Nin reads a revolutionary’s indictment of the reformists of the reestablished international federation of Socialist parties, the Amsterdamers. So called because of the labor gathering forming International Federation of Trade Unions in Amsterdam in 1919, and eventual reuniting in 1923 of the old Right and ‘centrists’ in the Labor and Socialist International that followed the demise of the Second International.

‘Eight Years of the Amsterdam International’ by Andreu Nin from International Press Correspondence. Vol. 7 Nos. 43. July 27, 1927.

I. Eight Years in the Service of Capitalism.

In July 1919 a congress was held for the establishment of the Amsterdam International, whose foundations had been laid at the preliminary conference held in Berne in February of the same year. The International Federation of Trade Unions (I.F.T.U.) thus exists for eight years, although the ideological foundations upon which it rests were laid much earlier, in the pre-war reformist movement, and in the policy of class collaboration during the war.

This comparatively brief space of time has been eventful, and has brought with it much valuable experience for the international labour movement. The period may be divided into three main stages.

The first stage is characterised by the revolutionary wave which flooded and shook the bourgeois world from 1917 to 1920, as a result of the Russian revolution, and the crisis in the capitalist regime produced by the imperialist war. The characteristic facts of this period, apart from the Russian revolution, are the following: the overthrow of the monarchies in the defeated States, the German revolution, the Soviet republic in Hungary, the occupation of the factories by the workers in Italy, the victorious advance of the Red Army to Warsaw, and the great social struggles and strike movements in the majority of countries.

During the second stage we find that the bourgeoisie, after having witnessed revolution quite close by, but now convinced that the danger is over, is taking up a fundamental offensive against the working class, attacking the eight hour day wages, and enchaining the White terror in a number of countries. This period is especially characterised by the victory of Fascism in Italy and by the defeat of the proletarian revolution in Bulgaria and Germany.

The third stage, which is still lasting at the present time, is charaterised by a certain stabilisation. At the same time it is characterised by the revolt of the colonial and semi-colonial peoples, and above all by the Chinese revolution; further by the general strike and the coal strike in England, and by the consolidation of the Soviet Union. The bourgeoisie, conscious of the fragility of the stabilisation, is preparing to parry the attacks expected from the working class by initiating a powerful attack, in the first place against the workers defence organisations (the English trade union law, labour magna charta in Italy, militarisation of the trade unions in France, law on compulsory arbitration in Norway, etc.)

If we are to make a general survey of the fundamental activity of the Amsterdam International during this time, we must unveil the real countenance of this so-called labour international, whose action and lack of action appears before the proletariat invariably connected with international capitalism, which serves its interests, and betrays the interests of the class which it pretends to represent.

II. The years of the revolutionary wave.

Let us cast a glance at the first stage of the activity of the Amsterdam International.

The foundation congress met one month after the signing of the Versailles Treaty. We must remember that leaders of this International, Jouhaux for instance, had been among the most active workers in the drawing up of this robbery Treaty. Neither the Berne Conference nor the Amsterdam Congress showed the slightest wish to lead the working masses in their struggle against capitalism, this struggle forming the most burning of all questions in every country; they confined themselves to meetings which appeared to have no other object than to rescue the tottering capitalist order.

In Berne and Amsterdam the representatives of the trade unions of these countries which had participated in the war offered a despicable spectacle. They were divided into groups, and quarreled among themselves like their own bourgeoisie. The group of the “Allies” hurled accusations at the group of the “Central Powers”, and demanded that these should acknowledge that Germany was to blame for the war.

At that time the Amsterdam International was already a second edition of the League of Nations, which has never been what its founders assert, a society of “freed” peoples, created to secure “world peace”, but merely an organisation in the service of the victorious states. Exactly the same can be said of the Amsterdam International, and the more important the role which it plays in the League of Nations, the truer it becomes.

At the foundation congress of the Amsterdam International (July 1919), confidence in the League of Nations was dominant. Therefore the main task of the congress was the ratification of the so-called “labour charter”, which is contained in chapter 3 of the second part of the Versailles Peace Treaty, with the alterations made in it by the Berne conference, and the passing of resolutions on the labour conference at Washington, in which it was decided to participate. One single voice was raised against participation in this conference, but it was not the indignant voice of a real representative of the proletariat, raised against the policy of co-operation between the classes, but the voice of the old fox Legien, who asserted, rightly enough, that the League of Nations comprised only the countries of the Allies.

