"workers userping the capitalists and thereby becoming the capitalists in the process"





There's a big problem with that and it is this; to be a Capitalist one must:





1) Have exclusive (Or Private in Socialist slang) ownership over the means of production/workplace (i.e..Companies, Industry etc.).





2) Run said means of production in a Capitalist fashion, which is a hierarchical, bureaucratic fashion.





Under Anarcho-Syndicalism however, the workers in each workplace would usurp the owners and begin running their workplaces collectively. These workplaces aren't owned or run exclusively by any single Worker so it doesn't fit the first requirement. Secondly, the workplaces themselves would be run in on a democratic basis (i.e..Worker's Self Management), where the workers will all collectively decide how the workplace is to be run. It's basically like the Worker's Co-ops in Argentina and Mondragon. (Here is an FAQ on this: libcom.org/library/workers-sel…). Since there is no boss to command the workers in a hierarchical fashion, it cannot be said to be hierarchical, thus cannot be considered Capitalist.





"tearing down various states and putting up there own imperialist rule."





Again, that isn't the case, since an Anarcho-Syndicalist revolution isn't spread through conquest of other countries. It's done through people in their own countries establishing Unions and dismantling their own states as above.

