textfiles/politics/SPUNK/sp000830.txt

884 lines
44 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains invisible Unicode characters

This file contains invisible Unicode characters that are indistinguishable to humans but may be processed differently by a computer. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

From the Bourgeois to the Proletarian Revolution by Ottle Ruhle (1924)
Part 3 of 3
7 FACTORY ORGANISATION AND WORKERS' UNION
(Betriebsorganisation & Arbeiterunion)
When in the November Revolution of 1918 the bourgeois and
counter-revolutionary character of the parties and trade
unions revealed itself in all its glory for the second time,
a section of the proletarians, who were serious about the
revolution, reached consciousness. They recognised that the
proletarian struggle which plays itself out on the given basis
always exhausts itself in shifts of power; that bourgeois
organisations with bourgeois tactics of struggle, even when
they have proletarians as members, necessarily end up with a
compromise with the bourgeois economic and state power; that
in view of the displacement of the main emphasis of all
struggles towards the economic side, remaining in political
organisations and fighting out political struggles from
here on must lead to defeat.
Thus a section of the proletariat began to orientate
itself towards new viewpoints and finally also to organise.
It was recognised that:
The proletarian revolution is completely different in character
from the bourgeois revolution.
The proletarian revolution is first and foremost an economic affair.
The proletarian revolution can be fought out not in bourgeois
but only in proletarian organisations.
The proletarian revolution must develop its own tactics of struggle.
The consequence of this recognition was the decisive withdrawing
from party, parliament, trade union and everything connected with
them. At first the positive outcome hovered in the air, not too
clearly, and only gained form and shape in time, in the course
of many struggles and discussions. The revolutionary trade union
of the American workers, IWW, emerged as the model, although
known only to few. In addition to this, precisely in the
revolutionary period, the idea of the councils system which
had played a great part in Russia, was being eagerly discussed,
and stood at the centre of all practical suggestions for and
attempts at socialisation. 'Wildcat' strikes which broke out
everywhere and were carried on against the will of the trade
unions gave rise to the election of revolutionary action
committees, from which revolutionary works councils soon
followed. Finally, the movement grew, first in the Ruhr
region among the miners, into the struggle for revolutionary
factory organisations (BOs). These BOs, combined in local
groups and further united in economic areas, their construction
and completion in a united council organisation extending over
the whole state, soon became the main idea and prime aim of a
movement which flowed into the Union as the new organisational
vessel of the will of the revolutionary workers' struggle. Not
reasoned out in the official quarters of the leaders, not
transmitted by propaganda to the workers as a subtle invention,
but grown in quite an elemental fashion from the soil of the
most vigorous and serious struggles, it soon stood independently
as the object of the most heated conflicts of opinion and debates,
in the centre of the revolutionary movement.
The Union movement stems from the basic knowledge that the
proletarian revolution, because it wants to see the basis of
society overturned, is in the first place an economic
revolution, and that capital's work force, whose power is
anchored in the factories and works itself out in the first
place economically, must advance from the factories as
determined power.
Only in the factory is the worker of today a real proletarian, and
as such a revolutionary within the meaning of the proletarian-socialist
revolution. Outside the factory he is a petty-bourgeois, involved
in a petty-bourgeois milieu and middle-class habits of life, dominated
by petty-bourgeois ideology. He has grown up in bourgeois families,
been educated in a bourgeois school, nourished on the bourgeois spirit.
Marriage is a bourgeois penal institution. Dwelling in rented barracks
is a bourgeois arrangement. The private household of every family
with its own kitchen leads to a completely egoistic economic mode.
There the husband looks after his wife, the wife looks after her
children; everyone thinks only about his interests. Even the child
in bourgeois schools is directed to knowledge influenced by the
bourgeoisie, which is tailored in accordance with bourgeois
tendencies. Everything is dealt with from the standpoint of the
bourgeois-ideological interpretation of history. Then in apprenticeship,
in business, in the workshop: again in bourgeois surroundings. What
someone reads, what he has picked up in the theatre, in the cinema
and so on  everywhere, in the street, in the guest-house, bourgeois
existence comes to meet him. And all that gives rise to a bourgeois
way of thinking and feeling. Many become, as soon as they have taken
off their working clothes, bourgeois too in their behaviour. They
treat wives and children as they are treated by their bosses,
demand subjection, service, authority. When the proletariat is
liberated from the bourgeoisie, women and children will still
have to be liberated from the men. This has nothing to do with
evil intent, but emerges from our bourgeois attitude, through
the environment, through the bourgeois atmosphere. Whenever the
worker is seen outside the factory, he is a petty bourgeois. In
clothing, habits, life-style he apes the bourgeois and is happy
when he can not be distinguished from the bourgeoisie. If we
group the worker according to living areas and streets, with
the party and trade union membership, then we only find him as
a petty bourgeois. At best we get him along to distribute a
leaflet, to a peaceful demonstration, hardly anything more.
