Leo Jogiches

Leo Jogiches

Leo Jogiches, the son of a wealthy merchant, was born in Vilna, Russia. One of his friends, Paul Frölich, has argued: "Little is known about the life of this unusual man... A reserved man, he never spoke of his past."

Jogiches moved to Switzerland in 1890 where he met Rosa Luxemburg, Alexandra Kollontai, George Plekhanov and Karl Kautsky. A fellow revolutionary, Bertram D. Wolfe, has pointed out: "Leo Jogiches, three years older than Rosa Luxemburg, was, when he fled to Zurich in 1890, already a fully formed conspirator and revolutionary. Almost immediately, they became linked by a lifelong personal intimacy (without benefit of religious or civil ceremony) and by a lifelong association in the Polish and Russian, and later in the German, movements. The two were as different as two people engaged in a shared life and common enterprise could be. Jogiches was taciturn, stern, gloomy, secretive about his past and his private life, with none of her eloquence or outgoing capacity for friendship. Moreover, he was, as she was not, a consummate conspirator, an able organizer, a natural born faction fighter. Under the conditions of underground life in Poland and Russia, it is doubtful if she could have built a movement without him. She was the ideologist, he the organizer and conspirator."

In 1893 Jogiches joined with Luxemburg to form the Social Democratic Party of Poland. As it was an illegal organization, the party's newspaper, Sprawa Robotnicza (Workers' Cause) was published in Paris. One of his comrades remarked: "He was a very clever and able debater. In his presence one felt that this was no commonplace man. He devoted his whole existence in his work as a socialist, and his followers idolised him."

After the 1905 Revolution Jogiches and Rosa Luxemburg moved to Warsaw where they were soon arrested. After their release they returned to Germany. Jogiches and Rosa Luxemburg took the side of the Mensheviks in their struggle with the Bolsheviks. As a result Vladimir Lenin favoured the Polish section led by Karl Radek over those of Jogiches and Luxemburg.

On 4th August, 1914, Karl Liebknecht was the only member of the Reichstag who voted against Germany's participation in the First World War. He argued: "This war, which none of the peoples involved desired, was not started for the benefit of the German or of any other people. It is an Imperialist war, a war for capitalist domination of the world markets and for the political domination of the important countries in the interest of industrial and financial capitalism. Arising out of the armament race, it is a preventative war provoked by the German and Austrian war parties in the obscurity of semi-absolutism and of secret diplomacy."

Paul Frölich, a supporter of Liebknecht in the Social Democratic Party (SDP), argued: "On the day of the vote only one man was left: Karl Liebknecht. Perhaps that was a good thing. That only one man, one single person, let it be known on a rostrum being watched by the whole world that he was opposed to the general war madness and the omnipotence of the state - this was a luminous demonstration of what really mattered at the moment: the engagement of one's whole personality in the struggle. Liebknecht's name became a symbol, a battle-cry heard above the trenches, its echoes growing louder and louder above the world-wide clash of arms and arousing many thousands of fighters against the world slaughter."

Clara Zetkin later recalled: "The struggle was supposed to begin with a protest against the voting of war credits by the social-democratic Reichstag deputies, but it had to be conducted in such a way that it would be throttled by the cunning tricks of the military authorities and the censorship. Moreover, and above all, the significance of such a protest would doubtless be enhanced, if it was supported from the outset by a goodly number of well-known social-democratic militants.... Out of all those out-spoken critics of the social-democratic majority, only Karl Liebknecht joined with Rosa Luxemburg, Franz Mehring, and myself in defying the soul-destroying and demoralising idol into which party discipline had developed."

Immediately after the vote on war credits in the Reichstag, a group of SDP anti-militarist activists, including Ernest Meyer, Franz Mehring, Wilhelm Pieck, Julian Marchlewski, Hermann Duncker and Hugo Eberlein met at the home of Rosa Luxemburg to discuss future action. They agreed to campaign against the war but decided against forming a new party and agreed to continue working within the SPD.

