The Revolution Breaks Out
In November 1918, the German front collapsed. The whole war machine broke
up. At KIEL, the officers of the fleet decided upon a last stand 'to save
their honour.' They found, however, that the sailors refused to obey.
This was not, in fact, their first mutiny; previous attempts to protest
against the war had been put down with bullets and promises. But this time,
they scored an immediate success. The Red Flag went up, first on one
warship, then on another.
The sailors elected delegates who, ship by ship formed a Council. From now
on the sailors determined to make the movement spread. They had declined to
die fighting the enemy; neither did they wish to die fighting the so called
loyal troops who would be called in on the side of repression. They formed
the backbone of the movement for Soldiers, Sailors and Workers Councils.
And meanwhile they were going ashore and marching on the great port of
Hamburg; from there, the message poured out all over Germany. Delegates
left by train, and otherwise, for all parts of the country.
The first blow of freedom had been struck! Events now moved rapidly.
Hamburg welcomed the sailors with enthusiasm. Soldiers and workers joined
in the movement; they too elected councils. While this kind of organisation
was unknown in practice, within four days a vast network of workers and
soldiers councils covered Germany. Perhaps some talk had been heard of
Russian soviets (1917-18) but in view of the censorship, very little. At
all events, no party or organisation had proposed this form of struggle. It
was an entirely spontaneous movement.
Forerunners of the Councils
It is true that during the war similar organisations had in fact made their
appearance in the factories. They were formed in the course of strikes, by
elected representatives, the equivalent of our shop stewards. Given minor
offices in the union machinery, in the tradition of German trade unionism,
they were the link between the local and central headquarters, to transmit
the demands of the workers to HQ. These demands, and the number of
grievances, were naturally very high during the War. In the main they
concerned intensified work and price increases. But the German unions (like
those of other countries) had formed a united front with the Government
(the Burgfrieden). They guaranteed social peace in exchange for slight
advantages for the workers and in particular participation of the union
leaders on various official organisations. Thus the stewards in presenting
grievances found themselves hammering at a brick wall. The 'hotheads' and
'trouble makers' were, sooner or later, shanghaied into the Forces, in
special units. It became difficult to take up the struggle within the
unions.
As a result, the stewards gradually lost contact with union headquarters.
Union affairs ceased to interest them, but the workers demands remained
what they were. Then, in 1917, a flood of unofficial strikes suddenly swept
out over the country. No stable organisation led it. It was entirely
spontaneous. It proceeded naturally from the work done by the stewards and
the unsatisfied demands of the workers.
The New Movement
This new labour movement had come into existence without the aid of any
party, and without any leadership. Any ideological considerations of any
nature had to give way before the demands of the moment. In 1918, this
sporadic movement, consisting of trends cut off from one another, became
united by reason of its identical form of struggle. They came to form a new
means of administration.
On the one hand were the 'normal' forms - police, food control,
organisation of labour; on the other hand, in all important industrial
centres were the workers councils. In Berlin, Hamburg, Bremen, the Ruhr,
Central Germany, Saxony; the workers councils had to be recognised and
reckoned with. But they had up to that time few concrete results. Why ?
An easy victory !
This arose from the very ease with which the workers councils were formed.
The state apparatus was breaking down, but not as a result of a persistent s
truggle by the workers. It was breaking down in the stress of war, and the
workers councils met in a vacuum. Their movement was growing without
resistance, without the need to fight. All that the population of Germany
was speaking of was - Peace and an end to the War. This was of course an
essential difference with the Russian position in 1917. In Russia the first
revolutionary wave (the February revolution) overthrew the Tsarist regime;
but the War went on. The workers movement had to become bolder and more
decided; it had to tighten the pressure on the State. But in Germany, the
first aspiration of the population, Peace, gave way to the
Republic. But what did the Republic mean ?
The Weimar Republic
Before the War, working class practice and most working class theory was
that approved of and carried out by the Social Democratic Party and the
Trade Unions, adopted and agreed to by the majority of organised workers.
To this Socialist Democracy, the bourgeois democratic State was to be the
lever for Socialism. They felt it would suffice to have a majority in
Parliament, and with Socialist ministers it would be Socialism.
There was also, it is true, a revolutionary current, of which Karl
Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg were the best known representatives. Never
the less, this current never developed a conception clearly opposed to
State Socialism. It formed only an opposition within the Social Democratic
Party, and was not distinguishable from it by the majority of workers.
New Conceptions
But new conceptions came about with the great mass movements of 1918-21.
They were not the creation of the so-called 'vanguard' but were created by
the masses themselves. The independent activity of the workers and soldiers
adopted the organisational form of councils as a matter of expediency;
these were the new forms of class organisation. But because there is a
direct connection between the forms taken by the class struggle and the
conceptions of the future society, it goes without saying that, here and
there, the old ideas of nationalisation etc. began to totter.
