Nieuwenhuis in English?

11 posts / 0 new
Last post
David in Atlanta
Offline
Joined: 21-04-06
Oct 6 2007 16:27
Nieuwenhuis in English?

does anyone know if any of Ferdinand Domela Nieuwenhuis's writings are available in English?

arminius's picture
arminius
Offline
Joined: 11-08-06
Jun 21 2009 20:30

I'd like to know this also. So bump.

redtwister
Offline
Joined: 21-03-05
Jun 22 2009 17:36

I have not found anything and I have been looking on and off for about 5 years.

If you find it, let me know too.

Boris Badenov
Offline
Joined: 25-08-08
Mar 9 2010 14:20

I am looking for stuff by Domela too. I do have some articles he published in the short lived UK anarchist journal Liberty (one of which contains the earliest use of "libertarian socialism" that I'm aware of), but what I'd really like to get a hold of is his autobiography From Christian to Anarchist.
I will upload said articles to the library when I get the chance, if anybody's interested.

Also, his "Socialism in Danger" is available, in French, on Project Gutenberg.
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/11380

arminius's picture
arminius
Offline
Joined: 11-08-06
Mar 11 2010 14:40

Also this:

De libertaire opvoeding [Libertarian Education (Dutch)]

http://www.marxists.org/nederlands/domela/1899/1899opvoeding.htm

capricorn
Offline
Joined: 3-05-07
Mar 12 2010 00:09
Quote:
Also, his "Socialism in Danger" is available, in French, on Project Gutenberg.
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/11380

Here's a quick translation from this work where Nieuwenhuis, commenting in 1894, makes this astute criticism of the German Social Democratic Party of the time (and in fact of the whole practice of adding a "minimum programme" of reforms to the "maximum programme" of socialism).

Quote:
"Did not Bebel say at Halle in 1890: 'If the reduction of working hours and the abolition of child labour, Sunday work and night work are accessories, then nine-tenths of our agitation becomes superfluous'. Everybody knows now that there is nothing specifically socialist about these demands; no, any radical can associate with them. Bebel recognises that nine-tenths of the agitation is in favour of these demands that are not essentially socialist; but, if the party obtains so large a number of votes at elections, it is thanks to agitation for these practical demands, with which radicals can associate. Consequently, nine-tenths of the elements making up the party only demand such partial reforms and the remaining one-tenth are made up of social-democrats."

"Yes, certainly, we have all committed this mistake and, for our part, we frankly admit this. All of us have had a programme containing socialist principles and even the fundamental communist idea of 'from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs' could be found there. Then followed a list of so-called practical reforms which could be achieved immediately within existing society. Thus came together two in fact absolutely heterogenuous elements: on the one hand, the pure communists, accepting the 'considerations' without however being concerned with the 'practical reforms', and, on the other hand, the partisans of these reforms who, without attaching any value to them also accepted the considerants as well as the 'practical programme'. As a result of the development of these ideas, the illogicality of this situation showed itself more and more and, finally, the real socialists and the reformers separated from each other."

"The considerations of the programme were communist and indicated the goal to be attained; but the practical programme helped maintain the present State. There was thus a contradiction between the theory part with its principled considerations and the practical part to be achieved within the framework of existing society, both being put side by side without any connection, as we have previously proved."

Shorty's picture
Shorty
Offline
Joined: 13-06-05
Mar 15 2010 14:45

From someone in Anarchist Group Amsterdam:

If you look at http://www.worldcat.org/ (an international library catalogue) it tells you that there's some publications in English (Socialism in Danger) for example... but they're very old and alsmost impossibe to get. Also there's a small pamphlet in English called 'Pyramid of Tyranny' that I never heard of. Both are available at the IISG (Institute for social history) in Amsterdam, but I don't know about the UK. Then there's an article about Domela in English in the International Journal of Social Economics, 22, no. 5 (1995): 50. That's all I could find.

arminius's picture
arminius
Offline
Joined: 11-08-06
May 4 2010 12:31

Actually, you can find some of FDN's stuff in English here:

http://libcom.org/history/liberty-journal-anarchist-communism

including part of Socialism in Danger. (Lots of other interesting stuff, too.)

It's in pdf, though, so I'm guessing someone would have to transcribe it to put it in the library? (I'm a bit of a techno-moron, so not sure.)

arminius's picture
arminius
Offline
Joined: 11-08-06
May 5 2010 21:19

THE FORTHCOMING CONGRESS “Liberty” Nov/Dec 1896

The International Congress is approaching. Shall it be a failure or a success? That is the question.