In May 1915, Karl Liebknecht published a pamphlet, The Main Enemy Is At Home! He argued: "The main enemy of the German people is in Germany: German imperialism, the German war party, German secret diplomacy. This enemy at home must be fought by the German people in a political struggle, cooperating with the proletariat of other countries whose struggle is against their own imperialists. We think as one with the German people – we have nothing in common with the German Tirpitzes and Falkenhayns, with the German government of political oppression and social enslavement. Nothing for them, everything for the German people. Everything for the international proletariat, for the sake of the German proletariat and downtrodden humanity."

Over the next few months members of this group were arrested and spent several short spells in prison. On the release of Luxemburg in February 1916, it was decided to establish an underground political organization called Spartakusbund (Spartacus League). The Spartacus League publicized its views in its illegal newspaper, Spartacus Letters. Like the Bolsheviks in Russia, they began to argue that socialists should turn this nationalist conflict into a revolutionary war.

Dick Howard has argued: "Agitation continued throughout the war; yet the Spartacus League was never very strong. All agitation had to be carried out in strict secrecy, and the leaders were more often than not in jail." Members included Leo Jogiches, Rosa Luxemburg, Karl Liebknecht, Paul Levi, Ernest Meyer, Franz Mehring, Clara Zetkin, Wilhelm Pieck, Julian Marchlewski, Hermann Duncker and Hugo Eberlein.

On 1st May, 1916, the Spartacus League decided to come out into the open and organized a demonstration against the First World War in Berlin. Several of its leaders, including Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg were arrested and imprisoned. They were not released until October, 1918, when Max von Baden granted an amnesty to all political prisoners.

In January, 1919, members of the group organized the Spartakist Rising in Berlin. Friedrich Ebert, the leader of the Social Democrat Party and Germany's new chancellor, called in the German Army and the Freikorps to bring an end to the rebellion. By 13th January the rebellion had been crushed and most of its leaders were arrested. Over the next few weeks Karl Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg, and hundreds of other members were executed without trial.

Paul Frölich, the author of Rosa Luxemburg: Her Life and Work (1940) has explained what happened: "A short while after Liebknecht had been taken away, Rosa Luxemburg was led out of the hotel by a First Lieutenant Vogel. Awaiting her before the door was Runge, who had received an order from First Lieutenants Vogel and Pflugk-Hartung to strike her to the ground. With two blows of his rifle-butt he smashed her skull. Her almost lifeless body was flung into a waiting car, and several officers jumped in. One of them struck Rosa on the head with a revolver-butt, and First Lieutenant Vogel finished her off with a shot in the head. The corpse was then driven to the Tiergarten and, on Vogel's orders, thrown from the Liechtenstein Bridge into the Landwehr Canal, where it was not washed up until 31 May 1919."

Leo Jogiches was devastated by the news and spent the next few days trying to expose the murderers. He was eventually arrested and on 10th March, 1919, he was executed.

Leo Jogiches, three years older than Rosa, was, when he fled to Zurich in 1890, already a fully formed conspirator and revolutionary. She was the ideologist, he the organizer and conspirator. In Germany, however, where life was lived more publicly, he became a leader only by following in her wake. When they ceased to live together, his choice, not hers, he continued to be politically both her follower and mentor. As a foreigner, he could be active only in the Polish Social Democracy, until her murder caused him to risk his life in the Spartacus movement to avenge her and expose her murderers.

Leo Jogiches spent the next few days exposing the murderers, until his arrest. He was taken to the Moabit Prison, where Radek, Lenin's emissary to the Spartacans and to any German forces which the Russian ruler "might do business with," was also taken. On March 10, Jogiches was dragged out and murdered, but Radek, armored by investiture with a fragment of Lenin's governmental power, was permitted to sit in his cell, holding court for German officers and German heavy industrialists as well as German communists, and beginning the negotiations which led to the Reichswehr-Red Army secret military agreement, foreshadow of the future Stalin-Hitler Pact. In its way, the fate of the Russian emissary Radek and the "Russified" Pieck on the one hand, and that of Rosa Luxemburg on the other, are fitting symbols of the differences between Luxemburg's and Lenin's conceptions of the relationship between socialist principles and power.