The workers were now leading their own struggles, outside the apparatus of
the Party and Trade Union; and the workers began to think that they could
exert a direct influence on social life, by means of their own councils.
There would be a 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat', they said but it would
be a dictatorship not exercised by a Party, but would be an expression of
the unity, complete and lasting, of the whole working population. Of
course, such a society would not be democratic in the bourgeois sense of
the term, since that part of the population not participating in the new
organisation of social life would have no voice either in discussion or in
decision.
We were saying that the old conceptions began to totter. But it quickly
became evident that the Parliamentary and Trade Union traditions were too
rooted in the masses to be quickly wiped out. The bourgeoisie, the Social
Democratic Party and the Trade Unions called upon these traditions in order
to break down the new conceptions. In particular, the Social Democratic
Party congratulated itself in speeches about this new means the masses had
of asserting their part in social life. The Party even went as far as
demanding that this new form of direct power be approved and codified in
law.
But despite this ostensible sympathy, the old working class movement in the
main reproached the councils for not respecting 'democracy', although
excusing them because of their 'lack of experience'. The 'lack of
democracy' consisted of not yielding a large enough place to the
politicians, and in competing with them. In demanding what they called
'working class democracy' the old party and unions demanded that all
currents of the working class movement be represented in the councils, in
proportion to their respective importance.
The Trap
Few workers were capable of refuting this argument which corresponded with
their own ingrained beliefs. Despite what they had achieved, they still
believed in traditional forms of organisation.Thus they allowed the
representatives of the Social Democratic movement, the Unions, the Left
Social Democrats, the consumers Co-operatives etc., all to be represented
on the councils as well as the factory delegates. The councils on such a
basis could no longer be directly representative of the workers on the shop
floor. They became mere units of the old workers movement, and thus came to
work for the restoration of capitalism by means of the building of
'democratic State capitalism' through the Social Democratic Party.
It was the ruin of the workers efforts. The council delegates no longer
received their mandates from the shop floor but from the different
organisations. The workers were called on to respect and assure the rule of
'Order', proclaiming that 'in disorder there is no Socialism'. Under those
conditions, the councils rapidly lost all value in the eyes of the workers.
The bourgeois institutions regained their functions without caring about
the opinions of the councils; this was precisely the goal of the old
workers movement.
The old workers movement could be proud of its victory. The law passed by
the Reichstag fixed in detail the rights and duties of the councils. Their
future task was to see that social legislation was respected. In other
words, they were to become cogs in the State machine. Instead of
demolishing the State, they were to help in making it run smoothly. Old
established traditions had proved stronger than spontaneity.
But despite this 'abortion of the revolution', it cannot be said that the
victory of the conservative elements had been simple or easy. The new
climate of feeling was still strong enough for hundreds of thousands of
workers to struggle obstinately in order that their councils should keep
the character of new class units. There was to be five years of ceaseless
conflict (sometimes armed fights) and the massacre of 35 000 revolutionary
workers, before the movement of the councils was finally beaten by the
united front of the bourgeoisie, the old workers movement, and the 'White
Guards' formed by the Prussian land owners and the reactionary students.
Political Currents
Four political currents can be roughly distinguished among the workers.
The Social Democrats - They wanted the gradual nationalisation of the
large industries by parliamentary methods. They also wanted to reserve for
the unions the right to mediate between the workers and state ownership.
The Communists - Inspired more or less by the Russian example, they
advocated direct expropriation of the capitalists by the masses. They
maintained the revolutionary workers should 'capture' the Trade Unions and
'make them revolutionary'.
The Anarcho Syndicalists - They opposed the taking of power, and of any
kind of State, according to them, Trade Unions were an integral part of the
form of the future; it was necessary to struggle for a growth of the unions
in such a way that they would be able to take over the whole of social
life.
One of their best known theoreticians wrote in 1920 that the unions should
not be considered as a transitory product of capitalism, but rather as
seeds of the future socialist organisation of society. It seemed at first,
in 1919, that the hour of this movement had come. These unions grew after
the crumbling of the Kaiserreich. In 1920, the Anarchist unions had about
200 000 members.
The Factory Organisations - However, this same year, 1920, the effective
forces of the revolutionary unions were reduced. A large part of their
membership now made its way towards quite a different form of organisation,
better adapted to the prevailing conditions, namely the revolutionary
factory organisation. In this, each factory had or should have had, its own
organisation acting independently of the others, and which did not depend
upon the others. Each factory was to be an 'independent republic'.
