Glotzer Archive | Trotskyist Writers Index | ETOL Main Page
Two Internationals
From The Militant, Vol. VI No. 51, 11 November 1933, p. 3.
Transcribed & marked up by Einde O’Callaghan for the Encyclopaedia of Trotskyism On-Line (ETOL).
The German social democracy, not to be distinguished from its International, did not pursue a revolutionary class policy, but in a period of approaching civil war continued to travel the road of reform. It feared most of all, the possibilities of a proletarian revolution in Germany and the bureaucracy of the G.S.P. did everything in its power to prevent such an occurrence. Taking advantage of the bankruptcy of Stalinism upon all important questions confronting the German workers, the officialdom of the G.S.P. toyed with the idea of the united front, hoping at all times that it would never really be consummated, because the development of the united front struggle against Fascism, would indisputably have pushed to the foreground the struggle for power by the German working class.
The main policy adopted by it during the whole situation was the support of the “lesser evil” as against Hitler. Under the policy of “toleration” of the “democratic elements” in Germany, it proceeded to support the Junker Hindenburg as the bulwark of democracy, against Fascism. Its main struggles against Fascism were purely parliamentary, and its fire was directed against the Communists.
Now that Hitler has taken power, how do these people look upon events in Germany? What have they learned over a period of years in which they pursued the policy of reform, of safeguarding bourgeois democracy, of prolonging the life of capitalism? At the international conference of the 2nd International, held in Paris last month, the German situation was chiefly discussed from the point of view of its effects upon the world socialist movement. The main points of view are presented below.
The opening speech by Friedrich Adler, Secretary of the International, reads as follows:
“The German Social Democracy was too busy with its immediate problems and failed to formulate a general policy. THIS WAS THEIR MISTAKE, BUT THE REAL TROUBLE WAS THAT THE SOCIALIST MOVEMENT WAS FACED BY THIS BITTER HOSTILITY OF ORGANIZED COMMUNISM, and so Social Democracy was crushed ...” (emphasis mine – A.G.)
And from Otto Wels, the leader of the German Party, under whose direction the traitorous policies of that organization was initiated: “We made various mistakes but our critics mostly forget the circumstances and facts of the situation in which we worked. Why did we not declare a full Socialist revolution in 1918?” And here Wels goes on to attack the Allied countries and to say: “If they had been humane to our TENDER REPUBLIC EVERYTHING WOULD HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT.” (emphasis mine – A.G.) And again: “We were driven by terrible circumstances ... Only people who do not understand our terrible position can criticize us because we thought internationally (!). We estranged the middle class in the crisis and Hitler won them with the aid of the Communists, who fought us furiously to the very end.”
The leader of the French Socialist Party, Leon Blum, eloquently declared : “Real political democracy is impossible without economic democracy, bourgeois democracy being but a stepping stone. The Bolsheviki think it is necessary only to gain power and to hold it, but we feel that we want real socialism and liberty.”
These men who sank in the swamp of chauvinism, who, whenever it was in their power, throttled movements of revolt and rose to save this social order, have summarized the colossal German defeat. You have the results: (1) The Allies were unfriendly to the “tender republic”, (2) The Communists were hostile to social democracy. The conclusions: (1) Greater defense of “democratic” capitalism. (2) Reaffirmation of the policies of the German social democracy.
Here you witness no criticism of the “general line”, no questioning of the theoretical outlook of social democracy, no criticism of the tactics of the leadership. It was circumstances and the Communists that were resposnible for the defeat. Along with the admission of a defeat, “there are signs that the Hitler regime cannot last much longer. The German socialists and workers will fight bravely and their victory is certain”. (Wels) Thus inflated optimism and the promise of struggle in the future.
It is quite true that little else could be expected from this gathering. Every revolutionary worker knew that there could be no other evaluation of the German events by these people. They prepared the ground for all that has taken place. We have treated them briefly, because much has already been said of them and of their role in the labor movement. But it is important to observe their actions during and after great events in order that we may learn from such occurrences, and make comparisons. Here nothing has changed since the first betrayal of 1914. We turn now to the Communist International and its relation to the German events.