Leo Jogiches

Jogiches entstammte einer reichen jüdischen Kaufmannsfamilie. [1] Schon in jungen Jahren engagierte er sich in sozialrevolutionären Kreisen Wilnas. 1888 wurde er inhaftiert. Nach der Entlassung aus dem Gefängnis sollte er als russischer Untertan Militärdienst in Turkestan leisten und floh deshalb Anfang 1890 in die Schweiz, wo er an der Universität Zürich studierte und die Schweizer Staatsbürgerschaft beantragte. Jogiches suchte Kontakt zu dem ebenfalls im Exil lebenden Marxisten Georgi Plechanow. Zwei Jahre später überwarf er sich jedoch mit ihm, was zu einem Parteigerichtsverfahren führte. Die Anhänger Plechanows griffen Jogiches scharf an, auch Friedrich Engels äußerte sich in einem Brief negativ über ihn.

In Zürich lernte er im Jahre 1890 die damals neunzehnjährige polnische Studentin Rosa Luxemburg kennen. [2] Er war zeitweiliger Lebensgefährte Rosa Luxemburgs und Mitglied der Sozialdemokratie des Königreichs Polen und Litauens (SDKPiL).

Während des Ersten Weltkriegs lebte Jogiches in Berlin im Untergrund. In der Novemberrevolution von 1918 war er neben Franz Mehring, Karl Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg und anderen Mitbegründer des Spartakusbundes und der aus ihm zusammen mit anderen kommunistischen Gruppierungen am 1. Januar 1919 hervorgegangenen KPD.

Nach der Ermordung der charismatischen Leitfiguren der KPD, Rosa Luxemburg und Karl Liebknecht, am 15. Januar 1919 durch rechtsextreme Freikorpsleute übertrug man Jogiches den Parteivorsitz der KPD. Jogiches ermittelte die Namen der Mörder und deckte die Einzelheiten der Ermordung auf. [3] Anfang März 1919 wurde er in seiner Wohnung in Berlin-Neukölln verhaftet und am 10. März 1919 im Untersuchungsgefängnis Berlin-Moabit von dem Kriminalwachtmeister Ernst Tamschick durch einen Schuss in den Hinterkopf ermordet. [4]

Leo Jogiches hatte sich wie die führende Theoretikerin der KPD, Rosa Luxemburg, gegen eine Führungsrolle der Kommunistischen Partei Russlands (Bolschewiki) innerhalb der Komintern gewandt. Auch Jogiches’ Nachfolger im KPD-Parteivorsitz, Paul Levi, sah sich im Februar 1921 wegen seiner kritischen Haltung gegenüber der Komintern-Leitung zum Rücktritt gezwungen. Wenige Jahre später geriet die KPD in immer stärkere Abhängigkeit von Moskau. [5]

Karl Retzlaw, der ihn gut kannte, schrieb in seiner Biografie: „Jogiches war eine Persönlichkeit, die auf alle, die ihn kannten, einen unauslöschlichen Eindruck machte. Er war ein Typ, wie ihn die deutsche Arbeiterbewegung niemals hervorgebracht hat. Er war 52 Jahre alt, wohlhabend, und sein Leben wäre auch als Privatgelehrter ausgefüllt gewesen. Sein Temperament liess ihn gegen soziales Unrecht, Militarismus und Krieg kämpfen. Jogiches war kein gebürtiger Deutscher.“ [6]


Leo Jogiches 1867. július 17-én született Vilniusban egy jómódú zsidó származású kereskedő gyermekeként. 1890-ben Svájcba költözött, ahol találkozott Rosa Luxemburggal, Alekszandra Mihajlovna Kollontajjal, Georgij Plehanovval és Karl Kautskyval. 1893-ban Luxemburggal közösen megalakították Lengyelország Szociáldemokrata Pártját. Mivel tevékenységük illegálisnak minősült, ezért a párt Munkások Ügye néven megjelenő lapját (Sprawa Robotnicza) Párizsban jelentették meg. Az 1905-ös orosz forradalom után Jogiches és Luxemburg Varsóba költöztek, ahol nem sokkal később letartóztatták őket. Szabadon bocsátásuk után visszatértek a Német Birodalomba. Jogiches és Luxemburg a mensevikek pártjára álltak a bolsevikokkal szemben. Ennek következtében Vlagyimir Iljics Lenin Karl Radeket támogatta velük szemben. [2] [3]

