Studies in Social History – serie

This text aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of a neglected aspect of Chartism, its poetry. Here the Chartists are documented as poet-politicians. In order to show how much this poetry can contribute to a deeper understanding of the movement, the poems are treated as literary pieces and as historical sources. Being a mass phenomenon, these poems and songs served as a vehicle of Chartism. They offer critical insights into society, and reveal the emotions and values which brought about the mass consensus.

This text examines the rise of the German Communist Party in the crucial period between the Kapp Putsch and the stabilization of the Weimar Republic. Based on archival research, its reconstruction of Communist participation in union and protest movements in the key industrial region of Rhineland-Westphalia offers a detailed social analysis of Communist support, organization, and political strategy in German labour unions. By viewing German Communism against the backdrop of industrial structures and economic conditions, this study illuminates the deeper divisions in the German workers' movement that contributed to the tragedy of the Weimar Republic.

About Tsereteli relatively little has been written in historical literature. A study of his political career fits well into the current, gradually widening interest in the men who were the losers in the Russian revolution. A biography of Tsereteli is certainly not out of place alongside S. H. Baron's biography of Plekhanov, I. Getzler's work on Martov and the biography of Aksel'rod by A. Ascher. While Plekhanov, Martov and Aksel'rod laid down the theoretical principles of Menshe­ vism, Tsereteli was certainly their superior in the field of practical politics. The quantity and quality of the available source material is un­ equally divided over the different periods of Tsereteli's life. There is very little more about his youth than the brief notes which he himself made much later in his life, and the recollections which Boris Niko­ laevskii and Tsereteli's sister Eliko noted down from things he said. There is quite a lot of material about the student movement in Moscow between I900 andI902, in which he took an active part, so that it is possible to get a good general picture. Since the students often acted anonymously, however, it is not easy to determine Tsereteli's role.

Wherever possible in this monograph I have referred to English trans­ lations of works originally appearing in other languages. Where this has not been possible, for example with Russian material, I have followed the Library of Congress system of transliteration, but omitted the diacritics. I have also retained the conventional use of 'y' for the ending of certain Russian proper names (e.g., Trotsky not Trotskii). In accordance with the policy of using existing English translations, I have referred to the Martin Nicolaus translation of Marx's Grundrisse, which is relatively faithful to the text. (The Grundrisse, although the Dead Sea Scroll of Marxism, bear all the characteristics of a rough draft, characteristics which are preserved in the Nicolaus translation.) The term 'Marxian' has been employed in the conventional way in this book, to distinguish the views of Marx and Engels from those of their 'Marxist' followers. In preparing this work I have received bibliographical assistancefrom Professor Israel Getzler, now of the Hebrew University, and critical assistance from Mr Bruce McFarlane of the University of Adelaide and especially from Professor Eugene Kamenka of the Aus­ tralian National University. Professor Jean Chesneaux of the Sorbonne, as one of the leading participants in the more recent debates discussed here, provided me with some further insight into the issues, and Pro­ fessor K.A. Wittfogel of Columbia also supplied some valuable in­ formation.

1 This study deals with the Mamliik period in Iraqi history (1750- 1831), and more particularly with later Mamliik times (1802-1831). Only the most scanty evidence exists on the history of the Yanissaris of Baghdad, or on the socio-political history of the lower orders of the town.

Soviet Russia will conquer all the millions of problems that stand in its way, on one condition: as long as the cause of the political education of the broad masses of the people continually advances. We have nothing to be afraid of, if our people fully learns to distinguish who are its friends and who are its enemies. The trial of the Socialist Revolutionaries must and shall be a great step forward in the cause of the political instruction of the very broadest masses in town and country. (Grigorii Zinov'ev, Pravda and Krasnaia gazeta, 20 June 1922) For my part, I considered this trial to be unnecessary: the Socialist Revolu­ tionaries had been beaten and represented no visible danger at all. (Charles Rappoport, Ma vie, Paris 1926-1927, Vol. 2, p. 80) The Bolsheviks seized power in Russia in October 1917 by staging a coup d'etat, and then established a dictatorship. The new rulers sup­ pressed all armed resistance in a bloody civil war, after which they made every effort to uproot andexterminate even peaceful political opposition of all kinds. Even now it is impossible in the Soviet Union to subject these developments to critical historical study. The political opponents of the Soviet regime of the time are still regarded by official Soviet his­ toriography as counter-revolutionaries and the measures taken against them are seen as completely justified.

