KPD or New Party? (Ill)

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

The renunciation of the slogan for "reform" of the KPD may provoke doubts in the minds of many comrades. Let us foresee some of the possible objections:

a. We have always affirmed our devotion toward the official party, now we will turn our back to it — that will push the Communists away from us.

b. The party is now illegal, it has nuclei and organizations active everywhere — we must support them.

c. Urbahns and others will say that they were right as against us when they declared the KPD to be dead.

d. We are too weak to undertake the task of building a new party.

All these objections are untenable. We started out from the proposition that the key to the situation was in the hands of the KPD. That was correct. Only a timely turn on the part of the KPD could have saved the situation. Under such conditions to oppose the party and in advance to declare it to be dead would have meant to proclaim a priori the inevitability of the victory of fascism. We could not do that. We had to fully exhaust all the possibilities of the old situation.

Now the situation has changed fundamentally. The victory of fascism is a fact, and so is the breakdown of the KPD. It is no longer a question of making a prognosis or a theoretical criticism, but it is a question of an important historical event which will penetrate ever deeper into the consciousness of the masses, including the Communists. One must build the general perspective and the general strategy upon the inevitable consequences of these events and not upon secondary considerations.

It is unquestionable that many subjectively revolutionary elements of the old party will attempt to save it without giving up the old principled basis. In the near future, that is, as soon as the first consternation has disappeared, we can expect an acceleration of illegal Communist activities. However, without a fundamental revision of all the ideological baggage, without the elaboration of new methods, and without a new selection of persons, etc., the total of these activities will have no future. The efforts and the sacrifices on the old basis will not be the signs of a regeneration but the convulsions of agony. During legal conditions the policy of bureaucratic centrism, based upon falsity, apparatus, and finances, could for a long time mislead through an appearance of strength. It is the opposite for an illegal organization. It can maintain itself only through the utmost devotion of its members, and this devotion can be nourished only through correctness of policy and ideological honesty of the leadership. In the absence of these prerequisites the illegal organization will inevitably die (example: Italy).

It would be inadmissible to have any kind of illusions as to the illegal perspectives for the Stalinist apparatus or, in meeting it face to face, to be guided by sentimental instead of political-revolutionary considerations. This apparatus is corroded by paid functionaries, adventurists, careerists, and yesterday's or today's agents of fascism. The honest elements will have no compass. The Stalinist leadership will institute in the illegal party a regime even more contemptible and disreputable than in the legal party. Under such conditions the illegal work will be only a flash, although a heroic one; the result, however, can only be rottenness.

The Left Opposition must place itself entirely on the basis of the new historical situation created by the victory of fascism. There is nothing more dangerous, at the time of sharp turns of history, than to hang on to the old customary and comfortable formulas; this is the direct road to decay.

Urbahns and company will say: We have always declared that a new party is necessary. But the so-called KAPD said that long before Urbahns, during the years when Urbahns was still occupied as they were, against us, in ruining the party. The foundation of sectarianism consists precisely in its estimating the historical processes with the measure of its own group. The new party begins for Urbahns at the moment when he has broken with the bureaucracy. The Marxist, however, judges all organizations and all groups through the measure of the objective historical processes. During the last two years we have written more than once that our position toward the party does not have a dogmatic character and that great events which may radically change the situation of the working class could also compel us to change our position. As examples of such great events, we named most often a victory of fascism in Germany and a breakdown of the Soviet power. Thus there is nothing subjective or arbitrary in our turn. It is dictated entirely by the course of developments in which the policies of the Stalinist bureaucracy were the decisive element.

"We are too weak to proclaim the new party." But no one proposes this. How and when the new party will be created depends upon many objective circumstances and not only upon us. But it demands the pursuing of a correct course. To the extent that we support illusions about the vitality of the old party, to that extent we hinder the creation of the new party.

Moreover one must not forget for a moment that processes of decomposition will set in not only in the official party but also in the Social Democracy, in the SAP, and in all organizations, groups, and sections which cannot stand the test of historical catastrophe. Under these conditions, it is necessary to create an independent axis for the crystallization of all revolutionary elements regardless of their party past.

Perhaps the reply to us will be: The logic of this position will lead to a break with the Comintern. Possibly in formal logic. The historical processes, however, do not develop according to formal logic, they develop dialectically. We do not give up our efforts to save the Soviet power from the ruin to which it is being driven by the Stalinists. We cannot know in advance what the reaction inside the other sections of the Comintern will be to the victory of fascism. To this belongs the test of the events — with our active assistance.

The question of the open break with the Stalinist bureaucracy in Germany is at the present moment of enormous principled importance. The revolutionary vanguard will not pardon the historical crime committed by the Stalinists. If we support the illusion of the vitality of the party of Thälmann-Neumann we would appear to the masses as the real defenders of their bankruptcy. That would signify that we ourselves veer toward the road of centrism and putrefaction.