Red Rosa now has vanished too,
And where she lies is hid from view.
She told the poor what life’s about,
And so the rich have rubbed her out.
On 15th Jan 1919, as a soldier’s rifle butt smashed her skull – Bertolt Brecht, a German poet, wrote this epitaph honouring Rosa Luxemburg.
Happenings, post-Russian Revolution, made the image of Socialism so blurred and mala fide, that a rational discussion on the subject is barely possible. Socialism is either equated with dictatorial regimes that ruled in its name, or economic stagnation brought about by bureaucratic corruption.
To overcome this historic predicament, it becomes necessary to study the subject from its sources – Souls that tried to lift the iron veil from the misery of human masses; hidden under the façade of superficial progress. The life and works of Rosa Luxemburg offer us a fairly good opportunity to do precisely that.
Representing the true humanistic outlook of Socialism, she weaved theory and practice together; for improving the lot of the disempowered. Her life and work were in such perfect consonance, that they could be virtually interchanged. Unlike the proverbial ivory tower of the philosophers, she led movements, organised mass action, and spoke on all relevant issues around her with an articulate mind.
Born in a small Polish town, in 1875, Rosa Luxemburg became an active Socialist from her early youth. Banished from Poland, she went to Zurich; where not only did she enter university but also took an active part in the local labor movement. At 22, she represented the Social Democratic Party of Poland at the Congress of the Socialist International.
Thereafter, she returned to Germany and spent a fair amount of her time refuting, what she considered ‘Reformism’; of the true Marxist ideology. Simultaneously, her political engagements continued – rightly captured in the motto, At the beginning was the deed. During the tumultuous years of 1905-1910, Rosa Luxemburg developed ideological differences with the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD).
The difference reached its summit when the parliamentary group of SPD voted in favour of war spending. This was in clear contradiction to Luxemburg’s ideals; who believed in war against war. Eventually, Rosa Luxemburg, along with a handful of comrades, formed the Spartacus League.
Prisoned for the next four years, she continued to inspire and lead. When the October Revolution occurred, Rosa showered both praise and contempt, from her prison cell. Eventually, her pulsating life was brought to a tragic end on 15th Jan 1919, by a German butt.
During this vibrant span of life – Rosa Luxemburg had the chance to see and participate in major political upheavals around her. She took an active part in many movements, while also theorising her ideals. What stands out in her work – is her clarity of thought, a humanistic (rather than a mechanistic) understanding of Marxism, courage, and objective analysis.
Her works may be broadly classified into three categories: Theoretical contribution to Marxism, Rebuttal of Reformism, and Critique of the October Revolution. Besides, she wrote on numerous issues of the day, but these three themes stand out as her major contribution to the field. Her biggest contribution to the economic field was ‘The Accumulation of Capital’.
Praised and critiqued by her Marxist comrades, Rosa, therein, delved into how capitalist economies have to drench non-capitalist economies, in order to expand. While her contempt for Imperialism continued unabated in her works, Accumulation of Capital gave proper contours to this exploitative relation.
It elaborated and expounded on Marx’s Capital; trying to fix what it found as insufficient analysis of Capitalism under an incomplete Capitalist world. Franz Mehring, the biographer of Marx, showered praise, referring to her as the finest brain amongst the scientific successors of Marx and Engels.
Another major portion of her work was intended against Reformism, which narrowed down the Socialist movement to concessions and bargaining. A stream of writings flowed from her pen to counter what she believed was, not the realisation of socialism, but the reform of capitalism
She insisted that Socialism demanded a change of system, not a change in system, Every legal constitution, she argued, was a product of a revolution.
On the other end, she wrote a critique of the October Revolution. This may not deserve to be bracketed as a third of her writings in quantum. But in terms of significance, it surely forms an ingenious part of her work.
At the time of those upheavals, Rosa Luxemburg was in prison. Whatever she could gather from the newspapers smuggled into her cell, she tried making sense of it and put pen to paper; leaving an indelible mark on the historical analysis of the Russian Revolution.
Eschewing partisan polemics, she took the matter objectively and without bias. Praising the Bolsheviks for courage, revolutionary farsightedness and consistency in an historic hour, she could not shut herself from the fact that the revolution was already appearing to downslide.
Important to remember is that she was not writing hindsight apologetics – Her writings on the Russian Revolution were written in 1918; when the revolution was right in its throes. While praising the Bolsheviks for their undaunted courage, she was explicit that the revolution was fast losing sight of its goal of real and radical democracy; and speeding towards authoritarianism.
As the revolution lost track, Rosa Luxemburg was there to correct course. She did not mince words when stating that the real objectives of a Socialist revolution were not taking power for the sake of power. Constant throughout her writings, she reiterated, that a Socialist revolution implied empowering the masses, and slaying the dichotomy that existed between capital and labor.
Socialism meant giving control of the means of production to the democratic set-up of the workers. Contrary to these ideals, she could (for) see that bureaucratism was creeping in and replacing Socialist ideals, in the post-revolution Russian polity. As such, she protested that political life in the land as a whole, will become more and more crippled.
While disapproving of Bolshevik censorship, she stood for freedom of thought and expression, stating:
Without general elections, without unrestricted freedom of Press and Assembly, without a free struggle of opinion, life dies out in every public institution, becomes a mere semblance of life.
Then her famous line, Freedom is always, and exclusively, freedom for the one who thinks differently.
She disapproved of the dictatorial workings of the Bolsheviks; that had started taking shape. She stated in plain words, that Socialism was not anti-democratic. On the contrary, it strove for real, grassroots, and radical democracy.
She retorted to the Bolsheviks that Socialists do not despise democracy. What they find revolting is rather the formal, bourgeoisie form of democracy. The kernel of which, she argued was social inequality and lack of freedom hidden under the sweet shell of formal equality and freedom.
What was to be replaced by real Socialist democracy – where people will have effective control over their lives. Rosa Luxemburg’s understanding of Socialism was humanistic.
Her thoughts on Marxism were innovative. Famous Trotskyist – Tony Cliff, encapsulated it thus, During a period when so many who consider themselves Marxists sap Marxism of its deep humanistic content, no one can do more to release us from the chains of lifeless mechanistic materialism than Rosa Luxemburg.
Rosa Luxemburg fought in word and deed for a society based on liberty, justice, and equality. Not as mere words for public consumption, devoid of any reality – but ideals to be embedded in the essential workings of the politico-economic order.
All in all, we may well sum up her passionate life, in her own words:
Uncurbed revolutionary energy and wide human feeling – that is the real breath of socialism.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are the personal opinions of the author.
The facts, analysis, assumptions and perspective appearing in the article do not reflect the views of GK.