The German-Dutch Communist Left - Libcom

strong presence amongst the Rotterdam workers, and during the July 1945 dock strike, they founded an
‘autonomous’ section of the EVB (Eenheids Vakbeweging; Unitary Trade Union Movement). It was highly
symptomatic that the Bond, during its Christmas 1945 Congress, should agree to work in the EVB, while
condemning the organisation’s activity within the unions. Its position on the unions as appendages of the state
thus remained a theoretical one. By leaving the Bond during the Congress, Toon van den Berg and his supporters
took their ‘tactical’ participation in ‘independent’ unions to its logical conclusion. 1214
The Bond was in the process of reappropriating the political positions of the GIC. It was feeling its way, more or
less clearly, towards its own political and theoretical positions.
On the other hand, the centralisation that this political work demanded, did not go down well with the Bond’s
anarchistic elements. A serious conflict developed within the organisation over the paper Spartacus. Some,
supported by a part of the Eind Redaktie (the editorial commission), found that the papers style was “too
journalistic”. 1215 They wanted the paper to be produced by all the members, and not by a political organ. The
conflict reached its height in March 1946, when a split occurred between the political commission (whose
secretary was Stan Poppe), and the Eind Redaktie. The result was a decision that “the Eind Redaktie is subject to
the political commission” in the political choice of articles, but not in the style, which was left up to the editorial
committee. 1216 The political commission defended the principle of centralism through the common work of the
two organs. The Eind Redaktie thought that its mandate was valid solely before an assembly of all the Bond’s
members. It looked for support to the young militants, who wanted the paper to be the expression of all the
members, whereas the majority of the political commission, and Stan Poppe in particular, defended the principle
that articles should be controlled politically by a responsible organ. The Eind Redaktie should thus be a
“subdivision” of the political commission. Militants’ participation in the editorial committee should be according
to the principal of “workers’ democracy”, and not of “democratic centralism” which dominated in the “old style”
organs. 1217 This was no “policy of compromise” as the majority of the editorial commission and the Amsterdam
membership claimed, but a practical question of the two organs working in common, based on the control and
participation of all the Bond’s members.
This confused debate, which intermingled the specificities of each commission and personal antagonisms,
simply brought the question of centralisation out into the open. The original failure to distinguish between the
political commission and the editorial board as a part of the latter, only poisoned the atmosphere further.
This serious crisis in the Bond led to the departure of several militants, and far from triumphing, the Bond’s
centralisation became increasingly vague during 1946.
However in real terms the departure of the Bond’s most confused, or most activist members, strengthened its
political clarity, and the Bond began to mark itself out more clearly from the surrounding political milieu. Thus
the summer of 1946 saw the departure of militants who had voted for the CP in the elections. The same
happened with the members of the Deventer section, who had contacted the trotskyists of the CRM with a view
to conducting ‘entryism’ into the Dutch CP. 1218
Political balance-sheet of the Communistenbond
1214 On Toon van den Berg (1904-1977), see the article by the Spartacusbond in Spartacus, No. 2, Feb.-March 1978.
1215 ‘Nota van de politieke commissie’ (Notes of the Political Commission), in: UEK, No. 2, March 1946.
1216 UEK, No. 2, March 1946, idem.
1217 At the same time as the debate over centralism, a split appeared between the ‘academicist’ elements, and militants
wanting more propaganda. The latter, like Johan van Dinkel, denounced the danger of the Bond becoming “a club for
theoretical study”. See: ‘Waar staat de Communistenbond? Theoretische studieclub of wordende Party’ (Where is the
Communistenbond going? A theoretical study club, or a party in formation?), in: UEK, No. 2, March 1946.
1218 See the internal circular of 17 th August 1946, containing the proceedings of the meeting of the national political
commission on 14 th July: in particular, the interventions of Stan Poppe, Bertus Nansink, Bruun van Albada, Jan Vastenhouw
and Theo Maassen on the state of the organisation.
301