Jogiches ellenezte a Német Birodalom részvételét az első világháborúban és 1914 őszén részt vett az SPD-n belül működő, informális, háborúellenes Internacionálé Csoport (Gruppe Internationale) létrehozásában. Az alapítók között volt Karl Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg, Paul Levi, Ernest Meyer, Franz Mehring és Clara Zetkin is. 1916 márciusában, amikor a csoport kibővölt 18 SPD taggal, akiket a pártfrakció a pártfegyelem megsértése miatt kizárt soraiból, felvette a Spartakus-csoport (Spartakusgruppe) nevet. 1916. május 1-jén a Spartakus-csoport tagjai úgy döntöttek, hogy nyílt politizálásba kezdenek és Berlinben háborúellenes demonstrációt szerveztek. Ennek következtében számos vezetőjüket, köztük Karl Liebknechtet és Rosa Luxemburgot letartóztatták és bebörtönözték. Csak 1918 októberében bocsátották őket szabadon, amikor Miksa badeni herceg az összes politikai fogolynak amnesztiát adott. [2]

1919 januárjában kitört a Spartakista felkelés Berlinben. Leverésükhöz Friedrich Ebert kénytelen volt igénybe venni a szabadcsapatok (Freikorps) segítségét, mivel a munkások nem voltak hajlandóak fegyveres erővel megvédeni a demokratikus rendszert. A szabadcsapatokban többnyire a régi hadsereg tisztjei szolgáltak, akik a kommunista felkelés leverését inkább a kommunizmus iránti gyűlöletből, mint a köztársaság irányában érzett tisztelet miatt segítették. Ennek következtében a levert felkelés vezetőit letartóztatták, majd sokakat (köztük Karl Liebknechtet és Rosa Luxemburgot) tárgyalás nélkül kivégeztek. Jogichest harcostársához, Rosa Luxemburghoz 15 éven keresztül tartó szerelmi kapcsolat fűzte. Luxemburg meggyilkolása után nyomozásba kezdett. [2] [4] [5] A gyilkosok utáni kutatása közben 1919 márciusában berlini lakásában letartóztatták, és 1919. március 10-én a Berlin-Moabit börtönben egy Ernst Tamschick nevű rendőr-őrmester tarkólövéssel megölte. [6]

Leo Jogiches keeps his personal and love life private. Check back often as we will continue to update this page with new relationship details. Let’s take a look at Leo Jogiches past relationships, ex-girlfriends and previous hookups. Leo Jogiches prefers not to tell the details of marital status & divorce.

Dating is to describe a stage in a person’s life when he or she is actively pursuing romantic relationships with different people. If two unmarried celebrities are seen in public together, they are often described as “dating” which means they were seen in public together, and it is not clear whether they are merely friends, exploring a more intimate relationship, or are romantically involved.

Rosa Luxemburg and Leo Jogiches: Authoritarianism and Ethnic Intolerance

Rosa Luxemburg is considered one of the greatest revolutionaries of the 20th century. Here we would like to draw attention to some of the political ideas expressed by Rosa Luxemburg and her common law husband and fight companion Leo Jogiches. These ideas are not usually discussed.

In the summer of 1894 a Jewish socialist Mill met with Rosa Luxemburg and Leo Jogiches in Zurich . 'I will not retell their silly jokes about the decisions of the conference (Conference of Socialists, held earlier in Vilna - meerov)', Mill wrote, 'but their angriest criticism was directed against its common position, which they branded as 100 percent separatist, as a kind of PPS-ism (Polish Socialist Party, PPS - meerov) on the Jewish worker's street . what we need, they said, is not Yiddish (language of East European Jewry - meerov) or a specific Jewish organization. According to Rosa Luxemburg, we needed the language of the surrounding population and merging with the Christian proletariat. "(1)

The problem was as follows. Russian-Jewish Social Democrats (future members of the Bund, General Jewish Labour Union of Lithuania, Poland and Russia) were in favor of a joint struggle with Russian and Polish socialists against autocracy. They did not support the complete isolation of the Jews or separatism. On the contrary, they advocated joint action with the Russian, Polish and Lithuanian workers. All specifically Jewish that they wanted was the right of the autonomous Jewish worker's revolutionary organizations (federated with Russian, Polish and Lithuanian ones) to exist. They also sought Jewish autonomy and development of the Yiddish language. This language was spoken by about seven or eight million Jews in Eastern Europe.