These factory organisations were a creation of the German masses,
spontaneously; but it should be pointed out that they appeared in the
framework of a revolution which, though not yet defeated was stagnant. It
was quickly evident that the workers could not, in the immediate period,
conquer and organise economic and political power through the medium of the
councils. It was necessary first of all to carry on a merciless struggle
against the forces which opposed the councils. The revolutionary workers
began therefore to muster their own forces in all the factories, in order
to keep a direct grasp on social life. Through their propaganda they strove
to re-awaken the workers consciousness, calling upon them to leave the
unions AND join the revolutionary factory organisation. The workers as a
whole would then be able to lead their own struggles themselves and conquer
economic and social power over all society.
On the face of things, the working class thus took a great step backwards
on the organisation plane. While previously the power of the workers was
concentrated in some powerful centralised organisations, it was now
separated into some hundreds of little groups, uniting some hundreds of
thousands of workers, depending on the importance of the factory. In
reality, this showed itself to be the only form of organisation that
allowed the outline of workers power; and therefore, despite its relative
smallness, it alarmed the bourgeoisie and the Social Democrats.
The Development of the Factory Organisations
The isolation into small groups factory by factory was not premeditated,
nor a matter of principle. It was due to the fact that these organisations
appeared, separately and spontaneously, in the course of unofficial strikes
(for example among the Ruhr miners in 1919). Many tried to unite these
organisations and present a united front of factory organisations; the
initiative for this coming from Hamburg and Bremen. In April 1920 there was
the first conference for unification of the factory councils. Delegates
came from every industrial region of Germany. The police broke up the
Congress; but too late. The general unified organisation had already been
founded; and it had formulated its principles of action. This was given the
name of the GENERAL WORKERS UNION OF GERMANY (Allgemeine Arbeiter Union
Deutschlands - AAUD).
The AAUD was based on the struggle against the trade unions and the
legalised workers councils, and rejected parliamentarism. Each organisation
affiliated to the Union had a right to a maximum independence and freedom
of choice as to tactics.
Almost immediately the AAUD began to grow. At that time the trade unions
had more members than they ever had, or were ever likely to see in the
foreseeable future. The socialist unions in 1920 grouped almost eight
million paid up members in 52 unions; the Christian unions had more than a
million members; the company (or 'yellow') unions, had about 300 000. Then
there were the anarcho syndicalists unions (Freie Arbeiter Union
Deutschlands - FAUD) and also some breakaway unions which, a little while
later, affiliated to the Moscow controlled Red International of Trade
Unions - RILU.
At first, the AAUD numbered 80 000 (April 1920); by the end of 1920, this
was 300 000. It is true that many of its constituent members were at the
same time adherents either of the FAUD or RILU.
There were, however, political differences in the AAUD and in December, a
number of associations left it to form a new association, the AAUD-E
(Einheitsorganisation - or united organisation). Even after this break,
the AAUD reckoned on more than 200 000 members (4th Congress, June 1921);
but this was by then a paper organisation. The defeat of the Central German
rising in 1921 led to the dismantling and destruction of the AAUD. It could
no longer resist police persecution.
The German Communist Party (KPD)
Before examining the splits in the factory organisation movement, it is
necessary to refer to the role of the KPD. During the War (1914 - 18) the
Social Democratic Party had placed itself alongside the ruling classes, to
ensure 'social peace', with the exception of a militant fringe including
some party officials of whom the best known were Rosa Luxemburg and Karl
Liebknecht. These agitated against the War and violently criticised the
Party. They were not alone. In addition to their group, the 'Spartacus
League' (Spartakusbund), there were groups like the 'Internationalists' of
Dresden and Frankfurt; the Left Radicals (die Linksradikalen) of Hamburg
and the 'Workers Party of Bremen. After November 1918 and the fall of the
Empire, these groups which came from the Social Democratic 'Left' were for
a 'struggle in the streets' that would forge a new political organisation
and to some extent would follow the lines of the Russian Revolution. They
held a congress of unification in Berlin (30 December 1918) and formed the
Communist Party of Germany. (A translation of the proceedings of this
Congress - into French - with other interesting information, will be found
in 'Spartacus et la Commune de Berlin' Prudhommeaux, Cahiers Spartacus, Oct
- Nov 1949)
Within the Party there were many revolutionary workers who demanded 'All
Power to the Workers Councils!'. But there were many who, from the first,
regarded themselves as the cadres of the Left; they felt they were the
leaders by right of seniority, notions which they had brought with them
from the old Party. The workers who came into the KPD in growing numbers,
did not always stand up to their leaders; partly from respect for
'discipline', partly by their own yielding to outdated conceptions of
leadership. The idea of 'factory organisations' was a vastly different
conception. But of course it was open to misrepresentation. It could mean,
and the leadership of the KPD most certainly took it to mean, a mere form
of organisation, nothing more, subject to directives imposed on it from
outside. It could also mean, and this was what the militants had been
taking it to mean, a vastly different matter - a means of control from the
bottom up. In its new sense, the notion of factory organisations implied an
overthrow of ideas previously held with regard to :-
(a) the unity of the working class
(b) the tactics of the struggle
(c) the relationship between masses and their leadership
(d) the dictatorship of the proletariat
(e) the relationship between state and society
(f) communism as an economic and political system
These new problems had to be faced; they had to be answered, or the whole
new idea of revolution would disappear. But the Party cadres were unwilling
to face these ideas. All they thought of doing was to rebuild the new
(Communist) Party on the model of the old (Social Democratic) Party. They
tried to avoid what was bad in the old Party and to paint it in red
instead of pink and white. There was no place for the new ideas. And then,
these new ideas were not presented in a coherent whole, coming from a
single brain, or as if fallen from Heaven. They were the new ideas of the
generation, and many of the young militants of the KPD supported them; but
side by side with support for the new ideas was respect for the old
ideological foundation.
