The Dutch and German Communist Left 1900-68: Neither Lenin Nor Trotsky Nor Stalin! (Historical Materialism)

The Dutch-German Communist Left, represented by way of the German KAPD-AAUD, the Dutch KAPN and the Bulgarian Communist staff celebration, separated from the Comintern (1921) on questions like electoralism, trade-unionism, united fronts, the one-party country and anti-proletarian violence. It attracted the ire of Lenin, who wrote his Left Wing Communism, "An childish ailment opposed to the Linkskommunismus," whereas Herman Gorter wrote a recognized reaction in his pamphlet "Reply to Lenin." the current quantity offers the main immense heritage up to now of this tendency within the twentieth-century Communist circulate. It covers how the Communist left, with the KAPD-AAU, denounced 'party communism' and 'state capitalism' in Russia; how the German left survived after 1933 within the form of the Dutch GIK and Paul Mattick s councils stream within the united states; and likewise how the Dutch Communistenbond Spartacus persisted to struggle after 1942 for the area energy of the employees councils, as theorised through Pannekoek in his e-book "Workers Councils" (1946)."

Show description

Quick preview of The Dutch and German Communist Left 1900-68: Neither Lenin Nor Trotsky Nor Stalin! (Historical Materialism) PDF

Best Communism books

Clever Girl: Elizabeth Bentley, the Spy Who Ushered in the McCarthy Era

Communists vilified her as a raging neurotic. Leftists disregarded her as a pressured idealist. Her relations pitied her as an exploited lover. a few stated she was once a traitor, a stooge, a mercenary, and a grandstander. To others she used to be a real American heroine -- fearless, principled, daring, and resolute. Congressional committees enjoyed her.

The Party: The Secret World of China’s Communist Rulers

“Few outsiders have any reasonable feel of the innards, explanations, rivalries, and fears of the chinese language Communist management. yet we know even more than prior to, because of Richard McGregor’s illuminating and richly-textured examine the folks in command of China’s political equipment. .. . precious.

Revolutionary Russia, 1891-1991: A Pelican Introduction

What prompted the russian revolution? did it prevail or fail? will we nonetheless reside with its effects? orlando figes teaches background at birkbeck, collage of london and is the writer of many acclaimed books on russian heritage, together with a people's tragedy, which the days literary complement named as one of many '100 so much influential books because the war', natasha's dance, the whisperers, crimea and simply ship me note.

Meeting the Communist Threat: Truman to Reagan (Oxford Paperbacks)

This provocative quantity, written via the celebrated diplomatic historian Thomas G. Paterson, explores why and the way american citizens have perceived and exaggerated the Communist risk within the final part century. Basing his lively research on study in inner most papers, executive documents, oral histories, modern writings, and scholarly works, Paterson explains the origins and evolution of usa worldwide intervention.

Extra resources for The Dutch and German Communist Left 1900-68: Neither Lenin Nor Trotsky Nor Stalin! (Historical Materialism)

Show sample text content

Cit. , p. 60). ninety six. Idem, p. fifty nine. ninety seven. Idem, p. seventy six. 113 98. Idem, p. sixty four. ninety nine. Idem, p. forty five. a hundred. Idem, p. sixty seven. one hundred and one. Idem, p. 24. yet Gorter provides: “this kind of independence could be even worse for a country than subjection”. This place used to be to this point faraway from that of the Tribunist leaders, who like Rutgers and Sneevliet supported ‘national and colonial liberation struggles’. 102. Idem, p. 24. 103. “Gorter is opposed to self-determination for his personal kingdom, yet now not for the Dutch East Indies, oppressed through ‘his’ kingdom! ” (Lenin, “Result of a dialogue at the rights of peoples to self-determination”, 1916). 104. See De Internationale, organ for an self sustaining staff’ socialist coverage, no. nine, twelfth October 1918: “Verweer van afdeeling den Haag der SDP” (‘Defence of the SDP’s Hague section’). one hundred and five. De Internationale, no. l, fifteenth June 1918, “Ons Orgaan”, p. 1. The regroupment’s major traces have been: political attachment to the Zimmerwald Left; fight opposed to the imperialist Dutch kingdom; the sharpest fight opposed to all reformist and imperialist trends among union participants organised within the NAS and the NW (the SDAP union). 106. because August 1917, Wijnkoop and Van Ravesteyn had actually been the daily’s merely editors. 107. Kolthek, who was once elected deputy, wrote for a liberal paper De Telegraaf, which used to be extra vigorously proEntente. With the SP and the BvSC, the SDP gained 50,000 votes – of which 14,000 for Wijnkoop in Amsterdam – in different phrases part the ranking of the SDAP. the 3 elected deputies shaped a ‘revolutionary parliamentary fraction’. 108. See de Liagre Böhl, op. cit. , p. 213. 109. Gorter wrote an editorial deciding on Wijnkoop with Troelstra, released less than the headline ‘Troelstra– Wijnkoop’, in De Tribune of 18th September 1918. De Tribune of twenty sixth October 1918 declared: “The directing committee’s love for the Russian Revolution is solely platonic. actually, the best powers of its love are directed in the direction of the extension of the party’s attractiveness and numbers with assistance from allies in parliament”. one hundred ten. The competition didn't but reject parliamentarism as such; it sought a significant dialogue in the employees’ move to figure out destiny strategies: “... very important difficulties during this part of the staff’ stream couldn't be clarified... as regards to parliamentarism, the editorial fee takes the view that everybody may be capable of supply his opinion in De Internationale. even if, this query isn't but exhausted... an analogous is correct for participation or now not in elections” (De Internationale, no. nine, twelfth October 1918, ‘Landelijke conferentie van De Internationale’). In 1915, Pannekoek (in De Nieuwe Tijd, ‘De Sociaaldemokratie en de oorlog’, p. 137-151) had already condemned parliamentarism, which had turn into ‘non-revolutionary’, yet he didn't exclude the potential of “a principled fight good fought in Parliament” nonetheless having “a innovative value”. 111. Quoted through Sam de Wolff, op. cit. , p. 158. 112. Quoted by means of Burger, op. cit. , p. 114. 113. See P. J. Troelstra, Gedenkschriften IV, Amsterdam 1931, p. 245.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.57 of 5 – based on 49 votes