Luxembourg's position aroused indignation of the Jewish socialists and was not conducive to dialogue and unity of the working people. It is one thing to advocate for an international partnership, alliance, joint struggle and cultural exchange (which does not exclude the possibility of cultural synthesis). But a completely different thing is to demand the dissolution of one nationality within another. Jewish socialists rejected Rosa Luxemburg's offers.

Parallel to these almost anti-Semitic remarks, Luxembourg and Jogiches created the Polish Social-Democratic movement. However, their ideas received little support from the Polish socialists as well. The vast majority of the latter very poorly responded to the ideas of Rosa Luxemburg (2). In 1893, in Vilna the Constituent Congress of the Polish Socialist Party (PPS) was held, where the creation of an independent Polish state was announced the most immediate challenge. The national question was of great importance for the Poles, for the reason that they, like the Jews, were under the authority of the Russian state and subjected to brutal ethnic discrimination.

Unlike today's ultra-leftist cosmopolitans, Polish socialists who followed Rosa Luxemburg (Social Democracy of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania, SDKPiL, established in 1905) still had a national program. That is how it was formulated: "Equality of all nationalities living in the Russian state, providing them with the freedom of cultural development: the establishment of national schools and providing the freedom to use their own language, state autonomy for Poland" (3). As we see, there is no denying, of course, of the existence of nations or peoples.

We do not support the idea of a Polish or any other state. But we tend to assume that one of the reasons for the negative attitude of the majority of Polish socialists to the ideas of Rosa Luxemburg and Leo Jogiches was the latter's commitment to an extreme form of the "internationalism" (and in fact a thinly veiled nationalist preferences of the large nations' culture to the culture of small nations), which we could see by the example of attitudes toward Jews.

However, Rosa Luxemburg remarks about Ukraine and Ukrainians were even harsher. She denied the existence of this people (unlike some other nations): "Ukrainian nationalism in Russia was very different than the Czech, Polish or Finnish one. It was no more than just a fad, grimacing of a few dozens of petty-bourgeois intellectuals, without any roots in economic, political or spiritual sphere of the country, without any historical tradition . Ukraine has never been a nation or state, has never had national culture, except for some reactionary romantic poems by Shevchenko "(4). We believe that such remarks about Ukrainian culture are unfounded and insulting to Ukrainians, as well as the Luxemburg and Jogiches's demand to the Jews to abandon their language.

Rosa Luxemburg and her husband and colleague Leo Jogiches were accused of authoritarianism by their contemporaries. Johan Knif was the leader of the ultra-left group International Communists of Germany. Bolshevik Karl Radek presents his point of view as follows. He (Knif) demanded the immediate establishment of the German Bolshevik Party independently of Rosa Luxemburg. Knif spoke about the danger of Tyszka's dictatorship (Leo Jogiches, ex-husband of Rosa Luxemburg, who was responsible for organization work in SDKPiL and the Spartacus League), which would strangle the German supporters of communism with its centralism. "The German revolution can triumph only as a broad mass movement. Party should not be centralized, as opposed to what Tyszka wants . "

Funnily enough, the German ultra-left Knif, a supporter of broad decentralization and proletarian autonomy, supported the Bolshevik Party, which was the ultra-centralized authoritarian organization, and bacame soon the foundation of a new despotic state in Russia. But the Johan Knif's views can be easily explained: he did not know what had happened in Russia. Internet did not exist, information spread poorly and slowly. Accusations of authoritarianism are much more serious. Jogiches and Luxembourg had been accused of authoritarianism in the past. SDKPiL was governed by Luxembourg and Jogiches in an authoritarian manner. The result was the breakaway of a majority of local organizations of the party.

. Rosa Luxemburg and Leo Jogiches were neither angels nor demons in the Socialist movement of the late 19th - early 20th century. In Luxemburg's works one can find interesting hypotheses and interesting analyses. Nevertheless, her views cannot be adopted by conscious adherents of the social revolution, without (at least) very serious reservations. Rosa and Leo's attitude to the national question reek of national intolerance. Their contempt for the autonomy of local fighting organizations, their rigid centralism and dictatorial aspirations are all interconnected.