Shall this congress for the International movement have a similar result to that which the Congress of the Hague, in 1872, had for the old International? If the sectarian spirit of the so-called Marxists (German model) triumphs, the Congress will be a failure.

To understand the question we must have the circumstances described clearly and distinctly. Let us try to do this.

At the Zurich Congress of 1893 the majority adopted the following resolution:

“All Trade Unions shall be admitted to the Congress; also those Socialist parties and organizations which recognize the necessity of the organization of the workers and of political action. By ‘political action’ is meant that the working-class organizations seek, as far as possible, to use or conquer political rights and the machinery of legislation for the furthering of the interests of the proletariat, and the conquest of political power.”

By this resolution all the anti-parliamentarians were excluded. If this resolution only were to be acted on, we should not think of coming to the congress at London. Everyone has the right to make the conditions on which he invites others, and this condition was strong enough to limit the frontiers.

But what happened after one fore going was adopted? The following day, the proposers themselves of the resolution made a declaration which, with the consent of the congress, was written in the protocol. This declaration was:

“The addition proposed does not say by any means that everyone who comes to the congress should be obliged to tatake part in political action under all circumstances and in all details of our definitions. It claims only the acknowledgement of the labourer’s right to use the political rights altogether of their country, which, in their opinion, are for the promotion of the interests of the labouring classes, and to constitute themselves as an independent political labour party.”

The resolution closed the door: the declaration opened it.

What is now the position of the congress?

Nobody denies the right of those labourers who will use the political rights, if we are not obliged to use them. This declaration gives freedom to both; to those who will use the political rights, and to those who refuse to use them. There fore we antiparliamentary socialists have the right to be at the congress. We do not ask for a privilege, we ask for no change of the conditions; we come with an appeal to the congress, which has decided for free action. If we are excluded, the congress must put itself on the standpoint of the resolution and annihilate the declarations, but it is dishonest to refuse us, and Bebel himself, as one of the proposers of the addition, must plead our admission.

What will the congress do? Shall it be so narrow-minded as to exclude the libertarian socialists?

It is curious how history repeats itself. Marx remembers how history repeats itself – once as a farce and once as a tragedy. We shall see what is played this time. The old christians have had the same struggle against heresy; and we can see how the heresy of to-day will be the dogma of tomorrow. In that time there was a great difference in one single letter. Some said that the son (Jesus) was equal to the father (homoousios), and others that the son was uniform with the father (homoiousiios). This single “I” was the cause of their fighting and killing each other, and the whole body of christians was divided into two parties.

Shall the like happen after fifteen centuries? Alas! poor mankind!

Will you make Socialism ridiculous in the eyes of men? Go and exclude other Socialists, who do not think as you, but are as good Socialists as yourselves. On the Sunday before the congress, Hyde Park will contain the spectacle of Socialists who fraternize—who can hold a meeting for promoting the international peace of all the peoples of the world. On the following day, an international dispute will commence as to what Socialists shall be admitted to the sacred temple and who shall be refused. And perhaps there will be a fight between Socialists! And who will laugh? The capitalist class, who will ask, ”Is that the outcome of Marx’s advice, Proletarians of the world, unite?’”

Shame on those who will exclude, who will divide in place of uniting. The world will see a repetition of the struggle between Marx and Bakounine in 1872. It will be another struggle between authority and freedom.

Imagine such men as Kropotkine, Reclus, Malatesta, Teherkesoff, Cipriani, and many others excluded the congress, and you must admit that it is no more a Socialist congress, but only a parliamentary, a reform congress of a set of social democrats—that is, a sectarian congress.

Choose what you will be! —a congress of serious Socialists who discuss all questions, which interest the Socialists, or a congress of sectarians, from which are excluded as heretics so many men who have fought and suffered for the cause of the people.
F. Domela Nieuwenhuis.

Boris Badenov
Offline
Joined: 25-08-08
May 15 2010 03:10
Quote:
Will you make Socialism ridiculous in the eyes of men?

Clearly a man ahead of his time.

xautonomiax
Offline
Joined: 7-10-12
Oct 7 2012 08:00

the pyramid of tyranny:
http://web.archive.org/web/20090402063659/http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/bla...