and adopts all the Bergsonian anathemas it can find which condemn intellectual constructions, concepts, and thought in general.  Its war-cry is not only “Down with Capitalism” but also, in a great number of cases, “Down with Intellectualism”!  Instinct and impulse alone are to be guides.  Syndicalism, unlike Socialism, has no programme—­it does not believe in a prearranged plan.  Reality, it says, quoting Bersgon, has no plan.  It says, “Let us act, act instinctively and impulsively against what we feel to be wrong, and the future will grow out of our acting.”  We find Georges Sorel, the philosopher of Syndicalism, talking about what he terms the intuition of Socialism, and he talks emphatically about the tremendous moral value of strikes, apart from any material gain achieved by them.  He believes religiously in a General Strike as the great ideal, but considers it a myth capable of rousing enthusiasm in the workers, an ideal to which they must strive, a myth as inspiring as the belief of the early Christians in the Second Coming of Christ, which, although quite a false belief, contributed largely to the success of the early Church.  “Strikes,” says Sorel, “have engendered in the proletariat the most noble, the most profound, the most moving sentiments they possess.  The General Strike groups these in a composite picture, and by bringing together, gives to each its maximum intensity; appealing to the most acute memories of particular conflicts, it colours with an intense life all the details of the composition presented to the mind.  We obtain thus an intuition of Socialism which language cannot clearly express and we obtain it in a symbol instantly perceived, such as is maintained in the Bergsonian philosophy.” [Footnote:  Quoted by C. Bougle, in an interesting article Syndicalistes et Bergsoniens, Revue du mois, April 10, 1909.  And by Rev. Rhondda Williams in Syndicalism in France and its Relation to the Philosophy of Bergson, Hibbert Journal, 1914.  Also by J. W. Scott in his book Syndicalism and Philosophical Realism, 1919, pp. 39-40, and by Harley in Syndicalism.] In England, although the idea of the General Strike has not been so prominent, yet in recent years Strikes have assumed an aspect different from those of former years.  Workers who had “struck” before for definite objects, for wages or hours, or reformed workshop conditions, now seem to be seeking after something vaster—­a fundamental alteration in industrial conditions or the total abolition of the present system.  The spirit of unrest is on the increase; no doubt War conditions have, in many cases, intensified it, but there is in the whole industrial world an instinctive impulse showing itself, which is issuing in Syndicalist and Bolshevist [Footnote:  “Bolshevik”—­simply the Russian word for majority party as distinct from Mensheviks or minority.] activities of various kinds.  Syndicalism is undoubtedly revolutionary.  There are Les Syndicats rouges and Les Syndicats jaunes, of which the “Reds”