Thus the Amsterdam International found nothing better to do, at a moment when the revolutionary billow was rushing across the world, and the bourgeoisie trembled, than to play the part of fire brigade for the salvation of the bourgeoisie, to conduct negotiations with the bourgeoisie, to collaborate with bourgeois organs, and to confine themselves to elaborate a miserable programme of “minimum demands” of the workers. The policy of the leaders of the Amsterdam International has always been very consistent. During the war they co-operated with the bourgeoisie of their respective countries, and immediately after the war they co-operated with the bourgeoisie in working out the Peace Treaty and in hampering the revolutionary movement.

The following are a few of the actions characterising the line of the Amsterdam International:

Reformism, whilst welcoming with enthusiasm the Russian February revolution, whose government continued the policy of imperialism pursued by the Allies, opposed the Bolshevist revolution from the very first moment, and combined with the international bourgeoisie to stigmatize the Bolsheviki as agents of German imperialism and usurpers of power. In France reformist voices were even raised in favour of an armed intervention against Soviet Russia.

In Germany the responsible leaders of the Reformist trade union federations supported the Brest Litovsk treaty, which in their opinion prevented the restoration of pre-war Europe.

The Amsterdam International did not stir a finger to undertake anything against the blockade and the intervention in Soviet Russia.

The Bavarian Soviet republic was crushed with the aid of the reformists.

In Hungary the bourgeois order war restored with the active participation of such trade union leaders as Peidl.

It is true that the Amsterdam International, under the pressure of the masses, decided to boycott Hungary as protest against the horrors of the White terror. But the London Congress of 1920 was obliged to confess that neither Germany nor England, Italy or France, had really carried out the terms of the boycott, that is, the boycott was only on paper.

During the war between Soviet Russia and Poland, the prevention of the transport of weapons and ammunition was proclaimed, but in fact the Amsterdam International confined itself to proposing to the Entente “non-interference”, tantamount to neutrality in a moment when the fate of the proletariat all over the world was at stake. The English reformists did their utmost to dam the mighty movement of the masses in favour of Soviet Russia. And in Poland the Amsterdamers pointed out the “necessity” of protecting the native country against the Bolshevist intruders.

The shameful epilogue of this period is furnished by the despicable treachery committed by the leaders of the Italian trade unions in September 1920, when the factories were occupied by the workers. This treacherous action on the part of the Italian Amsterdamers was decisive for the defeat of the revolution in Italy, and smoothed the path to Fascism, and to the seizure of power by Mussolini in 1922.

The London congress of 1920 reflected the policy of the Amsterdam International at this period.

Pressed forward by the organised workers, the trade union bureaucrats found themselves compelled to pass resolutions against reaction and militarism; resolutions, it may be observed, entirely lacking in purport, and containing no practical measures. In actual fact the London Congress was chiefly occupied with the restoration of capitalist economy. Hence the resolutions on the distribution of raw materials, and on the exchange of goods, which occupied first place. Only one single “courageous” decision was adopted, that of opposition against the trade unions of the Soviet Union, and against the Red International of Labour Unions, then taking its first steps. In this resolution these collaborators in bourgeois ministries and in capitalist undertakings have the cynicism to protest against the fact that.

“Persons holding positions at the head of a communist government hold at the same time positions at the head of a labour international”.

And this at a time when civil war was raging in Russia, and the proletariat was struggling against a world of enemies. In Hungary the white terror, the blood of Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, of the Spartacists, of Leviné, of the shot Bavarians, still fresh, and Italy, where the proletariat had almost taken over power, Fascism preparing its offensive against the working class.

