Priorities. Reflections on the Liebknecht-Luxemburg commemoration 2008

On January 13, 2008, around 70,000 people visited the memorial of the socialists in Berlin Friedrichsfelde. 10,000 came with the demonstration taking place in the framework of the demonstration. In line with tradition, the federal executive of the Left Party on November 23, 2007 had called on all comrades, sympathisers etc. to take part in the various forms of the commemoration – silent remembrance, demonstration, and laying of wreaths on the Landwehr channel. As if this decision by the party executive did not exist, Karin Nölte wrote on the eve of the celebration in ND: „... an alliance of radical left initiatives separates itself every year with its own demonstration from silent commemoration which is allegedly closer to the state.“ Shouldn't Karin Nölte really know better? Shouldn't she really know that many members of the party THE LEFT take part in the demonstration just as well as many without party affiliation or members of other left parties or groups participate in silent remembrance? Is the VVN/BdA a radical initiative, or are the social-democratic falcons such a one? You may also pose the question differently: In light of the conditions in the world and in this country, where is the Left person who would not favour radical solutions? Who is not in favour of ending occupation in Iraq or in Afghanistan? Who is opposed to the radical solution: „Another world is possible“? Who is against the demand „Hartz IV needs to go!“?

Modern capitalism is so deeply antisocial, repressive and aggressive that also a left-wing social democrat such as Oskar Lafontaine talks about the need for a system change. Isn't that radical? Or are for Karin Nölte radicals only stone throwers as the mainstream pretends? But, even if: stones did not fly. No bottles were thrown, no cars scratched, or similar pseudo-revolutionary deeds accomplished. In a combative „procession“ that could certainly be called disciplined, women and men comrades of autonomous antifascist groups demonstrated together with trade unionists. Turkic and Kurdic friends living in the Federal Republic came along in the march just as Czech, Austrian, Swedish Danish, Irish, Luxemburgian and Greek comrades who had come especially for the honourable commemoration. Members of 'solid went together with those of the SDAJ. Among the demonstrators, there belonged antiracist initiatives and soccer fans from the Karl-Liebknecht stadium in Babelsberg. In the procession, there marched the strong block of the DKP and women and men comrades of the KPD as well as of the MLPD. Members of the Federal Parliament and of the EP were among the demonstrators just as well as members of the federal executive or speakers of associations within the Left. Very many of the demonstrators belonging to the most diverse left currents were young. And on the way to the cemetery of the socialists, those returning from the silent commemoration, among them not so few elderly, showed their sympathy to the demonstrators. And quite a few raised their fist in greeting, and quite a few had tears in their eyes seeing the sea of red flags. In no year before had silent commemoration and demonstration been so close to each other. Even the bourgeois media (ARD, ZDF, ntv and rbb) reported on the demonstration as part of the ceremony, and renounced to disparaging the latter as separate from the silent remembrance. There are certainly various reasons for that. One should be highlighted in particular.

For obvious reasons, the commemoration stood fully under the sign of antifascist action. For January 13, 2008, the Nazis had planned incredible things. Their answer to the commemoration of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht was supposed to have been a counter-march through the Weitling quarter. Its slogan: „Against forgetting – free corps, soldiers for Germany“. From the free corps under the command of SPD minister Gustav Noske came the murderers of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht. For instance, Waldemar Pabst. Already in December 2007, the NPD fraction in the Lichtenberg district parliament had submitted a motion for renaming the Anton Saefkow Square into Waldemar Pabst Square. The Communist and resistance fighter Anton Saefkow was murdered in 1944 by the Nazis. Waldemar Pabst, in the First World War general staff officer of the guard cavallery-marksmen division, belonged to the free corps. Pabst had, so the Nazis motivated their outrageous motion, contributed after the lost war to the squashing of the Spartakus uprising in Berlin. By his courageous intervention, he had prevented the criminal politics of Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg and their left partisans of conscience from coming to fruition. The German people had been saved much suffering because of that. „The Bolshevik terror“, thus they wrote, was on the way to driving the Empire into the chaos of Soviet dictatorship. Civil war was raging, and only weapons could restore order and the state of law.“

Of course, the Anton Saefkow Square was not renamed. Untiring antifascists, such as comrade Erika Baum, articulated their protest in the session of the assembly of district deputies (German abbr. BVV) and deputies declared their solidarity across all party lines. However good and important this may have been: It cannot exactly serve as a proof for the strength of bourgeois democracy. It is being undermined daily – not only by the brown folk. It is insupportable that in this country, Nazis are even permitted to place such motions, while Federal Parliament chairman Lammert and the petition committee of the Federal Parliament claim not to be competent to accept the over 170,000 signatures collected by the VVN-BdA for an interdiction of the NPD. It is the spirit of the times abhorring the Left sponsored by Bertelsmann and Co., it is the anti-communism rampant ever since the murder of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht that encourages the Nazis to their enormous cheekiness. As long as the formula „Red equals Brown“ is mainstream, they won't be stopped – all the more so, since the social problems deliver ever new docking points to their fatefully damaging demagogy.

