Free association of German trade unions

August 8, 1914 edition of Die Einigkeit , the organ of the Free Association of German Trade Unions

The Free Association of German Trade Unions ( FVdG for short ) was, in comparison to the free trade unions , a small radical trade union federation in the German Empire and at the beginning of the Weimar Republic . It was founded in Halle in 1897 under the name of Confidants Centralization of Germany as the umbrella organization of the localist current of the German labor movement . The localists rejected the centralization of the trade unions as a result of the expiry of the socialist laws in 1890 and preferred grassroots democratic structures. Various financing concepts were tried out until a system of voluntary solidarity was agreed in 1903, the same year in which the name was changed to Free Association of German Trade Unions .

Over the years that followed the founding of the FVdG, it took on increasingly radical positions. During the mass strike debate in the German labor movement, the FVdG took the view that the general strike must be a weapon in the hands of the working class. The association believed that the general strike would be the last step before a socialist revolution and at the same time became increasingly critical of parliamentarism. Disputes with the established trade unions ultimately led to the exclusion of all FVdG members from the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) in 1908 and the complete breakdown of relations between these two organizations. Anarchist and especially syndicalist positions became increasingly popular within the FVdG. During the First World War , the FVdG rejected the cooperation - known as Burgfrieden - between the socialist labor movement and the German government, but could not offer any significant resistance to the war or continue its usual activities. Immediately after the November Revolution, the FVdG quickly became a mass organization. It was particularly attractive to miners from the Ruhr area who rejected the reformist policies of the established trade unions. In December 1919 the FVdG merged with a number of smaller unions to form the Free Workers' Union of Germany (FAUD).

background

According to Angela Vogel and the political scientist Hartmut Rübner, as well as some of the later anarcho-syndicalists, such as Rudolf Rocker , Carl Hillmann , a typesetter and prominent trade unionist in the 1870s, was the spiritual forefather of the localist and later anarcho-syndicalist movement. Vogels and Rübner's claims are based on the fact that Hillmann was the first in Germany to see the most important task of the trade unions in creating the conditions for the socialist revolution and not just in improving the living conditions of the workers. He also advocated a decentralized union structure. For Hans Manfred Bock , another political scientist who researched the history of the FVdG, there is no evidence that Hillmann influenced the FVdG.

Official publication of the first socialist law, 1878

From 1878 to 1890 all socialist trade union work was prohibited by the Socialist Law . Only small local organizations that communicated with each other through shop stewards who worked illegally or semi-legally survived, as this form of organization was easier to protect against state repression. After the law expired in 1890, the General Commission of the German Trade Unions was founded on November 17th at a conference in Berlin to promote the centralization of the labor movement. In 1892 the Halberstadt Congress was held to place the many local trade unions under the commission. The localists, however, of whom 31,000 were represented in Congress, wanted to keep some of the changes introduced during the Socialist Law era. For example, they opposed separate organizations for political and economic affairs, that is, the party on the one hand and the trade unions on the other. In particular, they wanted to keep their grassroots democratic structures. They also advocated networking through delegates instead of central administration and were suspicious of bureaucratic structures. The localists' proposals were rejected in Halberstadt, so they refused to join the centralized unions that came to be known as free unions . However, they did not renounce social democracy , rather saw themselves as a vanguard within the social democratic movement in Germany.

Berlin was the stronghold of the localists, although there were also localist unions in the rest of the empire. Bricklayers, carpenters, and some metalworking professions - especially those that required a higher level of qualification, such as coppersmiths or gold and silver workers - were disproportionately represented. In 1891 at least 20,000 metal workers were organized in localist unions, as many as in the centralized German Metalworkers' Association (DMV).

founding

In 1897, at a congress in Halle , the localists founded their own nationwide organization, the Confidant Centralization of Germany. The congress was originally supposed to take place a year earlier, but had to be postponed due to a lack of interest. At the congress, 37 delegates represented 6,803 union members. Almost two thirds of the delegates came from either Berlin or Halle. Almost half of the delegates came from the construction industry, while 14 represented highly specialized professions. Congress decided to set up a five-person business commission to organize political actions, help with communication between local groups, and raise funds for strikes. Fritz Kater became chairman of the commission. A newspaper called Solidarity was also launched, but its name was changed to Unity the following year . At first it was only published every two weeks, but from 1898 onwards it was published weekly.

