Rosa Luxemburg and the Spartacist program

  1. Tower of Bebel
    Tower of Bebel
    Do you think that unlike today's communist left Rosa Luxemburg discarded the (marxist) minimum program only because of the specific revolutionary context (the proletarian revolution)?

    What has the war left of bourgeois society beyond a gigantic rubbish heap? Formally, of course, all the means of production and most of the instruments of power, practically all the decisive instruments of power, are still in the hands of the dominant classes. We are under no illusions here. But what our rulers will be able to achieve with the powers they possess, over and above frantic attempts to re-establish their system of spoliation through blood and slaughter, will be nothing more than chaos. Matters have reached such a pitch that today mankind is faced with two alternatives: it may perish amid chaos; or it may find salvation in socialism. As the outcome of the Great War it is impossible for the capitalist classes to find any issue from their difficulties while they maintain class rule. We now realize the absolute truth of the statement formulated for the first time by Marx and Engels as the scientific basis of socialism in the great charter of our movement, in the Communist Manifesto. Socialism will become an historical necessity. Socialism is inevitable, not merely because the proletarians are no longer willing to live under the conditions imposed by the capitalist class, but, further, because if the proletariat fails to fulfill its duties as a class, if it fails to realize socialism, we shall crash down together to a common doom. (Prolonged applause.)

    Here you have the general foundation of the programme we are officially adopting today, draft of which you have all read in the pamphlet, What does Spartacus Want? Our programme is deliberately opposed to the leading principle of the Erfurt programme; it is deliberately opposed to the separation of the immediate and so-called minimal demands formulated for the political and economic struggle, from the socialist goal regarded as a maximal programme. It is in deliberate opposition to the Erfurt programme that we liquidate the results of seventy years evolution, that we liquidate, above all, the primary results of the war, saying we know nothing of minimal and maximal programmes; we know, only, one thing, socialism; this is the minimum we are going to secure. (Hear! Hear!)


    I do not propose to discuss the details of our programme. This would take too long, and you will form your own opinions upon matters of detail. The task that devolves upon me is merely to sketch the broad lines wherein our programme is distinguished from what has hitherto been the official programme of the German Social Democracy. I regard it, however, as of the utmost importance that we should come to an understanding in our estimate of the concrete circumstances of the hour, of the tactics we have to adopt, of the practical measures which must be undertaken, in view of the probable lines of further development. We have to judge the political situation from the outlook I have just characterized, from the outlook of those who aim at the immediate realization of socialism, of those who are determined to subordinate everything else to that end.
    On the Spartacist program.
  2. LUXEMBURGUISTA
    LUXEMBURGUISTA
    I think "yes" and "not". It´s sure to me that the specific context of the revolutionary process in Germany was ¿crucial? (I don´t know if this is the word). But the socialism ever was the end, the aim, for RL.
    Nevertheless, this question today is not too important. For RL, the minimum and the maximum, the reform and the revolution, were parts of the historical process, one process that it must be understood as a totality.
    We have publish recently one text (in spanish and portuguese) on this question. The link is: http://www.luxemburgism.lautre.net/s...icle31&lang=es

    Today, what is very important is the different struggles that today really exist. The militants, the revolutionaries, the activists, we must be in these struggles. Because we are, first of all, proletarians that we have to fight against our exploitation, our repression. As the rest of the proletarians. With our positions and thoughts. As the rest of the proletarians.

    As Rosa said, "Let us speak plainly. Historically, the errors committed by a truly revolutionary movement are infinitely more fruitful than the infallibility of the cleverest Central Committee". So, the question today and ever for "the left" (for the militants and the organizations) is: are you in a revolutionary movement or in a central committee?

    SALUD
  3. Die Neue Zeit
    Die Neue Zeit
    Well, I guess that mixed answer of yours reflects the minimum-demand contents of the Erfurt Program that Rosa Luxemburg rejected. Truth be told (link): because the minimum program was coughed up by the one and only Eduard Bernstein, the theory associated with such was poorly developed, to say nothing of the "yellow" tred-iunionisty even worse than he (their warmongerism vs. Bernstein's pacifism).
  4. MarxSchmarx
    MarxSchmarx
    Do you think that unlike today's communist left Rosa Luxemburg discarded the (marxist) minimum program only because of the specific revolutionary context (the proletarian revolution)?
    Yes and no.

    Yes, because Luxemburg clearly appreciated that there is a historical and perhaps geographical contingency to any minimum demand. This is as true today as it was in 1919. The "minimum demands" of, say, India are going to be different from the "minimum demands" of Norway, much less the minimum demands of Norway 100 years ago.

    No, because I think Luxemburg saw in
    "minimum demands" the creeping tentacles of reformism. After all, as leftists, we have demands. The creation of a classless society. Focusing on immediate struggles, however warranted, risks losing sight of the big picture. Luxemburg understood this, and therefore rightfully sounded the alarm against an excessive focus on reforms (err.... I mean, "minimum demands"). She was concerned that the left not lose sight of the forest for the trees. In this respect, her critique of "minimum demands" stems just as much from a theoretical commitment to a non-capitalist praxis as much as it does to the historical circumstances that existed in Germany after the first world war.
  5. Tower of Bebel
    Tower of Bebel
    I'm reviving this old topic because I have an urgent question: does anyone know where to find and English (or Dutch or French) translation of the Spartacist programme? I found a German copy already.

    Another less urgent question: has anyone already read the programme?
  6. mikail firtinaci
    I have read "what spartacists want" ... in turkish. Ans I believe by spartacus program you mean that one;
    http://www.marxists.org/archive/luxe...1918/12/14.htm

    And we also have a very detailed article (series) on german revolution -from a left communist perspective-

    I would like to learn your criticisms&opinions about that; It would be interesting to learn what luxemburgist comrades (and of course other) think about that;

    English;
    http://en.internationalism.org/taxonomy/term/503

    Spanish; (I donot know which articles are exactly in the list are in the latest series )
    http://es.internationalism.org/taxonomy/term/156
  7. Tower of Bebel
    Tower of Bebel
    Okay, yes, that's the translation from the German version I found. Maybe I should have searched a bit harder.