation of Parliamentarism

Direct Action thus implies that the working class subscribes to notions of freedom and autonomy instead of genuflecting before the principle of authority. Now, it is thanks to this authority principle, the pivot of the modern world - Democracy being its latest incarnation - that the human being, tied down by a thousand ropes, moral as well as material, is denied any opportunity to display will and initiative.

From this negation of Parliamentarism, false, and hypocritical, and the ultimate form of the crystallisation of authority, arises the entire syndicalist method. Direct Action therefore arises as simply the fleshing out of the principle of freedom, its realisation in the masses; no longer in abstract, vague, indistinct forms, but rather as clear-cut, practical notions inspiring the rebelliousness that the times require: it is the destruction of the spirit of submissiveness and resignation that degrades individuals and turns them into willing slaves - and a blossoming of the spirit of revolt, the factor fertilising human societies.

This fundamental and complete rupture between capitalist society and the world of labour, as encapsulated in Direct Action, was articulated by the International Working Men's [sic] Association in its motto: "The emancipation of the workers will be carried out by the workers themselves." And it made a contribution towards making a reality of this divorce by attatching supreme importance to economic associations. But confused still was the influence it would attribute to them. However, the IWMA had an inkling that the work of social transformation has to begin at the bottom, and that political changes are merely a consequence of amendments made to the system of production. That is why it hailed the action of trades associations and, naturally, legitimised the procedure of expressing their vitality and influence, appropriate to the body in question - and which is nothing other than Direct Action.

Direct Action is in fact the normal function of the unions and their reason for being; it would be a glaring nonsense for such associations to restrict themselves to bringing the waged together, in order to better adapt them to the fate reserved for them in bourgeois society - production for others. It is all too evident that, in the unions, persons of no particularly clear cut social outlooks band together for the purposes of self-defence, in order to struggle first hand and as individuals. The community of interests attracts them there; they gravitate towards it instinctively. There, in that nursery of life, the work of fermentation, elaboration and education is made; the union raises the consciousness of workers blinkered still by the prejudices inculcated into them by the ruling class; it opens their eyes wide to the overriding necessity of struggle, of revolt; it prepares them for social battles by marshalling their concerted efforts. From such instruction, it follows that every individual must act without ever offloading on to others the task of acting in their place. It is in these gymnastics that the individual is imbued with a with a sense of her own worth, and in extolling such worth lies the fertilising power of Direct Action. It marshals human resourcefulness, tempers characters and focuses energies. It teaches self-confidence! And self-reliance! And self-mastery! And acting for oneself!

Now, if we compare the methods in use in democratic associations or groupings, we find that they have nothing in common with this constant tendency to raise consciousness, nor with this adaptation to action that permeates the economic associations. And we have no reason to suppose that the methods extant in the latter can be transposed into the former. Other than on the economic terrain, Direct Action is a meaningless formula, in that it is contradictory with the operation of democratic groupings, the premise of which is the representative system - implicit in which is that individuals at the grassroots should be inactive. Trust to our representatives! Refer to them! Rely upon them! Leave things to them!

The character of autonomous and personal action of the working class, as encapsulated by Direct Action, is clarified and accentuated by its demonstration on the terrain of the economic, where all mistakes founder, where misunderstandings are out of place, and where every effort serves some useful purpose. By this, the contrived associations of democratism, which amalgamates persons of mutually antagonistic social interests, simply come apart. Here the enemy is visible. The exploiter and the oppressor cannot hope to conceal themselves behind misleading masks, or to bamboozle people by dressing themselves up in ideological glad-rags: class enemies they are, and they must be exposed openly as such! Here, the struggle is engaged face to face and no holds barred. Every effort strives for some tangible, perceptible outcome; it translates in the short term as some whittling away of the employer's authority, as a relaxation of the shackles binding the working man to the workshop, as a relative improvement in well-being. And this is why, of course, it invlokes the overriding necessity of some accommodation between class brothers, so that they may march into battle side by side, standing up together against the common enemy.

So, it follows logically that, the moment that a revolutionary association is set up, one should infer from its inception that, wittingly or unwittingly, the workers banding together there are making ready to look after their affairs for themselves; that they are determined to stand up to their masters and look only to their own efforts for success; that they mean to act directly, without intermediaries, without leaving it up to others to carry out the necessary tasks.

Direct Action is, therefore, merely union action, stripped of all accretions, freed of all impurities, with none of the buffers that deaden the impact of belligerent upon belligerent, and with none of the deviations that vitiate the meaning and extent of the struggle; it is revolutionary union action without capitalist compromises, without the flirtation with the bosses of which the sycophants of "social peace" dream; it is union action without "friends" in the government and with no intrusions in the debate from "go-betweens".

Exaltation of the individual

Direct Action spells liberation for the masses of humanity hitherto trained in the acceptance of imposed beliefs, their ascent towards reflection, toward consciousness. It is a call to all to play their part in the common endeavour; the individual is invited to be a human void no more, to look no more to those above or outside of herself for her salvation; she is urged to set her hand to the plough, to submit passively no more to social inevitabilities. Direct Action signals the end of the age of miracles - miracles from Heaven, miracles from the State - and, in opposition to hopes vested in "providence" (no matter what they may be) it announces that it will act upon the maxim: salvation lies within ourselves!