He prefers to avoid fighting or retreats quickly. 'The leaders
ought to fight,' he says in his cowardice, 'that's what
they're paid for.'
In the factory the worker is another person. There he confronts
the capitalist face to face, feels the fist on his neck, is
irritated, embittered, hostile. If a conflict breaks out here,
he cannot shirk so easily. He is under the control of others,
subject to the general influence, is carried away the rest and
holds his own. Revolutionary disposition and revolutionary
determination coincide here.
Parties and trade unions, because they always include only the
petty bourgeois, never the conscious, real proletarians, can
never on the sole grounds of the composition of their human
resources bring about a revolutionary action. At best, a riot
or a putsch. But then, when these infuriated petty bourgeois,
their anger bursting out, rush on to the streets to fight, they
are rounded up, crippled or stabbed by the bourgeois organism
(bosses, police, military). And the movement is lost.
Not so in the factory. In every factory there is a core of
revolutionary elements. They come from all camps and parties.
Only gross delusion can maintain that there are revolutionaries
exclusively in one party or that adherence to this party
constituted the revolutionary quality. All the revolutionaries
in the factory, unencumbered by previous adherence to party of
trade union, get together and form the revolutionary factory
organisation. Are you revolutionary? Do you want to struggle?
Are you abandoning party and union? That is enough. Whoever
wants that can become a member of the revolutionary factory
organisation.
The proletarian revolution has to destroy a powerful system
from the bottom and to create something quite new on the
largest scale. For this task the forces of parties and trade
unions are not adequate. Even the strongest associations are
too weak for it. The proletarian revolution can only be the
work of the whole proletarian class. All energies must be
included for this. Every individual must stand in the proper
place and do his best there. This proper place is the factory,
where everyone does his duty. Here, in the factory, all
proletarian forces find their expression.
The factory organisation is, basically, absolutely nothing
new. That it grew quite naturally from the struggle is
explained by the fact that, in the development of the
struggle and of labour, everything was prepared for it to
arise. It was, so to speak, at hand for a long time;
capitalism itself created it. For the sake of profit it
constructed a wonderful system of organising work: the
factory, the mine, the works, the economic complex, the
business district. The workers only need to acquire
revolutionary consciousness of this organisation in
order to seize it, surround it and use it to organise
the district. It has to create afresh no party-substitute,
no trade union competitor. It only has to take possession
of the existing organisation of labour, which serves
capitalist profit goals, and place it in the service of
revolutionary aims of struggle. This happens as the
workers in the factories themselves recognise what power
they have in their hands; as they take greater pains to
seize for themselves the existing organisational apparatus;
and as they finally take possession of the factories, to
eradicate the bourgeois system and put socialism in its
place. The means to that is the factory organisation.
The BO is a federative form without centralism. All members are
independent; no-one outside the factory has a say in their factory
business. In their BO the members are autonomous. No boss from the
office or a central HQ, no intellectual or professional leader
can interfere in their affairs. The BOs construct themselves
from their own resources and settle their affairs with their own
energies and their own means. This is federalist independence.
Autonomy. The BO is neither party not trade union. It has
nothing to do with agitation and participation in the unions.
It is not a labour association, not a relief institution; it
signs no labour contracts and has no interest in Hapag
steamers christened 'Karl Legien'. It is, then, simply
a place for the preparation and stirring up of the
revolution.