a
Parliamentarism
The KPD was divided on all the problems raised by the new notion of
'factory organisation' from its very inception. When the Social Democratic
President, Ebert, announced elections for a Constituent Assembly, the Party
had to decide whether to take part in the elections or to denounce them. It
was debated hotly at the Congress. The majority of the workers wanted to
refuse to take part in the elections at all. But the Party leadership,
including Liebknecht and Luxemburg, declared for an electoral campaign. The
leadership was beaten on votes, and the majority of the Party declared
itself Anti Parliamentarian. It stated that in its view, the Constituent
Assembly was only there to consolidate the power of the bourgeoisie by
giving it a 'legalistic' foundation. On the contrary, not only were the
proletarian elements of the KPD opposed to participating in such an
Assembly; they wished to 'activate' the workers councils already existing
and to create others, through which they would give meaning to the
difference between parliamentary democracy and working class democracy, as
advocated in the slogan 'All Powerto the Workers Councils' (Alle Macht
an die Arbeiter R_ten !).
The leadership of the KPD saw in this anti-parliamentarism, not a revival
of revolutionary thought, but a 'regression' to Trade Unionist and even
Anarchist ideas, which in their mind belonged to the beginnings of
industrial capitalism. But in truth the anti-parliamentarism of the new
current had not much in common with 'revolutionary syndicalism' and
'anarchism'. It even represented its negation. While the
anti-parliamentarism of the libertarians centred on the rejection of
political power, and in particular, rejected the dictatorship of the
proletariat, the new current considered anti-parliamentarism a necessary
condition for the taking of political power. It was 'Marxist
Anti-Parliamentarism'.
The Trade Unions
On the question of trade union activities, the leadership of the KPD
differed from that of the factory organisations. This was only to be
expected. It aroused fierce discussion after the Congress (by which time
both Liebknecht and Luxemburg had disappeared from the scene having been
murdered by the Reaction). Those who supported the councils said, 'Leave
the Trade Unions! Join the factory organisations !' But the Communist
leaders said, 'Stay in the Unions !' The KPD did not think it could
capture the Union HQ, but it did think it could capture the leadership of
the local branches. It might then, reasoned the KPD, be possible to unite
these locals in a new 'revolutionary' trade union movement.
But once again the leadership of the KPD was defeated. Most of its sections
refused to carry out these instructions. The leadership was firm, however,
even at the expense of expelling the majority of its members. It was of
course supported by the Russian Party, and its chief Lenin, who at this
time published his disastrous pamphlet on 'Left Wing Communism, An
Infantile Disorder'
At the Heidelberg Conference in October 1919, the leadership succeeded in
'democratically' expelling more than half the Party . . . . . . .
Henceforth the KPD was able go ahead with its conduct of parliamentary and
trade union policies - with pitiful results. The expelled members united
with a party of left socialists and quadrupled their members, but for three
years only. They formed a new party the Communist Workers Party of Germany,
(KAPD - Kommunistische Arbeiter Partei Deutschlands). The KPD had lost its
most militant elements and had henceforth no alternative but to surrender
itself unconditionally to the Moscow line in the newly set up Third
International. (The Comintern's agent in Germany at this time was Radek).
The Communist Workers Party (KAPD)
The KAPD entered immediately into a direct relationship with the AAUD. At
this time, the KAPD was a force that counted. Its criticisms of trade union
and parliamentary action and its practice of direct and violent action, and
its struggle against capitalist exploitation, made it a positive influence,
first of all on the factory floor; also through its press and publications
that were the best that Marxist literature had to offer in this time of
decadence of the Marxist movement. Even so, the KAPD retained some
encumbrances in the form of the old Marxist traditions.
Part 3
This page hosted by
Get your own Free Home Page