Luxembourg and Jogiches believed that Jews and Ukrainians should be dissolved in the mass of the larger influential European nations. Similarly, the autonomy of a local group had to be dissolved in the ambitions of a party center.

1 Jonathan Frankel. Prophecy and Politics. Socialism, Nationalism and Russian Jewry (1862-1917).

3 Program of the Social Democracy of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania (SDKPiL)

5 V. A. Artemov.Karl Radek. The idea and destiny.

I think that this is a pretty bad article. It brings nearly no evidence for its claims. And it brings the "National Question" back in light of the current event in the Ukraine. Because of that I'm really uneasy with the political outlook of the article. So I wrote some hastily notes:

The article treats nationalist groups, who claim to be the sole representative of "their nation", as local fighting organizations who should have "autonomy". (f.e. the Bund, which saw itself as as a sole representative of its "non territorial nation" (the Yiddish speaking Jews, but the Bund was anti zionist) in the whole Russian empire, other groups with "territorial nations" like the Polish or Ukrainian social democrats).

In the next step the article distances itself halfheartedly form nationalism:

"We do not support the idea of a Polish or any other state. But we tend to assume that one of the reasons for the negative attitude of the majority of Polish socialists to the ideas of Rosa Luxemburg and Leo Jogiches was the latter's commitment to an extreme form of the "internationalism" (and in fact a thinly veiled nationalist preferences of the large nations' culture to the culture of small nations), which we could see by the example of attitudes toward Jews."

But it argues that internationalism and missing support for smaller nationalist movements is in reality in itself an nationalism which tries to dissolve smaller nations "in the mass of the larger influential European nations."

This argument seems to popular with leftist who want to see "revolutionary potential" in the movements of small suppressed nationalistic movements. (I learned that while trying to find some background to this article.)
These people say that Lenin and the Bolsheviks had an "abstract "ultra-left" internationalism that effectively does the work of the dominant ethnicity in a given nation-state" before the Bolsheviks changed their view of nationalist movements in the mid 1910s. One example of this view can be found in this article:

To say a few words to the the positions of Rosa Luxemburg (of whose political views I'm not an expert) in this question:
Rosa Luxemburg saw that as an active politician you had to deal with the different nationalist movements, because they were realities. And she tried to analyze how other people like Marx did deal with them:

"The present state of affairs shows how deeply Marx was in error in predicting, sixty years ago, the disappearance of the Czech
nationality, whose vitality the Austrians today find so troublesome. Conversely, he overestimated the international importance of Polish nationalism: this was doomed to decay by the internal development of Poland, a decay which had already set in at that time."

Rosa Luxemburg tried to take the real power of nationalist movements in account. But her general politics are pretty clear. You only support nationalist movements if you think that they will get better conditions for the worker movement. This was not the case in Russia, where there was a chance that the proletariat could create a unified working class movement in the whole tsarist empire.

In her pamphlet "The question of nations and autonomy" she wrote, that "Social Democracy is called upon to realize not the right of nations to self-determination but only the right of the working class, which is exploited and oppressed, of the proletariat, to self-determination." "“The right of nations to self-determination” is at first glance a paraphrase of the old slogan of bourgeois nationalism put forth in all countries at all times"

Luxemburg was an enemy of all separatist tendencies. But she thought that the workers should be able to live and organize undiscriminated in their cultural environment: "Vital for the working class [. ], are the freedom of using its own native language, and the unchecked and unwarped development of national culture (learning, literature, the arts) and normal education of the masses,[. ] – so far as these can be “normal” in the bourgeois system. It is indispensable for the working class to have the same equal national rights as other nationalities in the state enjoy. Political discrimination against a particular nationality is the strongest tool in the hands of the bourgeoisie, which is eager to mask class conflicts and mystify its own proletariat."

