Third Period in Weimar Germany: Alternatives for the KPD?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Were there alternatives for the KPD in Weimar Germany with respect to whom they should have worked with? I actually appreciate their staunch Third Period refusal to work with the social- corporatist SPD/VSPD/MSPD, but were there alternative parties with whom to launch joint strike actions, protests, demonstrations, etc.? Why the Nazis? Was there perhaps an anti-Nazi, anti-cutbacks Independent Germans party for communitarian populist cooperation or something?

[blake 3:17]

Why celebrate Third period Stalinism in the country where it had the worst result?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Blake, I am hardly supportive at all of the KPD's collaboration with the Nazis. It's one thing to not have "no platform" and to send the likes of young Walter Ulbricht to agitate at a Nazi meeting in exchange for a Nazi activist to agitate at a KPD meeting, but it's quite another thing to observe the closer, tragic collaboration between the two groups.

If I were celebrating, I would not have suggested the possibility of an Independent Germans alternative or the tragedy of such not being there.

[Viktor89]

Maybe off topic, but can you send me some good info and links about those areas in Germany where the left revolted and managed to rule for some short time?

[Rafiq]

Were there alternatives for the KPD in Weimar Germany with respect to whom they should have worked with? I actually appreciate their staunch Third Period refusal to work with the social- corporatist SPD/VSPD/MSPD, but were there alternative parties with whom to launch joint strike actions, protests, demonstrations, etc.? Why the Nazis? Was there perhaps an anti-Nazi, anti-cutbacks Independent Germans party for communitarian populist cooperation or something?

It's important to remember that this was a time of taking sides - one either sided with those in power, the reaction, or the Communists. Unlike with regard to Syriza, I would imagine that the alliance with the Nazis had little to do with the necessity of mustering up a bigger demographic or an increase in numbers, but a fatal underestimation of the historically eventful character of the Nazis as real contenders to state power. Conversely the social democratic party was seen as a real and imminent obstacle to KPD dominance both regionally and nationally, the Nazis were seen as a mere shit-scraper with no potential to themselves become shit.

What was crucially mistaken of Third period was not its alleged sectarian 'ultra-leftism' as some put it, but its failure to get its priorities straight regarding threats to its ascension to state power. The Nazis were perceived as historically devoid of an affirmative character, i.e. anomalies who couldn't possibly become the heirs to capitalism. For the KPD during the time, as well as for many radicals, the subversion of the state by the Nazis would naturally result in social revolution as the Nazis were by nature inconsistent and contradictory. And there might be some merit of truth to this: After all, the worker-base of the Nazis, represented by the strasserite faction, were keen on ideas of 'social revolution'. These inconsistent elements were purged precisely because a social revolution would have meant victory for the Communists (After the natural, learned experiences of workers fighting against bosses and so on).

By the time the Nazis were able to consolidate power, the Popular front tactics, doomed to fail, were the only option. If we can retrospectively look at the mistake, it was not the delay of the petty Popular Front tactics but the inability of the Comintern to properly, theoretically designate Fascism as potentially being a new order of capitalism (rather than a chaotic insistence of its collapse).

[Die Neue Zeit]

It's important to remember that this was a time of taking sides - one either sided with those in power, the reaction, or the Communists. Unlike with regard to Syriza, I would imagine that the alliance with the Nazis had little to do with the necessity of mustering up a bigger demographic or an increase in numbers, but a fatal underestimation of the historically eventful character of the Nazis as real contenders to state power. Conversely the social democratic party was seen as a real and imminent obstacle to KPD dominance both regionally and nationally, the Nazis were seen as a mere shit-scraper with no potential to themselves become shit.

By that logic, comrade, I'm tempted to go slightly off topic.

"The social democratic party" could easily be substituted with to PASOK, the Democratic Left, and To Potami. "The Nazis" can't be as easily substituted, because nobody is allying with Golden Dawn, and because, if the Communitarian Populist Front governing Greece right now is successful, I think ANEL has a fighting chance of replacing New Democracy as the new go-to party on the economic right, "real contenders to state power."

Back on topic, though, I'm not sure the KPD underestimated the Nazis in the contenders regard. "After Hitler, Us" was a statement that acknowledged the Nazis as real contenders to state power, albeit an estimation of short-term contention vs. long-term contention.

[blake 3:17]

Back on topic, though, I'm not sure the KPD underestimated the Nazis in the contenders regard. "After Hitler, Us" was a statement that acknowledged the Nazis as real contenders to state power, albeit an estimation of short-term contention vs. long-term contention.

When I was a young Trot, the "After Hitler, Us" just sounded so stupid. With a better knowledge of history, there's some truth to it -- the USSR did a pretty good sweep and got 1/2 of Germany and fwiw the social democrats got the other half.

But on the side of realism, fuck, I wish that the united front had been had. I know they didn't realize how bad fascism was going to be, but...

[OnFire]

First of all, they should have kicked out Thälmann and worked together with the left wing of the SPD and such to stop the fascists.

They even could have invited Trotsky and Veterans of the German Revolution like Barth and Renn and worked together with them. They should have exploited german revanchism at the time and adopt some left-nationalism to call out a general strike. Many low-level members of the Nazis had in fact very favorable views of the KPD and would have easily switched sides. IMO revolution in 32-34 was very much possible.

[Cliff Paul]

but it's quite another thing to observe the closer, tragic collaboration between the two groups.

Besides the whole Ulbright and Goebbels joint speech (which ended in a street fight) what other examples are there of Nazi-KPD collaboration?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Apparently, there was a so-called "red referendum" that brought down a regional SPD government. The "red referendum" was initiated by the KPD and the Nazis.

[cyu]

Interesting thread considering what was happening in Greece, but considering how "well" Syriza has kept their campaign promises, the question may be moot at this point.

In my more naïve years, I actually voted for Bill Clinton sincerely believing he could fix the country's problems. Then came welfare "reform". After waking up from that illusion, any time I voted, it was merely a tactical move, with no trust in the politician I voted for at all. Any trust I had in the Obama administration ended with the Honduras coup.

So what happened with Syriza isn't really surprising to me. Lots of socialist parties have been elected in the past to European parliaments. What did we get out of it? Austerity with a socialist face?