Joseph Schneider is both a critic, and in respectful awe, of the German Communist combatant Max Hölz as he is sentenced for his military role in the ‘March Action.’

‘Max Hölz’ by Joseph Schneider from Moscow. No. 28. June 29, 1921.

The very name of Max Hölz makes a shudder ran down the back of the good fat peaceable bourgeois Even in party circles opinions are divided as to whether he should be regarded as a sort of robber chief like Rinaldo Rinaldini, or a cutthroat or as an Anarchist Revolutionist. But all his actions at the time of the Kapp rebellion can be justified. His acts of sabotage in various factories of the Mogtland especially were justly criticised in the party press. It is certainly necessary in certain cases not to shrink from the destruction of industrial concerns for strategic reasons, but one cannot reduce purposeless destruction to a principle. Nevertheless it is unfair to describe Max Hölz as a pirate for that reason.

During the March fights in Central Germany, Hölz certainly did not commit a deed which cannot be sanctioned from a revolutionary point of view. Certainly all his actions are followed by excesses, committed by the rag tag of the party, the Lumpenproletariat, and, which are attributed to the leaders. It is for this reason that robberies, placed at the time of the March action, which took thefts, etc., were placed to the credit of Max Holz. The absurd attempt to blow up the Berlin Siegessaule (victory memorial) and the actual blowing up of certain buildings, e.g. a lavatory in Western Berlin, and a railway attempt long before the rising, were instigated by police agents and had nothing to do with Max Hölz. But the explosions which were caused by Hölz during the action, were due to strategic reasons and cannot be avoided in the struggle to come.

But even the expropriations which Hölz was compelled to enforce during the March rising can never be described as robberies. The wars between capitalist states could only be wage, on conditions that the states undertook to provide and equip the fighting troops. Ninety percent of the burden fell on the popular masses, for the State revenue was derived of almost exclusively from indirect taxation. The proletariat in its struggle for power lacks money and armaments. No war can be prosecuted without money, unless we open the door wide to the plunder of small tradesmen. The fighting working masses must at any rate have enough money to satisfy their most pressing requirements. Naturally this money will be taken from the bourgeoisie and therefore we cannot avoid expropriating the banks, post office cash, and the cash in the hands of the Junkers and the industrial magnates.

The fighting working masses of Central Germany banded togethe, illclad, illshod. No clothing stores were provided for the Red soldiers; they had to confiscate all the necessaries of life. The well-filled wardrobes of the capitalists had to be used for that purpose. Hölz attached no importance whatever to the points as to whether the confiscated outfits were new or old, he only took these clothes and shoes which were necessary for the equipment of his soldiers. During the March risings in Central Germany, not a single case occurred of confiscation of unnecessary articles, luxuries or other valuables. Confiscation was strictly limited to the necessaries of life. The well-filled food stores of the large landowners of Mansfield had, of course, to give up their supplies. If these proved insufficient, a head of cattle was slaughtered from time to time.

Thus in Beesenstedt two oxen were slaughtered which belonged to a rich peasant, who was known also as a usurer. These oxen were placed at the disposal of the population. No one is surely going to blame Hölz for this action.

As to the dynamite explosions, their number is limited, for only railways and bridges were concerned, and obviously, this was based on strategic considerations. The very safety of the workers’ troops made these measures imperative. These explosions were not intended to cause any railway accidents and the signalmen were notified before each explosion to inform the stationmasters of the disconnection of the rails. Hölz blew up some villas belonging to the greatest reactionaries, but on grounds that are thoroughly defensible. The villa of the Orgesch leader, Evers, contained a large arsenal which was exploded when the villa was blown up. The assertion is untrue that the burning of the villa caused the destruction of some of the property belonging to the proletarians. None of the industrial premises were in any way damaged.

The only reproach we have to make to Max Hölz is that at first he refused to admit any intervention on the part of the political parties. Max Hölz did not wish to subordinate himself either to the K.A.P.D., of which party he was a member, or to the V.K.P.D., which dominated in Central Germany. Holz held the view that party leadership is unnecessary to bring about a revolution. According to his view, the workers must on their own initiative, each in his locality incite a rebellion and must fight independently under the leadership of active Communists against the bourgeoisie. There is no doubt that in a state where the military is entirely reactionary, such an attitude will lead to a defeat of the workers. Max Hölz had come to this conclusion as early as the second day of the fight in Central Germany, and then he willingly placed himself under the military guidance of V.K.P.D. The way in which Max Hölz carried out his propaganda for a rising also gives ground for criticism.

The bloodthirsty appeals which he issued were extremely unwise and are in contradiction with communist principles. In his propaganda Hölz laid special stress on acts of vengeance. Thus he relied on the basest instincts of the workers. Moreover Hölz would never have carried those threats into effect, for he is in reality a very compassionate and charitable person. The extermination of the bourgeoisie irrespective of age and sex, as was threatened in Hölz’s appeals, was only a threat which he would never have carried into effect. It is true he took hostages and threatened to kill them, but this threat was never realised. The Hörsing gangs on the other hand killed the workers by the hundred, and did not shrink from threats to murder innocent women. As a counter-measure for the arrest of Dr. Evers by Hölz, my wife and our child aged seven months were taken as hostages and threatened with shooting. But they did not dare to execute this threat.

Max Hölz was in any case an honest revolutionary, who certainly was honestly striving to liberate the workers, though he lacked communist schooling. The German proletariat loses one of the most dauntless of its military leaders, who was destined to play an important part in the forthcoming struggle of the workers against the White gangs. The sentence was pronounced, as Holz rightly said, before he appeared before the White court. It is doubtful whether they will dare to execute the sentence in view of the present unrest among the masses, and thus we can still hope that Max Hölz will be spared the executioners axe of Ebert’s justice, and will be able to place all his dauntless energy at the disposal of the proletariat in its struggle for power.

Moscow was the English-language newspapers of the Communist International’s Third Congress held in Moscow during 1921. Edited by T. L. Axelrod, the paper began on May 25, a month before the Congress, to July 12.

PDF of full issue: https://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/3rd-congress/moscow/Moscow%20issue%2028.pdf