III. The capitalist offensive.

Had the Amsterdam International been what it pretends to be, it would have played an active part in the second stage. Their work would have been the defence of the most elementary achievements of the working class, directly threatened by the capitalist offensive. We have witnessed an entirely opposite action on their part. Instead of opposing labour to capital, and preparing it for battle, the Amsterdamers have practised the policy of class collaboration on every possible opportunity, and have made it their only aim to distract the fighting spirit of the proletariat on every occasion, and to induce the workers to place their confidence in the League of Nations and the International Labour Office. In view of the fact that great mass movements have been able to arise in spite of reformist policy, for instance the great strike of the English coalminers in 1921 and the rising in Central Germany in March of the same year, the attitude of the Amsterdamers can only be designated as blackest treachery.

When the first symptoms of capitalist offensive were felt, the Red International of Labour Unions proposed a united front with the reformists, in order to conduct a common fight against the common enemy. All their proposals, which always contained some definite aim, such as the boycott against Yugoslavia and Spain, as protest against the white terror, have been systematically rejected. But Amsterdam does not confine itself to declining our proposals of unity. It endeavours to widen the chasm. Ever since the end of 1920, all the national sections of the Amsterdam International have been working for the systematic expulsion of the revolutionary elements. The split in France at the end of 1921 resulting in two trade union federations, is an event characteristic of this splitting policy.

This second stage is further characterised by the aggravation of the inner antagonisms of capitalism. Explosions could be expected at any moment. The occupation of the Ruhr valley aroused unrest and indignation in the proletariat of all countries. In this situation Amsterdam again failed and remarkable coincidence in the heart of this noble Amsterdam International we find the same antagonisms as those prevailing in the capitalist camp. We only need mention one typical case. The English social traitor Thomas assumed an anti-French attitude, thus supporting Legien. This corresponds exactly to the position taken by the English government.

During this period, the attitude of the Amsterdam International is so shameful that Fimmen found himself obliged to write his article on the “Horrors of January”, demonstrating a distinct turn to the Left on the part of the former secretary of the International, and with him of an important section of the International.

Meanwhile the Amsterdam International was organising “demonstrations” against war. The loudest of these demonstration was the Peace Conference at the Hague, where empty resolutions were passed the complete meaninglessness of which was demonstrated by the attitude of the reformists during the occupation of the Ruhr district.

Other “positive” actions of the Amsterdam International were the telegram sent by Jouhaux to the bourgeois disarmament conference at Washington in 1921, in which a hope for the “solidarity of action for peace in all countries” is expressed, further the co-operation with the diplomatic Geneva conference by means of the organising of a parallel international labour conference, and finally, the constant collaboration with the bourgeoisie for the purpose of restoring world economics shattered by the war and revolution.

The Congress of the I.F.T.U. held at Rome at the end of April 1922 was again chiefly occupied with the question of the reconstruction of Europe on the basis of capitalist economics. Here, as in London, the first place was taken by questions relating to the distribution of raw materials, to war debts, and to the necessity of building up peace on principles of “just distribution”. At this congress Thomas was appointed president of the International Federation of Trade Unions. This was a very significant event. Amsterdam could not do anything better than to place this proved traitor to the working class at its head.

This stage was closed by the revolutionary events in Germany in October 1923, and by the defeat of the Polish and Bulgarian workers.

The role played by Amsterdam in all these events is sufficiently notorious. Both in Germany and in Poland the Amsterdamers took sides with the bourgeoisie in order to check the revolutionary advance of the masses. In Bulgaria the workers’ insurrection was drowned in blood, and the bourgeoisie established its bloody dictatorship with the immediate co-operation of the social democrats participating in the Zankoff ministry.

IV. The period of the relative stabilisation of capitalism.

It is scarcely necessary to deal in detail with the characteristic features of this period. Much literature has been published on this subject. During this stage we see the Amsterdamers co-operating zealously in working out the Dawes plan, which has had such disastrous effects for the German working class. The MacDonald government in England, the formation of a Left bloc in France, arouse in the naive minds of the reformists the illusion that a favourable period is beginning for the working class in Europe. Disappointment soon sets in. The bourgeoisie gets rid of the labour leaders as soon as it needs them no longer. The offensive against the proletariat becomes acuter. During this stage we have seen the eight hour day disappear in almost every country; wages have been reduced everywhere; unemployment has greatly increased, and has become a permanent condition.