FVdG membership numbers before the First World War

The decision of the localists to organize themselves nationwide probably had several reasons. First, the free trade unions became increasingly reformist and centralist. Second, the localists became more self-confident through their participation in the Hamburg port workers' strike in 1896/97 . Thirdly, a loss of membership - among other things, the Berlin metalworkers joined the DMV in 1897 - convinced that they had to act now.

The Erfurt program

The relationship between the shop steward centralization and the SPD was ambivalent. On the one hand, it was allied with the SPD and supported the Erfurt program . On the other hand, the party was hostile to the establishment of the association and called on its members to return to the centralized free trade unions. Nevertheless, the shop stewards centralization remained connected to the SPD, which they in turn tolerated, fearing that a split could lead to a large loss of members. The centralization insisted that it would only rejoin the centralized trade union if they accepted their organizational principles.

First years

During the first few years, the shop stewards centralization of Germany focused on a discussion about how strikes should be financed by individual local unions. It was discussed how the local trade unions can maintain their autonomy if they wanted to receive financial aid. Originally, any financial support between local organizations was purely voluntary. However, this system proved impractical, especially during the turn of the century when a number of major industrial disputes took place and were fought aggressively by employers - often through lockouts . In 1899 the business commission felt compelled to support a strike in Braunschweig . She took out a loan, which was then paid for by the Berlin groups with the help of membership fees and donations. In the following year, the commission took out a total of 8,000  gold marks to support various strikes. Part of the debt was paid by the SPD and the rest was distributed to the local unions.

This custom was abandoned in 1900 in favor of a much more complicated funding system based on contributions and donations. In the following year, however, this system was also discarded because it turned out to be impractical. The system introduced in 1901 required that each local union and the business commission set up strike funds. Under certain circumstances, the local groups received support from the central fund, which was then replenished by all member unions in proportion to their membership and average wages. But this system did not turn out to be satisfactory either, as it punished the larger, more financially strong unions - especially the Berlin construction workers, who earned more but also had higher living costs than workers elsewhere. Although many small unions joined the association between 1901 and 1903, the total membership tended to decline as many larger groups quit because of the disadvantageous strike fund system. In 1903 the shop stewards centralization not only changed its name to Free Association of German Trade Unions, but also returned to the old system of voluntary solidarity. This system was then maintained until 1914. The business commission tried to ensure that all local unions contributed as much as they could. On several occasions the commission was forced to threaten the local groups with expulsion in order to raise money to support a strike. Fritz Kater described this as a dictatorship necessary for the movement, but the local groups still had far more autonomy than those in other German trade union confederations.

Radicalization and exclusion from the SPD

In the course of the first decade of the twentieth century, the FVdG transformed from a localist trade union federation into a syndicalist organization with anarchist influences. This development began with the death of Gustav Keßler , the most important theoretician of the FVdG, in 1903. This role was then primarily filled by Raphael Friedeberg .

In 1903 a dispute between the FVdG and the Free Trade Unions led to an attempt at mediation on the part of the party leadership, which initiated talks between the two wings of the trade union movement with the aim of reunification. At this meeting, the representatives of the FVdG proposed a number of compromises which led to criticism from the membership. Within a very short time, a third of the members left the union. The FVdG congress of 1903 elected a committee that was to hold talks with the free trade unions from then on. This committee demanded that the free trade unions adopt localist organizational principles as a precondition for reunification. The committee was aware that these demands were unrealistic, but hoped that the exclusion of revisionists in the course of the debate over Eduard Bernstein's theses would strengthen their position. By March 1904 it became clear that a reconciliation between the two was an impossibility, since the reunification, which both the free trade unions and the SPD aspired to, tended towards the pure integration of the FVdG into the free trade unions.

The disillusionment of the FVdG in the SPD continued to grow during the mass strike debate . The significance of the general strike for the socialist movement was first discussed within the FVdG in 1901. At the SPD Congress in Dresden in 1903, Raphael Friedeberg proposed a discussion on this subject, but his proposal was rejected. In the following year, a proposal by Wilhelm Liebknecht and Eduard Bernstein to debate the question was accepted because they had distanced themselves from Friedeberg's positions.

