Question

according to the authors, how are radical socialists and anarchists different? while the afl (the american federation of labor) and the knights of labor competed for members, radical socialists and anarchists offered different visions of labors true path. the radicals, many of whom were immigrants steeped in the tradition of european socialism, believed that reform was futile; they called instead for social revolution. anarchists also wanted revolutionary change but envisioned a smaller role for the state than the socialists did. both groups, sensitive to criticism that they preferred revolution in theory to improvements here and now, rallied around the popular issue of the eight - hour day. —roark et al., the american promise: a history of the united states, bedford/st. martins. anarchists wanted a larger role for the state than socialists did. the two groups were criticized for being too abstract. the two groups had different visions for the future of the working class. the two groups supported the eight - hour workday.

Explanation:

The text states that radical socialists and anarchists offered different visions of labor's true path, which implies different visions for the working - class future. The first option is contrary to what's in the text (anarchists wanted a smaller state role). The second option is about a shared criticism, not a difference. The fourth option is about a shared stance, not a difference.

Answer:

The two groups had different visions for the future of the working class.