The Amsterdam International has done absolutely nothing to defend the most urgent interests of the working class. It has contented itself with demanding the ratification of the Washington agreement, although all governments regard this agreement merely as a scrap of paper. And the “rationalisation” of industry, whose consequences fall exclusively on the shoulders of the working class, is being carried out with the active co-operation of the reformist leaders.

This period has however been distinguished by one event of importance. This is the rise of a Left wing within the Amsterdam International. The chief cause of the coming into existence of the Left wing was the failure of the Amsterdam International during the occupation of the Ruhr basin, and the revolutionisation of the English working class following the acute economic crisis still shaking Great Britain. At the Congress at Vienna (June 1924) the Left became noticeable as such for the first time. The Right still rules in the I.F.T.U., however, and although certain concessions have been made to the Left with regard to increasing the importance of the international secretariats of the Industrial Internationals on the other hand the decision on unity is an actual declaration of war against the revolutionary trade union opposition.

But the opposition continues on its way. The Congress of the British trade union federations in Hull gave Comrade Tomsky an enthusiastic welcome. And since then the visit of the English delegation to Russia, the founding of the Anglo-Russian Committee, and the journeys of the workers’ delegations, have combined to extend the movement for the international trade union unity.

Amsterdam continues to pursue a systematic policy of splitting. The proposal for a world unity congress, made by the Russian trade unions and the Red International of Labour Unions, has been rejected by Amsterdam. Every proposal towards a united front is sabotaged, and the bonds attaching Amsterdam to capitalism are strengthened. When the general strike broke out in England, the Amsterdam International acted as strikebreaker towards the British miners, leaving one of the mightiest struggles in the history of the labour movement isolated and deserted.

The role played by the Amsterdam International during this period can be characterised as follows: it has become an active element in that relative stabilisation of capital which has been achieved at the expense of the working class, by means of disarming the workers in the face of the capitalist offensive, by means of the systematic and constant sabotage of all attempts towards establishing national and international unity in the trade union movement.

V. The Present Role of the Amsterdam International.

The consolidation of the Soviet Union on the one hand, and the development of the struggle for emancipation in the colonial countries on the other, have resulted in a strengthening of the capitalist offensive, directed partially against the first workers republic, and partially against the working class in each individual country.

This offensive may be seen in the intervention in China, in the breaking off of diplomatic relations between England and Soviet Russia, and in the attacks being made on the workers’ right of combination in the leading capitalist countries.

The Amsterdam International has not attempted to do anything against the military intervention in China. On the contrary, it is serving the interests of world imperialism. Oudegeest has even had the cynicism to declare to a delegation from the Chinese trade unions, which visited him in March this year.

“Amsterdam can send no delegation this year to study the situation of the labour movement in China, since the trade union movement can only develop under peaceful conditions, and times of great political agitation are unsuitable for its development.”

And Thomas, one of the most prominent members of the Amsterdam International, has had the brazenness to emphasise the “necessity” of sending troops to China.

It may be asserted without exaggeration that Chiang Kai Shek’s coup d’etat, and the resultant massacre of the Chinese workers and destruction of the trade union orgainsations, have been witnessed with satisfaction by all the leaders of the Amsterdam International.

As regards the Soviet Union, the Amsterdam International continues to prepare its masses psychologically for co-operation with the bourgeoisie in a possible war against the workers’ and peasants government.

In France the socialist Paul Boncour is the author of the trade union militarisation law. In Italy one section of the Amsterdam leaders has gone straight over to Fascism, whilst the other section, consisting of those who have remained “faithful” to the principles of class struggle, are working for the dissolution of the trade unions, and are taking refuge abroad. In Spain the Amsterdamites are working in co-partnership with the military dictatorship of Primo de Rivera, and publicly praise his so-called social policy. In the Balkans the Amsterdamites are directly aiding in the suppression of the workers and poor peasantry.

We may safely maintain that at the present juncture, when the essential interests of the working class are at stake, the Amsterdam International forms a bloc with the bourgeoisie against revolutionary China, against the Soviet Union, and against the working class of all countries.