Liebknecht and Bernstein - as well as the party left - were of the opinion that a general strike should not be used to provoke the state, but only to defend political rights - especially the right to vote - in the event that the state should attack them. The conservative faction in the party, however, rejected the concept completely. In 1904 Friedeberg spoke out on behalf of the FVdG that the general strike must be a weapon of the proletariat and represent the last step before the socialist revolution. In 1905 his lecture on the subject was even more radical. He claimed that historical materialism , a pillar of Marxism, was responsible for the apparent weakness of social democracy, and contrasted this with his concept of historical psychism . He assumed that human psychology was more important for social development than material conditions. He also recommended anarchist literature, especially Kropotkin's writings, over Marx's writings, which were most influential in the SPD at the time.

August Bebel introduced the resolution to expel the FVdG from the SPD

The view that a general strike should only be used as a last resort ultimately prevailed in the mass strike debate. This worried the conservatives in the SPD, especially the trade unionists. In a meeting in February 1906, the party leadership reassured the unionists and promised that they would try to prevent a general strike at all costs. The FVdG responded by unanimously publishing the secret minutes of the conversation - to the great annoyance of the party leadership.

At the 1905 party congress, August Bebel , who had always advocated a stronger position for the trade unions in the party, proposed a resolution that would oblige every SPD member to join the centralized trade union of his or her profession. This would force every FVdG member to either leave the party or his union. The resolution was passed and implemented in 1907. An internal survey by the FVdG showed a 22-8 majority against integration into the centralized trade unions. This prompted a number of bricklayers , carpenters and construction workers to leave the FVdG in order to avoid being expelled from the SPD. They justified their decision by stating that the FVdG "is taking a path that will certainly lead to a fight with the SPD and to syndicalism and anarchism". In 1908, the SPD party congress in Nuremberg finally passed a resolution on incompatibility with the FVdG.

The radicalization of the FVdG not only resulted in the withdrawal of two thirds of its membership in the years 1906 to 1910, but also resulted in a slight change in the milieus, the industries and the regions from which the members of the association were recruited. Many metal and construction workers, both professions with a strong localist tradition, left the FVdG due to the increasing syndicalist and anarchist affinities in the association. This tradition did not exist among miners who worked primarily in the Ruhr area in Germany , but they developed a certain skepticism towards bureaucratic structures. About 450 miners joined the FVdG before the war, a sign of what was to come after the First World War.

Pre-war period

After separating from the SPD, the FVdG was increasingly influenced by French anarchism and syndicalism. In 1908 Fritz Kater described the Amiens Charter , the program of the French Confédération générale du travail (CGT), the world's oldest and largest syndicalist trade unions, as "a new revelation". Although there was no contact between the German “intellectual anarchists” - such as Gustav Landauer or Erich Mühsam  - and the FVdG, it did have some important members with anarchist inclinations, in particular Andreas Kleinlein and Fritz Köster . Kleinlein and Köster became influential from 1908, which led to the founding of the pioneer in 1911 . This newspaper published by Fritz Köster had a much more aggressive tone than Die Einigkeit . Despite these developments, the anarchist influence in the pre-war FVdG remained marginal, especially since leading members such as Fritz Kater were very skeptical of the anarchist ideology.