If one BO exists near the others, then they must form links
with each other. Let us assume that in a large factory BOs
exist in the different section (casting, moulding, turning,
carpentry and book-keeping). These sections together comprise
the works. On questions which concern not the individual
sections but the whole, the BOs must work together. This
happens through the factory delegates or shop stewards who
are elected on an ad hoc basis. For a discussion, a certain
resolution, the delegate receives a binding mandate from his
BO. The delegate has only to carry out the instruction of
his BO, and disposes of no kind of independent rights on
that account. Thus the leader is not independent of his
electors like the party secretary or MP. He cannot decide
one way or another and subsequently refer back and take a
vote of confidence. He has only to carry out the will of
the masses. The membership has the right of recall at any
time if the delegate is unreliable. He can then be
replaced by a better one. He is permanently in the control
and power of the masses  through him the working mass
speaks.
But there can be questions which go even beyond the sphere of
a factory, perhaps affect a whole economic region. Then the
delegates of the factories of the whole economic region meet
together. They too have a binding mandate and are always
recallable. Thus the structure is completed, from the factory,
through the works, the economic district, out to the entire
state. This is not a new centralism, but only the councils
system constructed from below upwards. Centralism also has,
superficially, this form of organisation. But there the
command goes from above downwards. In the structure of the
factory organisation the decision goes from below upwards;
it does not rest on a leader's judgment but on the foundation
of the expression of will of the masses. The leaders do not
command while the masses have to obey; rather, the masses
decide and the leaders have become executors of the masses'
will. Policy is made in the name and after the initiative
of the masses. This is the fundamentally new thing, the
proletarian element.
The old parties and trade unions established their structure
as follows: a few people who considered themselves as leaders
from the beginning, drew up a programme, composed a founding
resolution and gave themselves a name  then members were
recruited. First the officers were there, then the soldiers 
the influencing and conferring of blessings on the people
followed from above according to the authoritarian
principle.
In the structure of the factory organisation it is exactly
the other way round. First of all the masses are there, getting
together, organising and deliberating their affairs. If people
are needed to carry out the decisions taken, then delegates
are chosen to whom the decision is conveyed as a binding
mandate. If the delegates meet at a conference with the
delegates of other BOs, the conference does not have to
deliberate and conclude, it has only to establish the will
of the BOs represented. The assertion of this will is the
decision. Now, it is the task of the conference to deliberate
how it will carry out the decision with greatest expediency.
Thus the delegates become executive organs discharging the
will of the BOs. They stand last in line, not first. For
the movement goes from below upwards. The main emphasis
lies in the masses, not with the leaders.
The combining of the factory organisation in a larger and
stronger unity is called Workers' Union (AU). The leadership
of the Workers' Union is formed by those at the top of the
regional organisations. In its organisational structure the
Workers' Union is neither federalist nor centralist, but
both and also neither. It lets freedom and independence go
on existing in the substructure, as guaranteed by the
federalism of the BOs, but adds in the superstructure the
unifying factor of concentration, deriving from centralism.
But as federalism is present without its weakness of
fragmentation and lack of unity, so the centralism is
without the disadvantage of paralysing and smothering
individual initiative and mass will. In the Workers' Union,
then, federalism and centralism appear in a higher unity,
in a synthesis. Therein lies the great superiority of the
Workers' Union over every other organisation. It is more
complete than every merely federalist or merely centralist
association; it is both without the disadvantages of one
form or the other.
In the pre-revolutionary phase the splitting of organisations
into political and trade-union had a meaning. At that time
there were indeed pure political struggles which were to be
fought out with political means, and pure economic struggles
which demanded exclusively economic means of struggle. Since
the war and the great transformation it brought about, this
has altered. Today every economic struggle, however small
at first, grows in the twinkling of an eye into a political
conflict: every wage movement ends with the recognition that
the proletariat is no longer to be helped by wage increases,
that rather the setting aside of the whole wages system
alone assures it rescue from downfall. But that too is a
political matter. And vice versa: every serious political
conflict immediately sets in motion the weapons of economic
struggles. Ebert and Noske, sworn enemies of the general
strike  when they saw their political system endangered
by the Kapp Putsch, summoned the masses to the general
strike. The KPD, in its famous 21 points of the Heidelberg
Party Conference quite decisively rejected sabotage and
passive resistance as 'syndicalist and anarchist methods
of struggle.' But in the Ruhr struggle, government, SPD
and KPD together summoned the workers to sabotage and
passive resistance. In the revolution the actual situation
demands that now this, now that method be employed in the
struggle, that methods be changed swiftly, a combination
of methods often be undertaken, etc. The revolution itself
changes its aspect continually, is now more an economic,
now more a political process. It has the highest interest
in an economic-political integrated organisation, with
which it has measured up to every situation and phase
of the struggle. The Workers' Union is such an
integrated organisation.
