The German-Dutch Communist Left - Libcom

Luxemburg’s conception, it was forced to opt clearly for one or the other. It did so in 1946, in an issue of its
weekly press. 1224 In an article devoted to national independence (‘Nationale onafhankelijkheid’), it attacked the
trotskyist position of the RCP, whose slogan was “Indonesië los van Holland, nu!” (‘Separation of Holland and
Indonesia, now!’). Such a slogan could not be anything but a call for the exploitation of the Indonesian workers
by other imperialisms: “‘Indonesië los van Holland, nu!’ means: “exploitation of the Indonesian proletarians by
Britain and America, Australia, and /or their own new rulers”. “The struggle of the Indonesian masses must arise
against all exploitation!’”.
More profoundly, the Bond adopted unambiguously Rosa Luxemburg’s conception, and rejected any Leninist
type slogan of the ‘right of national self-determination’. This could only mean abandoning internationalism for
the imperialist camp: “Any sympathy for this slogan means putting the working class on the side of one of the
two rival imperialist colossi, just like the ‘right of nations to self-determination’ in 1914, and [the struggle]
‘against German fascism’ during World War II.”
The Bond thus abandoned definitively its position of 1942. Later, when countries like India and China gained
their independence, its main concern was to see how far ‘independence’ could lead to a development of the
productive forces, and so objectively encourage the emergence of a powerful industrial proletariat. Implicitly,
the Bond posed the question of ‘bourgeois revolutions’ in the Third World (see below).
• The union question
The Unitary Trade Union Movement (EVB) was born in 1943. Members of the Communist Party (CPN),
trotskyists of the CRM (‘Committee of Marxist Revolutionaries’), and some members of the Communistenbond
Spartacus, had taken part in its foundation. In the autumn of 1945, the EVB changed its name to ‘Unitary Union
Central’ (EVC). This was no longer a little union like the NAS, but a large union organisation, with some
200,000 members in 1945 – almost as many as the Social-Democrat NVV. Its presence among the workers was
especially reinforced by several big strikes in 1945 and 1946, above all in ports like Rotterdam.
Hence, these also strengthened the CPN, which scored (in May 1946) the best electoral results of its history
(10.6% in 1946; 2.4% in 1959; 4.7% in 1972; 0.6% in 1986). The stalinist party obtained 10 seats in Parliament,
had 50,000 members (against 15,200 in 1978), and 300,000 subscribers to its press.
Since its Christmas 1945 Congress, the Bond had abandoned all union work: it had nonetheless sent delegates to
the EVC Congress on 29 th July 1946. 1225 Tactically, however, a part of the Bond worked in the EVC’s
‘autonomous sections’, such as Rotterdam, which since the dock strike (28 th June-5 th July 1945) counted some
3,400 workers. Since its foundation, the Bond had officially defended the principle of ‘factory councils’
(Bedrijfsraad) created spontaneously by the workers, forming ‘kernels’ which were to gather together the
conscious workers’ by ‘locality and company’. 1226 In fact, the Bond was simply repeating the KAPD’s old
conception of the Unionen and Betriebsorganisationen (factory organisations). Unlike the KAPD, however, the
Bond also carried out trade union work, under the pressure of workers who still fostered illusions as to the
formation of ‘real revolutionary unions’. This was the case in 1948-49, when the OVB was founded
(Independent Union of Enterprise organisations). The OVB was formed by a split, in March 1948, from the
Rotterdam EVC, provoked by Van den Berg as a response to the CP’s grip on the EVC. Later, the Bond was to
claim that the OVB was nothing but “a little union”. In reality, the OVB in 1948 had 10,000 members! 1227
1224 Spartacus-Weekblad, No. 12, 23 rd March 1946.
1225 Decision of the political commission, 14 th July 1946. See circular of 27 th August with the proceedings of the central
organ’s meeting.
1226 ‘Het wezen der revolutionnaire bedrijfsorganisatie’ (The nature of revolutionary organisation in the enterprise), in:
Spartacus Weekblad, No. 23, 7 th June 1947.
1227 In 1951, some members of the Bond thought that the OVB was nothing other than an “old union”, where they had no
business. This was the point of view of Spartacus in 1978, which defined the OVB as “a small trade union organisation”.
304