A session of the first international syndicalist congress in London

After 1913, both the British Industrial Syndicalist Education League (ISEL), a short-lived syndicalist organization that was heavily involved in the wave of strikes in 1910, and the Nationaal Arbeids-Secretariaat (NAS), a Dutch trade union, published proposals for an international syndicalist congress , the FVdG was the first to show interest. There were difficulties organizing the congress and the world's largest syndicalist union - the CGT - refused to attend because it was already a member of the social democratic International Trade Union Confederation . Despite these hurdles, the first international syndicalist congress took place from September 27 to October 2, 1913 at Holborn Town Hall in London . In addition to the FVdG, which was represented by Karl Roche , Carl Windhoff and Fritz Kater , British, Swedish, Danish, Dutch, Belgian, French, Spanish, Italian, Cuban, Brazilian and Argentine groups sent delegates to London. There were also connections with Norwegian, Polish and American organizations. Kater was elected President of Congress along with Jack Wills (later Jack Tanner ). Congress found it difficult to come to an agreement on many issues, the main issue being whether to risk further divisions in the European labor movement - as had happened in Germany and the Netherlands. The FVdG mostly agreed with their Dutch comrades that trade unions were faced with a choice between socialism and syndicalism, while the Italians, French and Spaniards, especially Alceste de Ambris of the Italian USI , were more anxious to prevent further divisions. Correspondingly, the Congress was also divided over the question of whether its purpose was merely to deepen the relations between the syndicalist associations or whether a syndicalist international was to be founded. The dispute ended in favor of the opponents of a new organization, but it was agreed to set up an information office. The office was based in Amsterdam and from then on published the Bulletin international du mouvement syndicaliste . Most participants rated the congress as a success, but De Ambris did not. A second congress was scheduled for two years later, but did not take place due to the outbreak of the First World War. The Bulletin only appeared eighteen issues before the war put an end to it.

First World War

In the run-up to the First World War, the FVdG decried the SPD's anti-war rhetoric as “complete humbug”. With the beginning of the war, the SPD and the free trade unions entered into a truce with the German state. Thanks to this agreement, the union structure remained intact and the government did not cut wages during the war. For their part, the unions did not support new strikes, ended those that had already started and took part in the war mobilization. The law on the patriotic auxiliary service of 1916 created works councils and equal arbitration courts and thus further cemented the cooperation between employers, trade unions and the state.

German infantry, 1914; the FVdG was the only German trade union that did not support the German war efforts in the First World War

The FVdG, on the other hand, was the only workers' organization not to participate in the German truce. The union claimed that war patriotism was incompatible with proletarian internationalism and that the war could only bring about more intensive exploitation of labor. In fact, the average real wage in Germany fell by around 55 percent over the course of the war. Although the free trade unions quickly agreed with the German state that Russia and Great Britain were to blame for the outbreak of war, the FVdG held that the real cause of the war was imperialism and that the culprit could not be finally determined until the war was over. She also rejected terms such as nation or national identity, which were used to legitimize the war, and claimed that there was no common language, origin and culture in Germany - the supposed foundations of a nation. The FVdG newspapers also claimed that the war refuted historical materialism because the masses had plunged into a war that ran counter to their own material interests.

The final edition of The Pioneer

After Fritz Kater and Max Winkler reaffirmed syndicalist anti-militarism in the August 5, 1914 edition of Des Pioniers , this newspaper was banned. Three days later, Die Einigkeit criticized the SPD's attitude towards the war and was therefore suppressed from then on. The FVdG responded immediately by publishing a weekly bulletin. After it was also banned in June 1915, the association started the bi-weekly circular, which survived until May 1917. FVdG activists were arrested in Cologne, Elberfeld, Düsseldorf, Krefeld and other cities as early as the first days of the war - some of them then remained under house arrest for up to two years. The FVdG experienced severe government repression. While the regular meetings of the union were regularly banned, the authorities in Düsseldorf even prevented the meetings of the syndicalist choir. Another problem for the union was that many of its members were drafted into military service. Half of all Berlin construction workers, after all the largest union of the FVdG, were forced to do military service. In some places all members of the FVdG were drafted.

Although the FVdG emphasized, "the goal is everything and [...] must be everything" - an allusion to Bernstein's formula: "The final goal, whatever it is, is nothing to me, the movement everything" - it was not in the position to do so Able to do a lot other than keep their own structures alive during World War I. Immediately after the outbreak of war, the FVdG tried to continue their anti-war demonstrations, but they proved sterile. Although she criticized the truce and militarism without interruption, with a few small exceptions - in particular the resistance of the carpenters' union against Sunday work - no labor disputes were possible. At the same time, the FVdG also received support from abroad. The faction led by Armando Borghi in the Italian USI , an anti-militarist minority in the CGT, the Dutch NAS and Spanish, Swedish and Danish syndicalists all agreed with the FVdG in their rejection of the war.