The first Workers' Union as an integrated organisation
originated in October 1921 following the lead of East
Saxony which had already withdrawn from the KAPD in 1920.
A national conference adopted on the suggestion of East
Saxony the following founding principles of the AAU
(Integrated Organisation):
"1 The AAU is the political and economic integrated
organisation of the revolutionary proletariat.
2 The AAU fights for communism, the socialisation of
production, raw materials, means and energies and of
the necessary goods produced from them. The AAu wants
to set planned production and distribution in the
place of the capitalist methods of today.
3 The ultimate aim of the AAU is society without
domination; the way to this goal is the dictatorship
of the proletariat as a class. The dictatorship of
the proletariat is the exclusive exercise of the workers'
will over the political and economic establishment of
communist society by means of the councils' organisation.
4 The immediate tasks of the AAU are: (a) the smashing of
the trade unions and of the political parties, these main
hindrances to the unification of the proletarian class and
the further development of the social revolution, which can
be no business of parties and trade unions. (b) the combining
of the revolutionary proletariat in the factories, the embryos
of production, the basis of the coming society. The form of
all combination is the factory organisation (BO). (c) the
development of the workers' self-consciousness and sense of
solidarity. (d) to prepare all the measures that will be
necessary for the political and economic construction.
5 The AAU rejects all reformist, opportunist methods of
struggle; it turns its back on all participation in
parliamentarism and in the legalised works' councils,
for these signify sabotage of the idea of the councils.
6 The AAU fundamentally renounces professional leadership.
So-called leaders can only be considered as traitors.
7 All functions in the AAU are honorary.
8 The AAU regards the liberation struggle of the proletariat
not as national but as an international matter. The AAU
therefore works for the combining of the revolutionary
proletariat of the world in a Councils' International."
With this programme of guiding principles, the AAU in 1921
constituted itself as an integrated organisation. After two
years' development, the Dresden local group took occasion
to set down in the following programmatic and organisational
principles its insights and experiences, which it had gained
from uninterrupted struggles waged with the most extreme
consistency:
1 The Origins of the Unionist Movement
"The World War with its national and international
effects in political, economic and cultural spheres
brought in the age of revolution at accelerated
speed.
The mounting collapse of the capitalist economy engenders
as its consequence an ever increasing impoverishment of
the working class.
This mounting impoverishment, as experience shows, no longer
can be compensated through struggles for better conditions of
pay or through legislative (parliamentary) reforms. It can
only be eliminated through the elimination of the capitalist
economic system itself and its replacement by the socialist-communist
economy of need. As the winning of this goal through struggle can
only be the business of the proletarian class itself, the demand
hence arises quite naturally for the proletariat to give up all
reformist methods of struggle and replace them with a resolute,
revolutionary form of struggle, also organised differently. The
victory of the revolution has as its pre-requisite the unification
of the working class. Parties and trade unions, inclined by their
whole nature to reformism, have proved themselves an obstacle to
the necessary revolutionary unity. Centralist in their organisational
structure, with the particular characteristic of professional
leadership, these forms of organisation especially hinder the
development of the proletariat's self-consciousness. Therefore
the problem of unity became at once a problem about the
revolutionary form of organisation.
The AAUE arose out of this knowledge and in accordance with
the materialist concept of history by which changing economic
and social relations necessarily imply consequent changes in
organisational form.
2 Nature and Goal of the AAUE
Proceeding from the understanding that economic questions
and political questions cannot be artificially separated,
the AAUE is neither trade union nor party but the integrated
organisation of the proletariat. In order to bring about the
unified front of the proletarian class, the Union organises
all the workers who profess its goal at the places of production,
the factories. All the factory organisations combine in the
Union on the basis of the councils' system.
The original transformation of the capitalist economy into
the socialist-communist economy has as its pre-requisite the
revolutionary expropriation of the means of production by the
proletariat. The process of transformation can only be
completed through the dictatorship, that is the exclusive
expression of the will of the proletarian class. The
instrument of the transformation is the revolutionary
councils' system. The councils' system, according to which
the Union is structured, ought to anticipate in the present
the basic traits of the future councils' system.