The motion by the Nazis to carry out a demonstration glorifying the free corps at the very same time as the Luxemburg-Liebknecht celebration on January 1, 2008 testifies and continues to testify to their will to escalate. We have to do with a whole concept of the fascists. They now seek the open confrontation with the Left; no longer with individual groups, but with the whole left spectrum in this country. The Luxemburg-Liebknecht commemoration – demonstration included – is the most significant left manifestation in Germany with international participation. To oppose this commemoration means to declare open battle to the left. This declaration of battle is based on a particularly militant anti-communism openly justifying murder. Offensively outrageous, they crawl out of the (...) fertile womb.

„Why the excitement?“ quite a few might ask. „The Nazi march was forbidden after all. Thereupon, the right-wingers withdrew their registration. And the Anton Saefkow Square continues to be called Anton Saefkow Square. The Nazis attracted a bit of attention – however, nothing else happened.“ We see that differently: Fascists have, in the open public, advocated violent means against social changes, they have without restraint justified two of the worst political murders of communists ever committed in Germany, and this – up to the very formulations – in a language that is strongly reminiscent of Adolf Hitler's thrusts against the so-called November criminals in „Mein Kampf“. Where, in the light of all of that, was the public outcry? Asked somewhat sarcastically: after what point do we need to fear the Nazis? Do they need to get 2.6% of the votes as in 1928, or 18.3% as in 1930, or do they first need to become strongest party with 37.4% as in 1932? Yet, not only public opinion dealt more than negligently with the evil ideological attacks of the Nazis. Since December 11, 2007, the intention of the Nazis to march on January 13, 2008 through the Weitling quarter had been clear. Only 10 days later – and that was then immediately before the Christmas holidays and New Year – there was then put on line, on December 21, 2007, an appeal – also signed by Gesine Lötzsch – by the Berlin managing regional executive to deal the Nazis an answer through massive and impressive commemoration. At the same time, Klaus Lederer addressed himself to the Berlin party members. The letter that among other things also centred on the Nazi provocation reached many only in the beginning of the New Year. Yet, not only clearly wasted time throws up questions. Also formulations in the letter are irritating. Thus it says: „Let us also show on this day that it is necessary to nib the evil in the bud, and that Nazi thought has no place in our society.“ It is necessary to nib the evil in the bud? Well, why are Nazis then in regional parliaments? How can they then already be in five Berlin district assemblies? Nazi thought has no place in our society? Where does Klaus Lederer live? And one more thing: On January 14, the district city councillor (for the LEFT) has filed suit (for the LEFT) at the police president against the NPD deputy in the Lichtenberg district assembly, Jörg Hähnel. That one on December 13, 2007 in his speech before the district assembly publicly condoned the murder of Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. It is good that a suit is now filed. But why after 4 weeks only? The hesitant reactions of the Left that had very little public effect show that there are within it apparently very few strategic reflections, how our party as part of the Left wants to conduct the antifascist struggle intellectually and in action. For the Party Congress on May 24/25, resolutions should be prepared for that purpose.

Not at all hesitantly and very publicly effective on the other hand, the Berlin regional executive in collaboration with ND dealt with a proposal by the member of the Marzahn-Hellersdorf regional executive of the LEFT, Bernd Preußer. In its edition of December 22/23, 2007, ND under the title „Carnations for the stone of contention“ reported on his proposal to lie down carnations at the memorial stone „To the victims of Stalinism“ and to fasten to each of these a note with the name of one victim. On December 24, 27, and 28, 2007 as well as on January 4 and 9, 2008, there took place on this proposal a voluminous reader discussion in ND and on the eve of the commemoration – on January 12, 2008 – there took place one more time a working-up of this debate by the editorial committee. In ND of January 14, 2008, on page 3, the report on what had happened on January 13, 2008 around the memorial stone „To the victims of Stalinism“ occupied ca. two-thirds of the overall report. Also in the direct information on the session of the regional executive of January 15, 2008, that one limited itself to a condemnation of the desecration of the memorial stone „To the victims of Stalinism“. No word of appreciation on the Luxemburg-Liebknecht commemoration. To exclude every kind of misinterpretation: We categorically reject the action of a couple of participants in the commemoration and demonstration. We are against any culture-less form of political dispute. Already in November 2006, still before the inauguration of the stone on December 11, we formulated the following among other things in a declaration: „Don't let ourselves get provoked – confront!“: „It would be more than damaging if the memorial of the socialists were in the future to get into the media by the fact that the mentioned stone was desecrated in any way. Therefore, we ask all those counting themselves among the provoked to give no one a pretext to ultimately bring those into disrepute who feel indebted to the memory of Rosa and Karl and to the same extent that of Hugo and Werner Eberlein.“ This appeal that was also signed by our unforgotten comrade Kurt Goldstein, has lost nothing of its actuality. We reaffirm today the positions laid down in it.

