Q abt the anti-deportation strike, Amsterdam 1941

11 posts / 0 new
Last post
Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 25 2005 18:23
Q abt the anti-deportation strike, Amsterdam 1941

Can anyone answer this questions about the Dutch Communist movement?

I just visited the museum of the Dutch anti-nazi resistance, and saw the exhibition about the strike, Feb 1941, against the nazi deportation of Jews. Apparentyl it was led by the dockers and tram workers, and spread to most areas and workplaces very fast, and lasted for a few days.

In the guide, it said that it was organised by the Communist Party.

now my question is, surely this was during the final months of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, during which Eeropean (and other) Communist PArties were told to not organise against the nazis or resist the occupation forces.

Was the Amsterdam CP more autonomous, or what?

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 25 2005 19:24

By the way, Revol can fuck off with his crushes on dead french lefties. I've lost my heart to Hanna Schaft, Dutch communist who used to shoot collaborators and was killed by the nazis a few weeks before liberation cry

http://www.hannieschaft.nl/

wld_rvn
Offline
Joined: 22-04-04
Oct 28 2005 10:14

There is some information about the February 1941 strike in the ICC's book 'The Dutch and German Communist Left', Chapter 10, which has been published here:

http://en.internationalism.org/books/dgcl/0/0_00.html

The strike was refered to in the '1939 and all that...' thread, as an example of how the working class expressed it internationalism, even under the most terrible conditions.

The strike was initially called for by the Dutch CP, but the workers themselves were largely responsible for organising the strike, although not to the level of forming their own strike committes. The 'Marx, Lenin, Luxemburg Front' were also influential in spreading the strike to other parts of the country, and defending internationalist positions within the struggle. They had the largest illegal newspaper at the time and distributed a manifesto which said that...

Quote:
If men and women of the workers’ districts rouse themselves in the Jewish district of Amsterdam... if they undertake a struggle against the bandits hired by the Dutch National Socialist movement, then we will see a magnificent demonstration of spontaneous solidarity which will appear in the factories under a superior and more effective form. Respond to all acts of National Socialist violence through agitation and strikes of protest in the factories. Come out en masse from the factories, leave work and massively join up with class comrades in struggle in the threatened districts. [...]

How to struggle? Germany? No. England? No.

The Third Front, the socialist proletariat.

Against National Socialism and National Bolshevism - The international class struggle!

Whether the Dutch CP was becoming more 'autonomous' begs the question 'autonomous from what?'. The tone of the MLL's manifesto broke with that of the CP which in its call to strike mixed anti-Nazi and nationalist slogans, such as: “Struggle proudly for the liberation of our country!!!”, which shows that the CP were no-less autonomous from the national capital, acting as its left-wing.

The MLL Front on the other hand were breaking with Trotskyism and moving towards internationalist positions. They never put forward anti-fascist slogans. Contrary to the Dutch Social Democratic groups who made anti-fascism the ‘first stage’ in the struggle for socialism, it insisted on one unique stage: the struggle against capitalism everywhere in the world.

'Liberation of the nation' or 'Workers of the world, UNITE!'. Which position does Lazlo defend?

World Revolution.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 28 2005 12:51
wld_rvn wrote:
Whether the Dutch CP was becoming more 'autonomous' begs the question 'autonomous from what?'

Autonomous from the Comintern's position of not opposing the Nazi occupations during 1939-1941.

Good to see that there were groups within the commie scene who were able to pull this kind of action. Of course I fully support them, as I would support all other concrete moves to save people from being deported, killed, etc.

wld_rvn
Offline
Joined: 22-04-04
Oct 31 2005 14:34

There was a discussion on a recent thread about the unacceptable tone of some of the posts on libcom, which we welcome. Special reference was made to Jack because he is an administrator, and it is even more unaccetable for an administrator to behave in that way. Someone then sent in a post saying 'that's just Jack and he doesn't count', or words to that effect.

There's a problem of organisation here. In proletarian forms of organisation, if you give someone responsibility, he or she is responsible to those who elected him or her to do the job. It's not a question of individuals just doing what they feel like.

This question of pointless abuse really has to be taken in hand by libcom.

meanoldman
Offline
Joined: 15-01-04
Oct 31 2005 14:39

What's a "proletarian forms of organisation"? There have been many non-hierachical groups consisting primarily of bourgeois or even ruling class members, and there are certainly many many working class organisations in which there is little or no accountability.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 31 2005 18:49

The libcom collective are proposing to make abuse (aka 'flaming') banned except in General. That should deal with the issues. Apart from that, let's deal with the issue at hand.