VI. What does the Amsterdam International Represent in the Labour Movement?

The brief survey which we have just made of the activity of the Amsterdam International during its eight years of existence has shown it invariably in the service of capitalism. We have declared that this International was a yellow organisation from the beginning. The facts have proved that our assertion was no mere demagogy.

In point of numbers the Amsterdam International has lost considerably. The 24 million members which it boasted at the time of its founding have sunk, in accordance with the report of the Executive Committee to the Paris Congress, to 13,455,533.

We shall not challenge the accuracy of these figures, though they are obviously exaggerated. Nor shall we diminish the importance of the figures by emphasising the fact that a great part of the members of the reformist International are revolutionary minorities belonging to the platform of the R.I.L.U.

The numerical strength of the Red International of Labour Unions is not inferior to that of the Amsterdam International. The trade union organisations of Russia, France, China, and Czecho-Slovakia combine to form a total superior in numbers to that of the Amsterdam International.

But though the Amsterdam International may be no very imposing power with regard to numbers, still it would be a mistake to underestimate its influence.

It must not be forgotten that in the industrially most strongly developed countries, Germany, England, Belgium, etc., the Amsterdam International has a leading position. The political influence of Amsterdam, though shaken, is still very great in these countries. Its influence, like that of capitalism, is stabilised to a certain extent. The Amsterdam International can still count among its forces an immense trade union apparatus, the co-operation of experienced trade union leaders, and above all the support of the governments. And we must not close our eyes to an important change which has taken place during the last few years: the greatly increased severity of discipline in the organisation.

The negative aspects of the Amsterdam International are: its internal disintegration, aggravated by the existence of a Left wing and a strong revolutionary minority; the financial crisis, which has placed it in an extremely difficult position; the inner struggles for positions, faithful reflections of the struggles of capitalist contradictions, struggles for the leading positions in the movement.

From the above we may draw the following conclusions: The Amsterdam International, like capitalism, is falling into decay, and is passing through a period of relative stabilisation at the present time, like the bourgeoisie, though this stabilisation is of a very shaky character.

The tasks before the revolutionary trade union movement, when we take into account the actual situation, are the following:

1. The intensification of our work, in order that we may gain important positions in Europe.

2. The trade union organisation of the workers in the colonial and semi-colonial countries. This work to be pressed forward with all urgency, in order to prevent reformism and bourgeois influence from gaining the upper hand.

3. Every effort, with every available means, for the development of unity within the reformist trade unions.

4. The strengthening of the revolutionary trade union organisations, not only increasing their striking power and numerical strength, but at the same time by the formation of trade union fighting cadres, capable of both leading the great struggles and carrying on the detailed work of the trade union.

5. The enhancement of discipline and solidarity in the ranks of the Red International of Labour Unions; these to be consolidated into one body capable of rapid action when required.

6. Energetic fighting measures against Amsterdam, the unmasking of its real character to the working class of all countries.

7. Redoubled energy in the struggle for trade union unity in all countries, the establishment of a mighty trade union unity, strong and competent for the fight.

VII. Has the Proletariat anything to hope from the V. Trade Union Congress?

The V. Congress of the Amsterdam International held in Paris, meets under extremely difficult conditions.

It would be a dangerous illusion to expect anything definite from this Congress. It is, however, imperatively necessary for the workers of all countries to follow its activity with careful attention. This Congress will show them that they have no greater enemies than the reformist leaders. Whilst the bourgeoisie in all countries is striving for the destruction of the labour organisations, and is working out plans of attack against the Soviet Union, the bulwark and the stronghold of world revolution, the international reformists, are preparing fresh treachery, blacker than even that of the 4th August 1914.

International Press Correspondence, widely known as”Inprecorr” was published by the Executive Committee of the Communist International (ECCI) regularly in German and English, occasionally in many other languages, beginning in 1921 and lasting in English until 1938. Inprecorr’s role was to supply translated articles to the English-speaking press of the International from the Comintern’s different sections, as well as news and statements from the ECCI. Many ‘Daily Worker’ and ‘Communist’ articles originated in Inprecorr, and it also published articles by American comrades for use in other countries. It was published at least weekly, and often thrice weekly.

PDF of full issue: https://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/inprecor/1927/v07n43-jul-27-1927-inprecor-op.pdf