With the continuation of the world war, war fatigue grew in Germany. The first strikes in Germany since the beginning of the war broke out in 1915 and then grew steadily in terms of both frequency and size. The role of the unions as intermediaries between employers and workers soon led to conflicts between the grassroots and union officials and the membership of the free unions dwindled. The SPD parliamentary group split accordingly over the question of whether the war should continue to be supported. The February Revolution in Russia in 1917 was seen by the FVdG as an expression of the people's desire for peace. The syndicalists paid special attention to the role that the general strike played in this revolution, as they had advocated it for years. The FVdG was unable to take a public position on the October Revolution of the same year, as the circular had already been banned before it broke out.

November Revolution and re-establishment as FAUD

According to some sources, the FVdG already had influence on some strikes in the armaments industry in February or March 1918, but the association was not re-established across the Reich until December 1918. On December 14th, Fritz Kater began publishing the newspaper Der Syndikalist in Berlin as a replacement for Die Einigkeit . On December 26th and 27th, Kater organized a conference in Berlin which was attended by 33 delegates from 43 local unions. The delegates reflected on the difficult times during the war and proudly stated that the FVdG was the only trade union that did not have to adapt its program to the changed political conditions, as it had remained true to its anti-state and internationalist principles. The delegates reaffirmed their rejection of parliamentarism and refused to take part in the Weimar National Assembly .

In the spring of 1919, Karl Roche wrote a new program called “What do the syndicalists want? Program, goals and paths of the 'Free Association of German Trade Unions' ”for the FVdG. It repeated the ideas and slogans of the pre-war period, but also went further by criticizing participation in parliamentary democracy as it impeded and confused the proletarian class struggle. The program also called for the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat , a position that the newly founded Communist Party of Germany (KPD) and the International Communists of Germany should lure. At the end of 1918 and beginning of 1919, the FVdG played an important role in the strike movement in the Ruhr area , in which miners were primarily involved. Your activists, especially Carl Windhoff, spoke regularly at demonstrations by the striking workers. A general strike began on April 1, which was called by the FVdG, the KPD and the Independent Social Democratic Party of Germany (USPD). Ultimately, up to 75 percent of miners in the region took part in the strike until it was suppressed by the SPD government at the end of April. After the strike and the subsequent collapse of the General Mining Union, the FVdG unions grew rapidly and independently of the parties already mentioned, particularly in the Ruhr area. This led to a sudden increase in the number of members of the FVdG. The FVdG's criticism of the bureaucratic and centralized trade unions, its support for direct action and the comparatively low membership fees were well received by the workers in the Ruhr area. In August 1919 the association already had 60,000 members across the Reich. However, the miners' unions of the FVdG in the Ruhr area rejected the organization traditionally preferred by the association based on occupations and instead preferred the simpler division according to branches.

The end of the collaboration between the FVdG and the political parties was part of a nationwide trend after Paul Levi , an outspoken opponent of the syndicalists, became chairman of the KPD in March. Then Rudolf Rocker , a communist anarchist and student of Kropotkin, joined the FVdG in March 1919. He had just returned from exile in London, where he had been an active part of the Jewish anarchist scene, with a stopover in the Netherlands. Augustin Souchy , an anarchist close to Gustav Landauer's tradition , also joined the association in 1919. Both quickly gained influence in the organization and, as anti-Marxists, were against all too close cooperation with the communists.

Nonetheless, the Rhineland-Westphalian section of the FVdG merged with a few smaller left-wing communist unions to form the Free Workers' Union (FAU) in September 1919. The syndicalists of the FVdG formed the largest and strongest camp in the new FAU. The FAU program was the result of compromises between the Union's sub-unions, but it also reflected the considerable influence of the FVdG.

