The German Socialist Movement Before World War 1, Part I

Provoked by a substack from a Canadian philosophy professor, as I wrote about here, I’m still on my kick to dig up and reconstruct my views on Marxism. To this end I’ve accumulated a few books by the so-called “analytical Marxists.” I also bought the hyped-up, new translation of Capital, Volume 1.

I resolved to read Gerry Cohen’s “Karl Marx’s Theory of History.” I tried hard but I just can’t see the point of it. Marx provides guidance of many types, but historical development under or after capitalism is not one of them. Cohen was a great lecturer. If only I could hear his lectures on the subject. At any rate, for the moment at least, I’ve moved on. I could never get much out of philosophy.

I’m now into Carl Schorske’s “History of German Social Democracy: 1905-1917.” I’ve barely scratched it, but it’s very easy to get into. My overall thesis is that the history of the German SPD (Social-Democratic Party, what socialists used to call themselves) is critical for contemporary radical politics. We need radical politics, and radical politics needs Marx. The SPD became dedicated to Marx, by then a celebrated German author, but this dedication took very different forms. How it progressed and regressed are relevant.

The SPD became huge in German politics, helping to win democratic rights such as universal suffrage (sic; for all men, at least). At the end of the 19th Century, German industrialism was proceeding fruitfully. In one sense, it could be argued to provide a foundation for the working class to become confident and conscious of its ability to run the economy, as Marx was known to propose.

On the other hand, increasing immiseration, thought by some to be the push the working class needed to rise up, was not observed. Trade unionism was growing rapidly, along with the SPD, but unions were focused on low common-denominator politics. Many German workers were alienated from socialist revolutionary appeals. They wanted their unions to bring home the bacon. Hence unions became a relatively conservative anchor in German left-of-center politics.

With all the current excitement in the U.S. about unionization at Starbucks, Amazon, and southern auto plants, I wonder if it occurs to any enthusiasts that a successful union becomes focused on transacting with the boss, not on replacing him. The current Teamsters’ president was supported by radical rank-and-file activists, and look where he has ended up. The socialist impulse in Germany against agreeing to contracts with employers was overcome by the interests of the workers in making beneficial deals, in the here and now. Then as now, unions play defense, not offense.

Something similar happened to the “no contract” principle held by the Industrial Workers of the World in the U.S. The IWW did some great things, especially in service to civil liberties, but establishing sustained worker organization was not one of them. Of course, it was victimized by harsh repression, but under capitalism, that is to be expected.

The likelihood of socialism is underlined by the question of economic expectations. If you expect apocalyptic breakdown. some kind of survivalist preparations could make sense. I think we would still be doomed, but that’s beside the point.

What if the economy keeps clipping along? Sure, there is privation by many, the Global South is beaten down, but no mass uprising in the U.S. is in prospect. Trade unionism, not necessarily revolutionary in any case, keeps limping along. People remain able to blame their troubles on scapegoats. Migrants. Transgender persons. The Jews (looks unlikely, but I think our day is coming.) Whomever.

Absent an utter breakdown, what are the prospects for radical politics? It all depends on what you mean. A useful radicalism envisions evolution by incremental reforms. The dumb kind thinks of a cataclysmic eruption. Back in the pre-war German SPD, this thinking was criticized as “catastrophist.”

We may still get a catastrophe. Bird flu seems to be the biggest threat, especially with Secretary Brainworm at the helm of the Department of Health and Human Services. The financial markets can blow up at any time, more likely now than ever given the abandonment of regulation. Contrary to a few nutcases, I doubt war with Russia is likely. Trump is not going to be much help, but his capacity to wreck everything should not be overestimated. He is a bluffer. He makes threats, then he backs down.

If the Democrats take back the Congress, which seems highly possible, that will put on some brakes. We will still be adrift, but not quite swirling around the drain.

I don’t pretend to understand how people think, or what would cause them to think differently. For the moment, the biggest things happening are the Bernie/AOC rallies and the April 5th “Hands Off” rallies. Those are the things to do at the moment.

I don’t think one can fault anyone for failing to formulate and prepare for a economic forecast. The possibilities just seem wildly diverse and uncertain. What we do hear are predictions of fascism, including from the so-called Democratic Socialists of America. It’s kind of idiotic, since prior to the election the dominant posture in DSA was abstention, and even statements to the effect that Trump would be no different from Joe Biden. Not coincidentally, DSA is nowhere on the radar of those most actively mobilizing against Trump and MAGA—a huge, missed historical opportunity.

Instead DSA adopts righteous positions against transphobia and Islamophobia, and in support of Palestine, all things I agree with, but the most virtuous politics is never necessarily the most effective politics. My best shot there is to channel Sherrod Brown, or Chris Maisano in Jacobin.