This is apoliticalbiography ofAlphonseMerrheim, asignificant leader of the Conf6d6ration G6n6raledu Travail(CGT)intheyears between 1904 and 1923 and the most important member of the Federation of Metalworkers during the sameperiod. Hewas born inthe Nord in 1871 and becameaworkeratanearlyage,firstinmetallurgythanintextiles and finally once more in metalworking. In his ideologicalevolution hepassed through asocialistpoliticalpartyandthenconvertedtorevolutionarys- dicalism. In his peculiar fusion of theory and practice, Merrheim represented a form of revolutionary syndicalism that helps define the characteristics of that movement. He believed,alongwithother revo- tionary syndicalists, that one day a workers' general strike would ov- throw capitalism. But the syndicalist movement wouldpreparethat ev- tualitybystrengtheningtheworkersthrough socialreformsandbycreating their class consciousness through education. Merrheim, however, p- ticipatedsothoroughly intradeunionactivityandstudiedtheorganization of capitalistindustry so carefullythat he cametoemphasizetheprepa- tions for such a generalstrike much more than thestrikeitself.The test of his attitude cameon theeve of, during, and immediately afterWorld War I; for contrary tothe demands of certain militant and revolutionary workerswhobelievedthatthethreatofwar andthenthedislocationcaused by the war demanded a revolutionary response, Merrheim persistently stressedthe dangers ofsuch anaction before the adequatepreparation of the workers. Hissteadfast refusaleventorespondtothestrikeactions of some ofhisown metalworkers in 1919 indicates the central contradiction between hisrevolutionary theory and reformistpractice. This book examinesindetailMerrheim'sevolution fromarevolutionary to areformer. Insodoingit alsoshedslightonanequallysubstantialtopic, namely,howacertaintypeofworkerrespondedtoindustrializationinthe late nineteenth and earlytwentiethcenturies. Merrheim is an interesting figure,too, becauseofhispositioninthelabormovement, foritrepresents a unique focalpoint forthestudy oflaborhistory. Merrheim enteredthe Frenchlabormovement in the 1890s and remainedactiveinituntil 1923. During that periodhewas, successively, alocalunion leader,co-secretary xii of a nationallaborfederation, and animportant figurewithinthe CGT.Never thesecretary-generaloftheCGT, hewasneverthelesstheconfident of thesecretary-generalfrom 1909, L6on Jouhaux.

1 This study deals with the Mamliik period in Iraqi history (1750- 1831), and more particularly with later Mamliik times (1802-1831). The year 1831 marks the watershed between an era of 'local rule' and one of restored Turkish centralization. During the Mamliik period the influence of external powers in Iraq was not excessive; after that year direct Turkish rule coincided with growing British in­ fluence, which increasingly opened the country to the forces of the world market. As an object of study the period of local rule is inter­ esting, particularly because it formed the background to, and in some aspects also the start of, the modern history ofIraq. The literature available on Mamliik rule and tribal power is scarce and unsatisfying in various ways. The best history of 'Ottoman' Iraq is still that of Longrigg, which was written in the 1920's. However, although based on an admirable range of sources, it provides the reader with little more than a political chronology. Generally, the social and political historian of early modern Iraq is confronted with a lack of information of a very basic kind - if indeed he can find any 2 relevant information. For example, there is hardly any information on the Mamliik institution. Only the most scanty evidence exists on the history of the Yanissaris of Baghdad, or on the socio-political history of the lower orders of the town. Again, almost nothing is known about the lower orders of the sedentary rural world.