The decision was soon made to continue the unification from Rhineland-Westphalia on a nationwide level. The 12th Congress of the FVdG, which took place from December 27th to 30th, became the founding congress of the Free Workers' Union of Germany (FAUD). However, most left-wing communists, including the influential member Karl Roche, had either turned their backs on FAU in Rhineland-Westphalia or were preparing to leave. Most of them soon joined the General Workers' Union of Germany (AAUD), which was founded in February 1920. So Rockers was elected to the FAUD program without further controversy, without further controversy. The FAUD completely rejected Marxist concepts and ideas, such as the dictatorship of the proletariat. According to the Business Commission, the Congress was attended by 109 delegates representing 111,675 members, double the number of members four and a half months earlier.

literature

• Hans-Manfred Bock: Syndicalism and left communism from 1918 to 1923: A contribution to the social and intellectual history of the early Weimar Republic . Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1993, ISBN 3-534-12005-1 .
• Hans-Manfred Bock: Anarcho-Syndicalism in Germany. An interim balance . In: International scientific correspondence on the history of the German labor movement . tape 25 , 1989, pp. 293-358 .
• Hans-Manfred Bock: Anarchosyndicalism in the German Labor Movement: a Rediscovered Minority Tradition . In: Marcel van der Linden, Wayne Thorpe (eds.): Revolutionary Syndicalism: an International Perspective . Scolar Press, Aldershot 1990, ISBN 0-85967-815-6 , pp. 59-79 (English).
• Helge Döhring: Syndicalism in Germany 1914-1918 "In the heart of the beast" . Edition AV, Lich 2013, ISBN 978-3-86841-083-9 .
• Dieter Fricke: The German labor movement 1869-1914: A manual about their organization and activity in the class struggle . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1976.
• Dirk H. Müller: Union assembly democracy and workers' delegates before 1918 . Colloquium-Verlag, Berlin 1985, ISBN 3-7678-0650-9 .
• Dirk H. Müller: Syndicalism and Localism in the German Trade Union Movement . In: Wolfgang J. Mommsen, Hans-Gerhard Husung (Ed.): The Development of Trade Unionism in Great Britain and Germany, 1880-1914 . George Allen & Unwin, London 2003, ISBN 0-04-940080-0 , pp. 239-249 (English).
• Klaus Schönhoven: Localism-Craft Union-Industrial Union: Organizational Patterns in German Trade Unionism . In: Wolfgang J. Mommsen, Hans-Gerhard Husung (Ed.): The Development of Trade Unionism in Great Britain and Germany, 1880-1914 . George Allen & Unwin, London 2003, ISBN 0-04-940080-0 , pp. 219-235 (English).
• Hartmut Rübner: Freedom and Bread . Libertad-Verlag, Berlin 1994, ISBN 3-922226-21-3 .
• Dieter Schuster: Chronology of the German trade union movement from its beginnings to 1918. 2000, accessed on October 11, 2006 . 
• Wayne Thorpe: Keeping the Faith: The German Syndicalists in the First World War . In: Central European History . tape 33 , no. 2 , June 2000, ISSN  0008-9389 , p. 195-216 , doi : 10.1163 / 156916100746301 (English).
• Wayne Thorpe: The European Syndicalists and War, 1914-1918 . In: Contemporary European History . tape 10 , no. 1 , March 2001, ISSN  0960-7773 , p. 1–24 , doi : 10.1017 / S0960777301001011 (English).
• Angela Vogel: The German anarcho-syndicalism: Genesis and theory of a forgotten movement. Karin Kramer Verlag, Berlin 1977, ISBN 3-89756-070-6 .
• Wayne Westergard-Thorpe: Towards a Syndicalist International: The 1913 London Congress . In: International Review of Social History . tape 13 , 1978, ISSN  0020-8590 , pp. 33-78 (English).