Since the 1890s, she fought all movement nationalist movements in Russia, because of that analysis. But her faction lost that fight. Since 1896 "self determination of the nations" was the official credo of the second International, and it was also in the program of the RSDLP and the Bolsheviks. This development got even stronger after 1905, most of the social democratic parties For Rosa Luxemburg this development was part of the reason of the defeat of the Russian Revolution in 1917. This and her idea how the development should have been becomes in her unfinished pamphlet about the Russian revolution. To cite the wider context o the quote used in the article:

"While Lenin and his comrades clearly expected that, as champions of national freedom even to the extent of “separation,” they would turn Finland, the Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, the Baltic countries, the Caucasus, etc., into so many faithful allies of the Russian Revolution, we have instead witnessed the opposite spectacle. One after another, these “nations” used the freshly granted freedom to ally themselves with German imperialism against the Russian Revolution as its mortal enemy [. ]

To be sure, in all these cases, it was really not the “people” who engaged in these reactionary policies, but only the bourgeois and petty-bourgeois classes, who – in sharpest opposition to their own proletarian masses – perverted the “national right of self-determination” into an instrument of their counter-revolutionary class politics. But [. ] it is in this that the utopian, petty-bourgeois character of this nationalistic slogan resides: that in the midst of the crude realities of class society and when class antagonisms are sharpened to the uttermost, it is simply converted into a means of bourgeois class rule.[. ]

Or take the Ukraine. At the beginning of the century, before the tomfoolery of “Ukrainian nationalism” [. ] and Lenin’s hobby of an “independent Ukraine” had been invented, the Ukraine was the stronghold of the Russian revolutionary movement. [. ] Poland and the Baltic lands have been since 1905 the mightiest and most dependable hearths of revolution, and in them the socialist proletariat has played an outstanding role. How does it happen then that in all these lands the counter-revolution suddenly triumphs? The nationalist movement, just because it tore the proletariat loose from Russia, crippled it [. ]

To be sure, without the help of German imperialism, without “the German rifle butts in German fists,”[. ] the Lubinskys and other little scoundrels of the Ukraine, the Erichs and Mannerheims of Finland, and the Baltic barons, would never have gotten the better of the socialist masses of the workers in their respective lands. But national separatism was the Trojan horse inside which the German “comrades,” bayonet in hand, made their entrance into all those lands.The real class antagonisms and relations of military force brought about German intervention. But the Bolsheviks provided the ideology which masked this campaign of counter-revolution they strengthened the position of the bourgeoisie and weakened that of the proletariat.

The best proof is the Ukraine, which was to play so frightful a role in the fate of the Russian Revolution. Ukrainian nationalism in Russia was something quite different from, let us say, Czechish, Polish or Finnish nationalism in that the former was a mere whim, a folly of a few dozen petty-bourgeois intellectuals without the slightest roots in the economic, political or psychological relationships of the country it was without any historical tradition, since the Ukraine never formed a nation or government, was without any national culture, except for the reactionary-romantic poems of Shevschenko."

To end this long comment. I would find it important to to criticizes the autocratic and centralizt way in which Rosa Luxemburg and Leo Jogiches controlled the SKPiL, which combines a lot of the bad old habits of the "old workers movement". But I don't think that this article does that in a good way. Also I think in the light of the current events, that it is important to discuss the danger of trying to find as a nationalistic defined group. I think that Rosa Luxemburg was right that this way "only leads into nationalistic swamp."

At the end some quotes from Rosa Luxemburg to the Bund and the Jewish national question.

Translation: “Leo Jogiches Slain!” by Franz Pfemfert

On 10 March 1919, the revolutionary Leo Jogiches was murdered by far right paramilitaries in Berlin. Like many other socialists hunted down by Gustav Noske’s police forces, the official explanation for his death was that he had been trying to escape arrest.

The erstwhile leader of the Social Democracy of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania has vanished into obscurity. Born in Vilnius in 1867 to a wealthy family, he used his inheritance to finance his political party’s activities. He became acquainted with Rosa Luxemburg during her doctoral studies in Zurich and the pair became life partners in the truest sense: united by the socialist idea and working together on virtually every political task they confronted.

These days, Leo Jogiches is mostly known as Rosa Luxemburg’s lover, through the publication of Red Rosa by Kate Evans and Comrade and Lover by Elzbieta Ettinger. It’s undeniable that by the end of their relationship, he was anything but a good partner. After their separation in 1907, he insisted on working in Rosa Luxemburg’s apartment, despite how uncomfortable it made her. He threatened to kill himself and her new partner Kostya Zetkin. One cannot paper over how unacceptable his behaviour was.