Back to the idea of Bernd Preußer and the logistical guarantee of its realisation: Who regularly read the ND in the time from December 21, 2007 up to and including January 14, 2008 could only reach the conclusion that the essential question in the preparation and carrying out of the Luxemburg-Liebknecht commemoration was whether one should lie down a carnation at the stone „To the victims of Stalinism“. In order to prevent any kind of misinterpretation here as well: We are deeply moved by the innocent dead and repressed under Stalin. We honour especially the socialists and Communists who fell victim in the Stalin era to arbitrariness and crime. But we say it in all openness and this not for the first time: A stone that quite generally reminds us of all, who found their death under Stalin or served sentences, to us is unacceptable. Because among them, there were not least and not too few fascists. The same way, it is unacceptable that every real or imaginary injustice committed in the GDR is being stylised into a Stalinist crime. The memorial stone „To the victims of Stalinism“ honours every Nazi murderer and also any one who as opponent of the GDR got into conflict with its laws. This is not our interpretation. The president of the House of Deputies of Berlin, Walter Momper, in his speech on the inauguration of the memorial stone explained: „The inscription 'To the victims of Stalinism' includes all victims. And that way it is supposed to be. Because you should not think only of individual groups of victims and leave others out.“

We are not prepared for this kind of memory without distinction. We know that we are not alone with this idea of ours. A couple of days ago, Hans Modrow declared that the position of the Berlin executive in the debate over the mentioned stone stood in contrast to the opinion by the majority of the basis. Many comrades were experiencing the stone as a provocation. Modrow hits the nail on its head. A considerable part of the members of our party cannot understand why a stone splitting the Left had to be placed precisely on the cemetery of the socialists. That became already very clear before and together with the inauguration of the „Stone of Contention“ at the end of 2006. Back then, proposals were submitted in order to relax the situation that provoked division. Proposals, such as those by Heinrich Fink or Andrej Reder, that instead of erecting this very general stone – allowing any kind of anti-communist manipulation – one should have made a table with names of socialists and Communists killed under Stalin, remained without answer until today. It was ignored for a year that a considerable part of the membership feels offended by this plaque . Then suddenly, three weeks before the commemoration, a debate is being thread off whether a flower should be laid down at the „stone of contention“ or not. Why this targeted, compact emotionalising of differences? We would have wished that, for instance, Katina Schubert, vice- party chairwoman and personal secretary of the Berlin senator for social affairs, Elke Breitenbach, MRP and member of the party executive, Thomas Nord, regional chairman of the Brandenburg LEFT, Halina Wawzyniak, member of the party executive, legal advisor to the federal parliament fraction and district chairwoman of Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg, or Norbert Seichter, speaker of the Berlin regional executive of the LEFT, district chairman of Marzahn Hellersdorf and executive secretary of Tempelhof-Schöneberg would have called for the afternoon of January 13 to an antifascist walk in the Weitling quarter. Such a call, as we know, did not come; not even before the interdiction of the Nazi march. The commitment to justify the stone – even on the premises – seemed more urgent. Some say: That is the tribute that needs to be paid, so that the speculations over Red-Red in Brandenburg become reality and that way also the SPD at the federal level, which just now drew out its social conscience for reconsideration out of a forgotten drawer, is ready to think about a coalition in this federal region. We won't comment on that. But whatever may be the motives for the things we described: The stone is divisive. „Simply take the stone away again!“ we asked back then and received a lot of support for that. The „stone of contention“ has remained. We need to relate to it. It is smart, we think, not to let ourselves get provoked. To that, it also belongs to pass over to the order of the day. Let us demand a more consequent anti-fascism. Let us work everywhere where resistance against social cut-backs, repressive security policy and against aggressive foreign policy materialises – precisely in view of the current debates on combat missions of the federal army in Afghanistan. Let us be solidary with people in the whole world, who are against exploitation, repression and war and let us demand equally the solidarity with asylum seekers, refugees, and migrants. Let us participate actively in the programmatic debate. And – last but not least – let us prepare long before and carefully the demonstration in the framework of the Liebknecht-Luxemburg commemoration in January 2009.

Berlin, January 19, 2008

(Übersetzung: Carla Krüger)

Zurück zur Übersicht