3 Structure of the BO (Factory Organisation)
The factory organisation elects from itself a number of shop
delegates judged necessary according to its size and type of
factory. They embody the particular works council, which has
to regulate all matters in agreement with the members. The
leaders (workers' council) are to stand at a new election
every quarter. Re-election is permissible. Every member is
eligible. If several Union members are employed in one
factory, they have a duty to found a factory organisation.
Individual members organise first of all according to groups
of industries or living areas, as also with relations between
small factories. Autonomous small-scale firms, as likewise
do intellectuals, organise themselves by dwelling areas.
The area groups bear the character of interim organisations
insofar as every member in one has to withdraw as soon as
the conditions cited above are present for the founding of
a BO of its own in his factory.
4 Structure of the Union (Councils' Organisation)
Every factory organisation, or dwelling area or industry
group has to send at least one shop delegate to the local
Heads-of-Councils body of the Union. Larger factory organisations,
and regional and industry groups send several shop delegates. Their
number can be regulated from time to time according to a uniform
schedule adapted to practical considerations. All three of the
above organisations together form a local councils' group in a
given place. All the local groups in a certain economic area form
together an economic district. The local groups elect from among
themselves a district economic council; for the most part it
acts as an information post for the district and is in addition
executive organ for the tasks assigned to it by the district
conference. Conferences arising from necessity are to be called
by it whenever the situation at the time makes impossible a
previously customary understanding among local groups. National
conferences are to be dealt with likewise. Every local district
group has the duty of being represented at the district conference.
At least once a year a national conference has to take place at
which all the economic districts, as far as possible, must be
represented. The national conference elects a national economic
council. Its character and its duties correspond to those of the
district economic council, only with the difference that its
activity extends over the whole area of the state. If necessary
measures extra to its deliberations arise in the time between
national conferences and they concern the Union as a whole, it
must first submit them to the general decision process. National
and district conferences only have their own right of decision
insofar as general national or district questions respectively are
concerned. In particular, such decisions must not transgress against
generally acknowledged principles. By and large these conferences
should serve to exchange experiences. All the shop stewards of the
individual BO, as of the Union as a whole, are recallable at any
time.
5 Tactics
The AAUE fundamentally rejecting all participation in the
elections to the legal works councils' committee as a consequence
also rejects the delegation of Union members to this body,
proceeding from the viewpoint that activity in the legal works
councils effects an artificial masking of class oppositions.
>From the recognition adduced under point 1, the AAUE likewise
rejects on principle propaganda and agitation for partial strikes.
Since the Union, however, is at present not yet in the position
to influence the development of the situation in its direction,
the circumstance automatically arises that Union comrades will be
drawn into economic strikes with the trade union orientated workers.
In such cases Union comrades in work have to raise the necessary
solidarity money by means of arranged contributions. The level of
the necessary contribution for the time being is discussed and
fixed in the meeting of council leaders and is in the form of a
lump sum, equal for everyone, to be collected from every comrade
and paid over to the local work committee through the head of BO.
It is left up to each BO whether it collects a fund for such
purposes or raises the contribution amongst itself from case to
case. The decisive principle must be: 'Whoever gives fast gives
double!' If the necessity for solidarity to be applied arises for
the whole region, the level of the necessary regional contribution
is to be calculated by the appropriate regional body. If the
application of solidarity becomes necessary throughout the country,
the corresponding national body has to undertake its regulating in
the same way.
All moneys collected are to be immediately handed over from the
local labour committee to the regional or local group involved
in the strike. The method of calculation follows from the plan
that 25 comrades should support one comrade. The support rate
should amount to 60% of a general average wage, taking into
account of the fall in real wages.
Moderate or other comrades fallen into need in the struggle
for our goal have an equal right to solidarity; the level of
the support rate at the time is determined by the nearest
competent body, to which the contribution is sent.
6 Nature of Administration
All the money required for administration by the local,
district and national committees is to be collected by
way of contributions. All functions in the Union as a
whole are to be performed on an honorary basis;
reimbursements are only accorded in cases involving
loss of pay, or for fares and additional expenses
necessarily arising for travelling speakers.
7 Membership
Membership is open to every man or woman who subscribes
to the foregoing rules and principles.
The right of exclusion only belongs to the BO; the eventual
exclusion of the BO, to the local Union. A whole local or
economic district can only be excluded by the national
conference. Exclusions can only result when transgressions
against generally acknowledged principles are in question.