Soviet Russia will conquer all the millions of problems that stand in its way, on one condition: as long as the cause of the political education of the broad masses of the people continually advances. We have nothing to be afraid of, if our people fully learns to distinguish who are its friends and who are its enemies. The trial of the Socialist Revolutionaries must and shall be a great step forward in the cause of the political instruction of the very broadest masses in town and country. (Grigorii Zinov'ev, Pravda and Krasnaia gazeta, 20 June 1922) For my part, I considered this trial to be unnecessary: the Socialist Revolu­ tionaries had been beaten and represented no visible danger at all. (Charles Rappoport, Ma vie, Paris 1926-1927, Vol. 2, p. 80) The Bolsheviks seized power in Russia in October 1917 by staging a coup d'etat, and then established a dictatorship. The new rulers sup­ pressed all armed resistance in a bloody civil war, after which they made every effort to uproot andexterminate even peaceful political opposition of all kinds. Even now it is impossible in the Soviet Union to subject these developments to critical historical study. The political opponents of the Soviet regime of the time are still regarded by official Soviet his­ toriography as counter-revolutionaries and the measures taken against them are seen as completely justified.

My interest in the topic of this book traces back over more than ten years to my interest in the history of political parties in pre- revolutionary Russia. To my late tutor Professor Reinhard Wittram, who guided me during my undergraduate and post-graduate days as a student at the University of Gottingen, lowe a special gratitude for giving my iiJ.terest its special focus. I. am indebted to him for my academic training more than this book may indicate. He did not see the results of his influence, but he followed my preparatory work with both sympathy and critical attention. My thanks are due equally to Professors Hans Roos (Bochum) and Rudolf Vierhaus (Gbttingen), whose constant advice and help meant continued encouragement. I am further obliged to Professors Dietrich Geyer (Tiibingen) and Hans Kaiset (Oldenburg) and their critical reading of the 1973 draft of my book. In 1977/78, during my revision of the manuscript and its preparation for publication, the most im- portant suggestions came to me from many discussions deep into the night with my friend Jurgen Jahnke. To the many others whose names do not appear here lowe my thanks for their help and encouragement.

At a fairly early stage of socialism's penetration into the Afro-Asian world, a handful of European social democrats established an Indian Social-Democratic Association (lSDV). They did so in a country, Indonesia, that was economically little developed and far away from any of the centres of European socialism and Asiatic radical-national­ ism. The ISDV was soon able to bring its influence to bear on sec­ tions of the urban proletariat and to build up an Indonesian revol­ utionary movement. This occurred in sharp competition with a nascent nationalist leadership, and then without the usual inter­ mediary role played by radicalizing groups of native intelligentsia. In this way, Dutch social democrats laid the foundations for one of the first communist parties in Asia and Africa, a party which was des­ tined to become one of the few communist mass parties of the Third World. However, in contrast to the major communist movements of China-Vietnam, this Indonesian party was to demonstrate a basic weakness: successive and catastrophic defeats. ! If we leave out Japan, the only non-Western country where a capi­ talist industrial revolution occurred, we see that foreign and particu­ larly Western minorities frequently did playa dominant role in the initial and formative phases of the socialist and workers' movements of the Afro-Asiatic world.

Wherever possible in this monograph I have referred to English trans­ lations of works originally appearing in other languages. Where this has not been possible, for example with Russian material, I have followed the Library of Congress system of transliteration, but omitted the diacritics. I have also retained the conventional use of 'y' for the ending of certain Russian proper names (e.g., Trotsky not Trotskii). In accordance with the policy of using existing English translations, I have referred to the Martin Nicolaus translation of Marx's Grundrisse, which is relatively faithful to the text. (The Grundrisse, although the Dead Sea Scroll of Marxism, bear all the characteristics of a rough draft, characteristics which are preserved in the Nicolaus translation.) The term 'Marxian' has been employed in the conventional way in this book, to distinguish the views of Marx and Engels from those of their 'Marxist' followers. In preparing this work I have received bibliographical assistancefrom Professor Israel Getzler, now of the Hebrew University, and critical assistance from Mr Bruce McFarlane of the University of Adelaide and especially from Professor Eugene Kamenka of the Aus­ tralian National University. Professor Jean Chesneaux of the Sorbonne, as one of the leading participants in the more recent debates discussed here, provided me with some further insight into the issues, and Pro­ fessor K.A. Wittfogel of Columbia also supplied some valuable in­ formation.