Matters stand in no different light with regards to the Comintern. The policy pursued by the Stalinist bureaucracy in Germany was essentially in an active political sense no different than the policy of social democracy. The likeness lay in that neither programs led in the direction of a possible victory of the proletariat. Quite the contrary, the line pursued by both organizations spelled inevitable defeat for the German workers. And here, the question of consciousness or unconsciousness has no real meaning. Objectively, the line of march of social democracy and Stalinism led to the victory of Fascism.
If Social democracy held to the theory of the “lesser evil”, the Stalinists advanced the position of “national and social emancipation of the German people”. When Wels and company came out in support of Hindenburg, Thaelmann and Neumann, drove the Communist party into Hitler’s referendum, at the same time substituting the historic slogan of the proletarian revolution with the petty-bourgeois and reactionary slogan of the “people’s revolution”. Advancing the theory of Social Fascism, Stalinism refused and prevented the formation of an effective united front struggle against Hitler. On this question, it play directly into the hands of the social democratic bureaucracy. In the course of the past three years, it successively denied the growth of Fascism, or, proclaimed that a victory of reaction would lead to the immediate triumph of the proletarian revolution. Instead of preparing the extra legal struggle, the party of the revolution carried on a purely parliamentary battle against the Brown Shirts, differing in no way from the methods of struggle of the social democracy. Its vacillating and speculative approach to the united front when Hitler was made Chancellor, bound the proletariat hand and foot.
Now, the working class is taught to believe that it has to go through the brutal stage of Fascism before it can experience the victory of the proletarian revolution. The decimated ranks of the Communist International is given to understand and made to believe too, that the height of revolutionary strategy consisted in maintaining the disunity of the German workers, and conversely, that the united front was inimical to the interests of the revolution. On the day that Hitler was made Chancellor, the G.C.P. proclaimed the main danger to be the social democracy. When the Fascists were marching into power, the Stalinists continued to assert that the main struggle must be directed against the G.S.D.P. All of these outrages were committed in the name of Marx and Lenin. And at each new stage of the struggle, when comrade Trotsky in his numerous pamphlets and articles, and the I.L.O. in its declarations, were pointing the revolutionary way out of the difficult German situation, new repressions, new slanders, new characterizations were invented by these organizers of defeats.
Accepting Fascist functionaries into its ranks, canonizing fascist army officers who excelled in the anti-semitic campaign taking place in Germany, publishing their pamphlets and printing their articles because they announced their adherence to the Party when it issued its nationalist slogans, only hastened the collapse of the German Party.
Revolutionists never expected the prosecution of a revolutionary course by social democracy. But they did expect that the tactics of the Communists would have severed the millions of social democratic workers from the tail of reformism and win them to the side of the revolution. This was possible only through one tactic: the united front. From the moment that the G.C.P. refused to utilize this supreme tactic of unifying the proletariat, all thought of winning the social democratic worker, was pure illusion. Experience is the only test for policy. What transpired in Germany stands out as the greatest indictment of the policies pursued by social democracy and Stalinism.
How does the Comintern evaluate the German events? From a disgraceful silence of almost three years, it finally recorded itself in a declaration that appeared in the world Stalinist press. The contents of the declaration can be summarized as follows: The victory of Fascism is not a defeat of the German workers. The German revolution has not only not been defeated, but is well-nigh on the upgrade and will break forth very soon. The German Communist Party is stronger and more active today than prior to the victory of Hitler. The policies of the G.C.P., under the leadership of Thaelmann (that means the policies of the Comintern) were absolutely correct. There were no errors committed. The social democracy is to blame for the victory of Fascism. The Party could not make the revolution because it did not have the support of the workers in Germany (!). Then the statement concludes by garbling and distorting a quotation from Lenin on what constitutes a revolutionary situation, in order to prove that such a condition was absent in Germany prior to March 5, 1933.