Against all exclusions appeal can be lodged within four
weeks with the next highest body, whose decision can be
contested no further. Until the rejection of his appeal,
the appellant is still a full member of the whole Union
and the appropriate documents for elucidating the
circumstances may not be withheld from him.
Every comrade always has the duty to take the liveliest
interest in the question of principle, tactics and organisation
of the AAUE; the structural completion of the organisation and
our power are thereby assured."
8 THE COUNCILS' SYSTEM
Factory organisation and Workers' Union are sustained and dominated
by the principle of the councils' system.
The councils' system is the organisation of the proletariat
corresponding to the nature of the class struggle, as to the
later communist society. If Marx said that the working class
could not simply take over the government machine of the
capitalist state, but must find its own form for carrying
out its revolutionary task, this problem is solved in the
councils' organisation.
The idea of councils was born in the Paris Commune. The
fighters in the Commune recognised that it was necessary
to destroy resolutely the bureaucratic military machine
instead of transferring it from one hand to the other if
they wanted to reach a 'real people's revolution'. They
replaced the smashed state machinery with an institution
of fundamentally different character: the Commune. 'The
Commune,' wrote Marx, 'was to be not a parliamentary but
a working body, executive and legislative at the same time.
Instead of deciding once in 3 or 6 years which member of
the dominant class is to represent or trample on the
people in parliament, the general right to vote was to
serve the people constituted in communes as the individual
right to vote serves every other employer, to locate workers,
foremen and book-keepers in his business.' The first decree
of the Commune was the suppression of the standing army and
its replacement by the armed people. Then the police, the
tool of the state government, was at once stripped of its
political attributes and converted into the responsible tool,
removable at any time, of the Commune. Likewise, the officials
of all other departments of administration. From the members
of the Commune downwards, public service had to be performed
for workers' pay. The acquired entitlements and upkeep
allowance of the high state dignitaries disappeared with
these dignitaries themselves. The judicial officials lost
that apparent independence; they were to be henceforth
elected, responsible and removable. The effecting of
complete eligibility and removability of all official
persons, without exception, at any suitable time, the
reduction of their wages to the level of the usual workers'
pay, these simplest and most obvious democratic measures,
bound up the interests of the workers with those of the
majority of the peasants and served at the same time as
a bridge linking capitalism and socialism.
The measures taken by the fighters of the Commune could not
be more than such a linking bridge because their political
reorganisation of the state lacked the appropriate economic
basis.
In the Russian Revolution the link bridge became a proper
coherent structure. As early as 1905 in Petersburg, Moscow,
etc., the institution of the workers' councils existed,
although it soon had to give way to the reaction. But their
image had impressed itself on the workers, and in the March
revolution of 1917 the mass of Russian workers immediately
seized on the formation of councils again, not from lack
of other forms of organisation but because the revolution
had awakened in them the active need for an amalgamation
as a class. Radek wrote at that time in observing this
phenomenon: 'The party can always call only upon the most
skilled, lucid worker. It shows a broad path, wide horizons,
presupposes a certain level of proletarian consciousness.
The trade union appeals to the most direct needs of the mass,
but it organises by occupations, at best by branches of
industry, but not as a class. In the period of peaceful
development only the front ranks of the proletariat are
class conscious. The revolution however consists in the
broadest layers of the proletariat, even those which have
hitherto met politics with hostility, being drummed out of
their rest and seized by deep ferment. They wake up, want
to act; various bourgeois and socialist parties, different
in the aims of their efforts and in the path they want to
take, turn to them. The working class feels instinctively
that it can triumph as a class. It seeks to organise as a
class. And this feeling, that it can only conquer as a
class, that the efforts of its opponents who group
themselves around a single party cannot be victorious,
is so great that with every continuation of freedom of
agitation for the party slogans, even the most advanced
sections of the proletariat, whose endeavours go farther
than the momentary wishes of their class, submit to class
organisation in the decisive days. They do it from clearer
insight into the nature of the proletarian revolution. In
the peaceful epoch of the movement, the proletarian vanguard
sets itself narrowly limited political goals, to attain
which the strength of the whole class was not at all
necessary. The revolution places the question of the
conquest of power on the order of the day. For that the
energies of the avant-garde are not adequate. The workers'
councils thus become the ground on which the working
class unites itself.'