About Tsereteli relatively little has been written in historical literature. A study of his political career fits well into the current, gradually widening interest in the men who were the losers in the Russian revolution. A biography of Tsereteli is certainly not out of place alongside S. H. Baron's biography of Plekhanov, I. Getzler's work on Martov and the biography of Aksel'rod by A. Ascher. While Plekhanov, Martov and Aksel'rod laid down the theoretical principles of Menshe­ vism, Tsereteli was certainly their superior in the field of practical politics. The quantity and quality of the available source material is un­ equally divided over the different periods of Tsereteli's life. There is very little more about his youth than the brief notes which he himself made much later in his life, and the recollections which Boris Niko­ laevskii and Tsereteli's sister Eliko noted down from things he said. There is quite a lot of material about the student movement in Moscow between I900 andI902, in which he took an active part, so that it is possible to get a good general picture. Since the students often acted anonymously, however, it is not easy to determine Tsereteli's role.

The present work is aimed at filling a hiatus in the literature dealing with the Young Hegelians and the early thought of Karl Marx. Despite the prevalent view in the past few decades that Bruno Bauer played an important part in the radical activity of Hegel's young disciples in the eighteen forties in Germany, no comprehensive work has so far been published on the relations between Bauer and Marx. In 1927 Ernst Bar­ nikol promised to write a monograph on the subject, but he never did. For the purpose of this study I perused material in numerous library collections and I would like to express my gratitude to the staff of the following institutions: Tel Aviv University Library, the Library and Archive of the International Institute of Social History in Am­ sterdam, the Heidelberg University Library, the Library of Gottingen University, the Tiibingen University Library, Frankfurt University Library, the State Library at Marburg, the Manuscript Department of the State Archives in Berlin.

This book analyzes how a sizable group of Gennan workers came to support Communism and how they in turn influenced the emergence and development of the German Communist Party (KPD) in its fonnative period as a mass party. It reconstructs the interaction between a party and the constituency to which it appealed within the constraints and opportunities set by social structures, econo­ mic conditions, and political competitors. This interaction revolved around the elaboration and implementation of a specific concept of revolutionary politics, and this study investigates both the rise of the KPD as a mass party and its failure to set off a socialist revolution in the early 1920s in light of the contradictory ways German workers responded to its revolutionary strategy. When I began to study the KPD in the mid 1970s, scholarly works in the West portrayed a party so out of touch with the realities of German life from 1918 to 1933 that its history was a litany of political mistakes that led from crisis to catastrophe. The KPD was dominated by the foreign policy interests of the Soviet Union, by factional disputes and personal rivalries among the leadership, by an authoritarian, centralized party structure that stifled rank-and-file initiative and imposed a party line determined in Moscow and Berlin, and by a rigid ideology largely irrelevant to trends in German economy, society, and politics with at best compensatory value for a minority of the most impoverished workers.

My interest in the 'refugee question' of the 1930s stemmed initially from time spent as an undergraduate at Manchester University, an interest which has been expanded, via a doctoral thesis, to the writing of this book. In wri­ ting about the German and Austrian refugees who fled to the Netherlands before the country was occupied in May 1940, the main aim has been to re­ turn the 'refugee question' of the 1930s into its pre-war context,a context from which it has often been dragged to provide an introduction to the events of the war period and the policies carried out by the Germans in oc­ cupied Europe. A study of the Netherlands provides the opportunity to look at refugees as a whole, not just as Jews, social democrats or communists, and also to examine the reaction and response of an European government to what was essentially a unique problem. I take great pleasure in recording my gratitude to the many people who have helped me in the course of my work. To the Dutch Ministerie van On­ derwijs en Wetenschappen and the Twenty-Seven Foundation for grants which enabled me to spend time in the Netherlands completing the research for this project, and to the British Acadamy for their financial assistance with publication costs. The research for this book took me to many libraries and archives in a number of countries.