What essentially is different here from the “explanations’” made by the social democracy? Nothing of genuine importance. Social democracy blames the Stalinists, the Stalinists blame social democracy. The social democrats feared the united front because it would inexorably have led to the proletarian revolution. The Stalinists played into their hands by preventing the execution of this tactic. The social democracy carried on a pure parliamentary struggle against Fascism, the C.P.G. did likewise, warning the Brown Shirts, following their march before the Liebknecht House, to beware the results of the ejections. Social democracy declares that Hitler is on the verge of collapse and that his overthrow is imminent; the Stalinists declare that the revolution is today on the order of the day. Both declare their policies to have been entirely correct and signify their intention to continue along the same lines. The revolutionary worker can begin to draw his own conclusions on the basis of these facts.
With the defeat of the German party, the backbone of the Comintern was broken. Aside from the German party, the largest and strongest party in the International in the capitalist world, the C.I. is composed of small ineffectual organizations that play either small or no roles at all in the countries where they exist. With the collapse of the German party, the most powerful defense instrument for the Soviet Union has been destroyed. Yet, apparently undaunted, the Stalinist leadership organizes distinct defense organizations of musicians, actors, pacifists, soldiers, scientists and others of the same stripe who are and represent nobody in a class sense, as the defenders of the Soviet Union. The anomaly consists in this: that the revolutionary organizations of the proletariat, the only real defenders of the October Revolution, are hampered and made sterile, and are thus unable to build truly revolutionary organizations for the struggle for power (which in the last analysis is the decisive defense of the Soviet Union), while neo-sympathizers of the Soviet Union (those who are rallying to it since the construction of the isolated, independent and nationalist socialist society) are being made the defenders of the Soviet Union and apostles of anti-war work. The latter, as life has shown time and again, will be the first ones to fall and stumble over one another in their hurry to reach their homes, when the first serious conflicts arise, while the revolutionary has been strangled.
Before the Nazis gained their victory, the party and the International always boasted about what would happen AFTER Fascism took power. Thus, Remmele in the Reichstag: “If they (the Nazis) once come into power, the united front of the proletariat will be established and sweep everything away ... They will come to grief more speedily than any other government.” (Rote Fahne, October 16, 1931) We do not doubt that eventually and finally the proletariat will come to victory in Germany as elsewhere. What the events in Germany prove is what has always been understood by Marxists: there is no hopeless situation for capitalism, just as there are no guarantees for the proletariat. The decisive element in such situations is the party of the working class. Post-war events have shown that in most cases it was precisely this subjective factor that was lacking, in order to bring about victory for the workers. In Germany this failure of the subjective factor has brought about tragic consequences for the international movement. Today, following this defeat, the German Party offers conditions by which to overcome Fascism. These conditions were borrowed almost totally from the proposals made by the Left Opposition of Germany, in December 1931. At the present moment these proposals have no concrete importance. To think that you can today organize a united front of the working class in Germany is to learn nothing from events. Or, to believe that it is now possible to establish committees of action or armed defense corps, to carry on the fight against the Fascist butchers, is to run about two years behind events.
What is necessary in Germany today, is clarity. The workers must be taught to understand what took place and why it tok place. The German working class will reconstitute itself in a final struggle against Fascism. But one thing certain, this reorganization of the ranks of the German workers will not take place upon the basis of the social democracy of Stalinism. The lessons of the social-democratic betrayal, the confusion and error of the Stalinists, which objectively brought about the same results as did the policy of Social Democracy, have left deep scars upon the proletariat. The “lesser-evil” theory, the policy of toleration, Social Fascism, united front from below. People’s Revolution, bureaucratic centrism and national socialism are dead in Germany, and cannot play any role in the reconstruction of the German revolutionary movement. The German working class will reconstitute itself on the basis of the proletarian revolution, upon the foundation of Internationalism, above all.
The international proletariat is marching toward a new period of clarification. Betrayal by social democracy for twenty years, ten years of defeat under the bankrupt policies of Stalinism are forcing definite changes in the ranks of the world proletariat. Clarification as to these defeats of the working class in the “era” of wars and revolutions is indispensable. The needs of the situation demand a re-examination of our own ranks. In this period of clarification, the world proletariat will march forward on the basis of a revolution of events and a reorganization of the forces upon an international revolutionary foundation. That foundation is Marxism, mutilated today by Reformist Social Democracy and the National Socialist doctrines of Stalinism.
Albert Glotzer Archive | ETOL Main Page
Last updated: 3 January 2016