The Russian revolutionaries, the workers and small peasants,
conquered economic and political power with the help of the
councils. They took power for themselves only, no longer
shared it with any remnant of the bourgeoisie. They divided
up Russia into Districts, in which the Soviets were elected
by workers and poor peasants, first for the local areas then
for the districts; the District Soviets elected the Central
Soviet for the whole state, and the Executive Committee
issued from the Congress of these Soviets. All the members
of the municipal, district and Central Soviets, just like
all officials and employees, were only elected on a short-term
basis; they always remained dependent on their electorate and
were accountable to them.
In the workers' councils the workers had found their organisation,
their amalgamation on a class scale and expression of will, their
form and their essence. For the revolution as for socialist
society.
Through the setting up of workers' councils, even if it could
not itself maintain them in their revolutionary form and make
them effective for the tasks of socialism, the Russian
Revolution has given to the workers of the world the example
of how the revolution  as a proletarian phenomenon 
will be carried through.
With this example before it, the proletariat can prepare
the world revolution. The proletariat of the world, in
order to transport themselves  and themselves alone 
to economic and political power everywhere the proletarian
revolution is starting to unroll, before, during and after
the struggles, will have to create workers' councils in
municipalities, districts, provinces, areas of country,
and nations.
When the German November Rising broke out, suddenly at
the centre of all the revolutionary demands and slogans
stood the watchword: All power to the Councils!
And all at once, workers' and soldiers' councils arose.
They were certainly incomplete and often unsuitable 
the German worker confirmed here too the old lesson that
the German has no great aptitude for revolution  but
they were not so bad, miscarried and disunited as the
criticism of the parties and the hostility of the
counter-revolutionaries has made out. However gross
their mistakes might be, they represented a new principle 
the principle of the proletarian revolution, the principle
of socialist construction. Therein lies their significance,
their world-historical value. And on that the respect owed
to them should have been based.
But the SPD, accomplices of reaction and allies of the
bourgeoisie (which latter it had already rescued with
its policy of collaboration through the dangers of the
war), fell raging upon the workers' councils. It insulted
and slandered them, never tired of discrediting them by
false and exaggerated insinuations and accusations, and
sabotaged them by making the existence of the workers'
councils dependent on parliamentary elections. When these,
as the result of the participation of bourgeois elements
quite unreliable or directly opposed to the revolution,
turned out in a more or less reactionary way, it let the
power of the councils won in the revolution be bestowed
by majority decisions and the bureaucratic authorities
on the National Assembly. Where the revolutionary workers
resisted this treacherous and malicious procedure, the
Noske guards stepped in, suppressed the workers with
armed power in sometimes embittered struggles (Bremen,
Braunschweig, Leipzig, Thuringen, the Ruhr) and
violently made an end of the councils.
If these councils had not been quickly opened blooms of
revolution which fell unexpectedly into the lap of the
German workers but were basically alien to their political
ideology and remained alien, if rather they ripened
organically in the consciousness generated through proletarian
struggle and had been firmly rooted forms in the places of
employment, with whose function and mode of operation the
mass would have familiarised itself  they could never have
been so quickly erased and obliterated again from the image
of the German Revolution. So the German proletarian let the
only gain ....
9 THE PROLETARIAN REVOLUTION
The November Revolution of 1918 was the last off
shoot of the bourgeois revolution of 1848. It brought
to completion the liberal-democratic republic which
the determination and power of the German bourgeois
of that time in the struggle against feudal ownership
and princely power had not been able to achieve. In
order to save its sinking ship (in extreme danger
because of the World War), the bourgeoisie unceremoniously
threw overboard the last feudal, monarchical, absolutist
ballast which it had dragged round with it for seventy
years and which now seriously threatened to become fatal
to it. With that was created a basis for understanding
and negotiation with the west-European capitalist powers,
in particular with the victorious democratic-republican
states of France and America. By giving itself a bourgeois
liberal constitution and taking the government into its
own hands, the bourgeoisie made possible and attained
its new structure.
Its rescue, admittedly, as regards the concept of a
capitalist nation state, came too late. The German
bourgeoisie, while it was adding the finishing touches
to its bourgeois-capitalist state and at last seeing
the work of making an independent democratic republic
crowned with success, had at this very moment to give
up its economic independence and let the victorious
states dictate the degree of its political freedom.
That is the tragedy of missed opportunity and belated
courage.
