The German-Dutch Communist Left - Libcom

Kommunist, publication of the Bremen opposition, which on most questions oscillated in a centrist way between
the right and the left. While demonstrating that it was impossible to use parliamentarism as a “means to the
proletarian revolution” in “the imperialist and revolutionary era”, Pannekoek seemed to think it possible to use
the parliamentary platform in the less developed countries. 423 According to him the possibility of using it
depended on “the strength and stage of development of capitalism in each country”. This theory of ‘special
cases’ leads to an implicit rejection of anti-parliamentarism as a new principle of the revolutionary movement in
the era of decadent imperialism – “period of crisis and chaos” – valid internationally, in every country. It
becomes simply a tactical question to be determined according to the productive forces of a given country. This
idea was only implicit but was widely adopted later by the ‘bordigist’ current. 424
The theoretical ideas of the Dutch Left developed slowly; they were enriched through polemic and the
experience of the German revolution. In fact they owe as much to the German Left as the latter did to the Dutch.
There was an interpenetration of the various left groupings, including the Left in Italy, at an international level.
A crystallisation of the positions of the communist left as a fairly complete doctrinal body was greatly
encouraged by the creation of the Amsterdam Bureau of the Komintern. Its creation marks the Dutch Left’s
greatest audience in the international revolutionary movement.
The Amsterdam Bureau (1919-1920)
In 1919 the Third International’s centre was isolated in a country plunged into civil war and quarantined by the
allied armies. The EC therefore decided to move the International Bureau to Western Europe. The tasks of this
Bureau were as much propaganda as to organise the different parties dependent on the respective bureaux. The
executive of the Komintern therefore created bureaux in Scandinavia, in the Balkans, in the south of Russia, and
in central Europe, in Vienna; at Borodin’s instigation a Latin-American Bureau was set up in Mexico. All these
organs were badly co-ordinated and greatly confused the centralisation of the international work. However, it
was still clear to the Komintern that with the development of the revolution the centre of the International would
have to be moved to Western Europe in the near future. These bureaux were its skeleton.
But in autumn 1919 the Komintern simultaneously set up a provisional secretariat for Western Europe, based in
Germany and a provisional bureau based in Holland and in permanent contact with the former. These two organs
closely reflected the tendencies within the Komintern. The secretariat was under the influence of the right, that
of Levi and Clara Zetkin, who inclined towards the Independents; the one in Amsterdam regrouped the left
communists who opposed the KPD’s move to the right.
The Komintern gave a particular role to the Dutch in propagandising and setting up within the Amsterdam
Bureau links between the communist parties of Western Europe and North America. The Dutch were to direct
this work. The Executive of the Komintern decided on 28 th September 1919 to nominate Gorter, Pannekoek,
Roland Holst – all on the left of the CPH – and Rutgers, Van Ravesteyn and Wijnkoop (the latter two
represented the right). Rutgers arrived at the beginning of November to set up the ‘sub-bureau and to organise an
international communist conference. 425 Despite their disagreements, the Bolsheviks had great confidence in the
Dutch, especially Pannekoek. The latter had been expressly invited to go to Russia as a specialist to help with
theoretical work. 426 Pannekoek refused in order to remain materially independent of the Russian government.
423 K. Horner, ‚Taktische und organisatorische Streitfragen’, in: Der Kommunist, Bremen, 13 Dec. 1919. The publication of
Pannekoek’s article was a contribution to the discussion on parliamentarism within the Bremen organisation. The latter
published Levi’s articles in favour of parliamentarism, indicating that it had moved to the right; this was soon to be
confirmed.
424 Before its explosion in 1982, the bordigist current considered participating in elections in certain geographic regions of
the Third World, where the ‘bourgeois revolution’ was still ‘on the agenda’.
425 Cf. Wiessing, op. cit., pp. 97-103.
426 Cf. A. Pannekoek, Herinneringen, op. cit., pp. 196-199.
122