Individual evidence

1. ↑ See Rübner 1994, p. 23; Bock 1989, p. 296; Angela Vogel: The German anarcho-syndicalism: Genesis and theory of a forgotten movement. Pp. 33-37.
2. ↑ Angela Vogel: The German anarcho-syndicalism: Genesis and theory of a forgotten movement. P. 39 and Schönhoven 1985, p. 220.
3. ↑ Dieter Schuster: Chronology of the German trade union movement from the beginning to 1918. 2000.
4. ↑ Dieter Fricke: The German labor movement 1869-1914: P. 746.
5. ↑ Cf. Angela Vogel: Der Deutschen Anarcho-Syndikalismus: Genesis and theory of a forgotten movement. Pp. 46-47.
6. ↑ See Bock 1989, pp. 299-300.
7. ↑ Cf. Angela Vogel: Der Deutschen Anarcho-Syndikalismus: Genesis and theory of a forgotten movement. P. 47.
8. ↑ See Bock 1989, pp. 298-299.
9. ↑ See Müller 1985a, pp. 140-145, 148; Bock 1990, p. 60; Müller 1985b, p. 245.
10. ↑ Cf. Angela Vogel: Der Deutschen Anarcho-Syndikalismus: Genesis and theory of a forgotten movement. Pp. 53-55.
11. ↑ See Müller 1985a, pp. 140-141.
12. ↑ See Müller 1985a, p. 141.
13. ↑ Cf. Angela Vogel: Der Deutschen Anarcho-Syndikalismus: Genesis and theory of a forgotten movement. Pp. 53-55.
14. ↑ See Müller 1985a, pp. 146-147.
15. ↑ See Müller 1985a, pp. 151–155.
16. ↑ See Müller 1985b, p. 246.
17. ↑ See Müller 1985a, pp. 170-172.
18. ↑ Cf. Angela Vogel: Der Deutschen Anarcho-Syndikalismus: Genesis and theory of a forgotten movement. P.56.
19. ↑ See Müller 1985a, pg 173-174
20. ↑ See Müller 1985a, pp. 179-180.
21. ↑ Cf. Angela Vogel: Der Deutschen Anarcho-Syndikalismus: Genesis and theory of a forgotten movement. Pp. 56-57; Müller 1985a, pp. 179-181.
22. ↑ Hans-Manfred Bock: Syndicalism and Left Communism from 1918 to 1923. P. 29.
23. ↑ See Müller 1985a, pp. 183-185.
24. ↑ See Müller 1985a, pp. 186-187; Angela Vogel: The German anarcho-syndicalism: Genesis and theory of a forgotten movement. Pp. 59-60; quoted from Angela Vogel: The German anarcho-syndicalism: Genesis and theory of a forgotten movement. P. 60.
25. ↑ See Bock 1989, pp. 301-302.
26. ↑ See Hans-Manfred Bock: Syndicalism and Left Communism from 1918 to 1923. P. 31–32.
27. ↑ See Bock 1989, p. 306.
28. ↑ See Hans-Manfred Bock: Syndicalism and Left Communism from 1918 to 1923. P. 33–37.
29. ↑ See Rübner 1994, pp. 46-47.
30. ↑ See Westergard-Thorpe 1978, pp. 35-37, 55, 57-59, 65-66, 70, 74.
31. ↑ See Thorpe 2000, p. 197.
32. ↑ See Thorpe 2000, p. 200.
33. ↑ See Thorpe 2000, p. 195.
34. ↑ See Thorpe 2000, pp. 199-200, 205-206.
35. ↑ See Thorpe 2000, pp. 197-198.
36. ↑ See Thorpe 2000, p. 202.
37. ↑ See Thorpe 2000, pp. 197-202.
38. ↑ See Thorpe 2000, pp. 207-208.
39. ↑ See Thorpe 2000, pp. 202-2004.
40. ↑ See Thorpe 2000, pp. 208-209.
41. ↑ See Thorpe 2000, p. 195.
42. ↑ See Hans-Manfred Bock: Syndicalism and Left Communism from 1918 to 1923. pp. 103-104.
43. ↑ See Rübner 1994, p. 35.
44. ↑ See Hans-Manfred Bock: Syndicalism and Left Communism from 1918 to 1923. pp. 104-105.
45. ↑ See Hans-Manfred Bock: Syndicalism and Left Communism from 1918 to 1923. pp. 119–120.
46. ↑ See Hans-Manfred Bock: Syndikalismus und Linkskommunismus from 1918 to 1923. S. 134 and Bock 1990, S. 69.
47. ↑ See Hans-Manfred Bock: Syndicalism and Left Communism from 1918 to 1923. pp. 118–120.
48. ↑ See Hans-Manfred Bock: Syndicalism and Left Communism from 1918 to 1923. P. 134.
49. ↑ See Hans-Manfred Bock: Syndicalism and Left Communism from 1918 to 1923. pp. 105-107.