The German proletariat tried, to an extent, to drive the
revolution farther. From Liebknecht to Holz it strained
every nerve in numerous, vigorous, indeed heroic risings
to make a social revolution out of the bourgeois
revolution, to overthrow the bourgeoisie and to establish
socialism. The crowd of fighters did not lack
determination and dedication. Tens of thousands have
been slain, others tens of thousands thrown into prisons
and penitentiaries, still more have gone into exile,
pursued, persecuted, driven underground and ruined.
But all the struggles, all the heroism, all the
sacrifices have not led to the goal. For the German
proletariat the revolution is, for the present,
lost.
It was defeated because, under the leadership of its
party and trade union apparatus, the major part of the
German proletariat kept their fighting class-brothers
back in fact stabbed them in the back. Deceived by
their petty-bourgeois ideology, prisoners of their
counter-revolutionary organisations, confused by their
opportunist tactics, betrayed by their self-seeking and
demagogic leadership, they themselves had to become
traitors, saboteurs and enemies to the liberation and
rising up of their class. That the bourgeoisie looked
after itself, and had recourse to cunning and violence
to save its skin, is obvious, for it was a matter of
necessity in the struggle between classes. But that
the German proletariat, which was in possession of the
strongest organisations, which prided itself on being
the most advanced in the world, and which had already
for a space of four years just experienced physically
the terrible consequences of bourgeois-capitalist politics,
wading through a sea of blood and tears that this proletariat
in the hour of revolution knew nothing else to do and was
able to do nothing better than to rescue once again the
bourgeoisie of its country, this bourgeoisie unparalleled
in brutality, audacity, incorrigibility and lack of
culture that is a deeply shaming and sad indictment.
An indictment which, even if not completely justified,
would make it seem quite understandable if thousands,
demoralized and despairing, throw in their hands: This
nation of serfs cannot be helped!
And yet this people deserve not our contempt but our
help, in its lack of courage as in its lack of understanding.
After all it is itself the victim of a centuries-long serfdom,
from which everything free and independent was beaten and
broken out of it, and of a unique gross deception which the
leaders committed against it again and again. It must now
go throw the terrible school of hunger and slavery, and if
under the pressure of world capital's multiplied power of
exploitation, it will have the last drops of blood squeezed
from its veins, all the bad instincts and vices of the
martyred creature will be squeezed out too; in this way
the school of misery will also yet become the school of
inspiration and political awakening.
The German proletariat must finally realise that the
proletarian revolution has nothing to do with parties
and trade unions, but is the work of the whole
proletarian class.
The German proletariat must finally set about gathering
this proletarian class in the places of its servitude
for the task of revolution, schooling it, organising it,
setting it on the march and leading it in the struggle.
The German proletariat must finally resolve upon slipping
the halter of its leadership and taking into its own hands
the work of its liberation, in order to complete it with its
own energies and methods, on its own initiative and under
its own leadership.
World history allows us time until all forces are ripe for
the task which is set us.
Parliaments are becoming increasingly empty trappings:
the parties are collapsing, destroying one another, and
losing their political credibility: the trade unions are
changing into ruins. The breakdown of this organisational
and political system all along the line is inevitable.
Proletarian and petty bourgeois strata are recognising in
growing numbers that they have become victims of the decrepit
party economy, if not victims of party-political and trade
union confidence tricks and, as they still believe deep
down in the rightness and future of the socialist idea,
are turning to movements which lead them up the garden
path of a liberation without struggle, a paradise for
which they need do nothing: to the anthroposophy of
Rudolf Steiner, the Free-country Free-money movement
of Silvio Osell, the work co-operatives which bowdlerize the
ideas of councils, to the National Socialism of Adolf Hitler,
the band of rebels who deny every organisation, or the Serious
Bible-Searchers who hope for pie in the sky. They are all
going astray: their way is full of disappointment; it ends
in nothing.
There remains solely and only the class struggle, developing
on the broadest economic basis, unleashing all proletarian
energies and advancing to the social revolution, that leads
to the socialist goals. The class struggle, in which the
proletariat is at the same time leader and mass, general-staff
and army, brain and arm, idea and movement, impulse and
fulfilment.
The road of the class struggle is a moment of world history.
It binds feudal past through and beyond capitalist present
to the socialist future. It leaves behind it all exploitation
and domination. It leads to freedom.
Follow us on this road, comrades!
We have a world to win!