Chris Harman was a socialist and journalist. He born on 8th November 1942 and died on 7th November 2009. His style of speaking was different from many other writers and he wrote in the analytic way. Here is going to present a review of the German Revolution according to the book of Chris Harman; The Lost Revolution: Germany 1918 to 1923.
German revolutionary socialist activities started in 1918 after the defeat of Germans in WW1. The overthrow and decline of Kaiser and establishment of a democratic republic until 1923, the unsuccessful revolutionary opportunities came into being in the shape of French crisis and on-going controversies among them. At that time European revolutionaries including Russians thought about strategic aspiration on the behalf of those efforts in Germany. Different types of outcome emerged in that era. Thanks to establishment of a German Workers Republic the course of the entire world history changed in many ways.
Beginning with the Trotsky-led Russian Left Opposition in 1923 and International Left Opposition, failure of revolutionary leadership was initial and primary cause of that German revolution. Against that views and analysis of the whole developed industry, probably around the British revolutionary history giving encouragement to latter day situation and many occasions drawing lesson that revolution in Germany could not have happened. Argument on the prospects of the 1923 revolution by August Thalheimer, a central and essential party member Brandler in this era have been warmly and particularly encouraged. It is one thing for those who grounded in Germany to miss the obvious signals for revolution and another for latter revolutionaries to provide political cover and platform for those who refused to see and act on the revolutionary opportunities at that time. Inside the Russian Coomunist Party in 1924 during the internal problems and struggle after the death of Lenin was getting white heat, when the events of failed German revolution were also follower in what was called ‘literary debate’. As a student of history I argue that, with historical point of view and facts of that time, it is impossible to discuss all of the revolutionary crisis of 1923.
All these major events started from WW1 with the famous disloyalty of German Social Democratic Leadership in voting in the favour of Kaiser’s war budget and then results of 1923 incident are in front of the world. Later the defeat of the German army from the allied forces was overthrown after the agreement for the future of Germany. That question was not decided until the German working class understated with Bourgeois democratic republic. Unlike the Russian experience in 1917 with the help of Soviets or from any other platform organizations were establised. The start of the problem was that, there was no any Bolshevik type organization present to lead them and take advantage of the revolutionary situation. Heroic personalities Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Kiebknetch were defeated and murdered. Because of lack of proper leadership all that happened in 1923.
When a German organization formed and contained many of elements that were subjectively revolutionary but politically not, suffered from a very tough situation and lived in the atmosphere of pre-war period. While party needs such subjectively elements to make the revolution and without them nothing was possible. The turning point of this lack of organizations was the March action of 1921. Unlike the supportive German working class to attempted Kopp Coup of the previous year and an action which did much to discredit communists in the eyes of working class. Shameful result of this action was placed all the way upto the Communist International where Lenin and Trotsky were forced to defend the action in public and expel former leader Paul Levi for his open criticism and his wrong way of support. In 1923, without gun fearness Communist Party Leadership caused by the 1921 events.
So what is the main argument of 1923 all about and was there or not a revolutionary opportunity to fight for a Soviet Germany with a long way to save Russian Revolution? These questions are not clear but the situation was just for revolution. Conflicts and controversies among France and Germany over territories and boundries also played role in the revolution. The reality is against a revolution and this is where previous policies of German Communist Party came into play. If a revolutionary crisis last for a long time then the identity of Thalheimer’s leadership placed for a long time in the world. Mostly they did not take advantage of the decline of Social Democratic Party to win over the mass movements. That is where pre-mature events discussed and described. The annihilation of prominent leadership of Luxemburg and Liebknetch left a small amount of aggressive strategy. It is difficult to blame these two leaders. If Liebknetch would governed a little more, it would be an obvious problem of the failure of German Revolution in 1923. No one can predict whether revolutionary crisis lead to revolutionary condition and success. Another reason of threatening and dangerous was fascists. If they were as much dangerous in the situation of 1923, what about the harsh authority in 1930 when they had 100,000 well-organized and fighting storm troopers in the streets. Single rational policy was that, German Working Class had their passports but they had never enough as much required. On the other side German’s army was not big until to improve and increase them by ‘unofficial’ parliamentry forces. It would difficult to divide forces in many groups. In the final analysis, revolution is to get victory or defeat from outsider influences and their planning against the regime.
What about the internal capitalist opposition and stabilization of the economic situation? All these factors might possibly argue against a revolutionary crisis in 1923, that jointly create notion but lost a big revolutionary opportunity. That should make very doubtable skills and qualities of the ‘revolutionaries’ that stated one and did not exist in nature.