His own contributions to the revolutionary movement are barely traceable to him: but that is how he would have liked it. Karl Radek, who knew him well, recalled in his tribute to Jogiches that ‘a joke ran in party circles that he was so conspiratorial, he didn’t know where he lived himself.’ He utilised a wide variety of pseudonyms across his work in Poland and Germany, and unlike Luxemburg, never made any dazzling public appearances. He called for his comrades to make great sacrifices: but never sacrifices he wouldn’t have made himself. In the 1905 revolution when a party member ran into him in prison, Jogiches chastised him for having been arrested in a coffee house. If he had nothing left to do, Jogiches explained to him, he ought to have gone to sleep so he could do better work, not meet friends for a coffee.

The single-mindedness with which Jogiches pursued the socialist cause may strike us as off-putting at best, and frightening at worst. But the socialist movement needs such personalities as well. When Luxemburg and Liebknecht were imprisoned, it was none other than Jogiches who organised the Spartacist League underground, evading the brutal repression by the authorities. Paul Fröhlich described him as ‘the organiser with an iron will’. It was Leo Jogiches who managed the day-to-day work of the Spartacist League, including the ‘Homeric struggle’ (according to Radek) to get printers to produce Spartacist leaflets at a decent price. Without Jogiches, it remains doubtful that the League could have carried on its programme of agitation amongst workers prior to the November Revolution.

The publication of this short piece is not intended to bring Jogiches ‘out of the shadows’, certainly he was happiest there. Let it serve as a reminder that the history of our movement is filled with those who made the ultimate sacrifices whilst eschewing any personal glory.

Leo Jogiches Slain! By Franz Pfemfert

From Die Aktion, 3 May 1919

After Rosa Luxemburg, Karl Liebknecht and many hundreds more, now the man has been murdered, who the Scheidemann and Eberts feared as much as the victory of freedom. The horde of mercenaries assembled together by Vorwärts advertisements and whipped up by Vorwärts lies surely did not guess what they destroyed when they slaughtered this inexhaustible leader of the proletarian world revolution.

Even to the revolutionary proletariat of Germany, the name Leo Jogiches has only come before their eyes, when its bearer is no longer here. However, the few who knew him personally, who knew his life’s service for the cause of humanity, experienced a catastrophe when they learned of this crime. Leo Jogiches – that was our trust after the murders of Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. You didn’t have to agree completely with all of his expressions of will (e.g. during the war years, when I collaborated with him – Rosa sat in custody, Karl at the front and then in prison – I often was not of his opinion and after the assassinations of Liebknecht and Luxemburg [to have thrown light on these is the achievement of Leo alone!], these differences stood out even more sharply.) But one thing bridged over every divide: Leo Jogiches’ unparalleled devotion to the revolutionary ideal.

Who knows what this demand means: to give yourself up totally as a person and live only for the sake of the cause? To throw your entire being into the service of the spirit and hence deny yourself every personal desire, to go through the world alone as a ‘furnished lodger’ to work for the universal? Whoever takes on this existence for an idea, have they not already proven themselves as a great one?

Leo Jogiches is one of the greats, someone who will never be forgotten by the world proletariat in the imminently approaching dawn of victory!

Leo Jogiches (Imperial States of America)

Leo Jogiches ( July 17, 1867- November 8, 1945) was a Marxist revolutionary, organizer, politician, and general, who ruled as dictator of the German People's Republic from 1937-45. Of Lithuanian origin, Jogiches conducted an affair with Rosa Luxemberg, with whom he helped found the Spartacus League in 1917, which eventually developed into the Communist Party of Germany. As a dedicated party organizer, Jogiches helped the Party win elections in 1933, securing Communist control over Germany. After the death of Chancellor Liebknecht in 1936, and Lenin in 1937, Jogiches emerged the victor of a power struggle within the party, purging Ersnt Thalmann and his moderate faction, and becoming Chancellor

As Germany's power grew, Jogiches decided to launch a war against the capitalist nations in hope of sparking a global revolution. Germany invaded Poland in September 1, 1939, sparking World War II. Although the highly disciplined People's Arm soon stormed much of Europe, it was unable to defeat the allied forces of the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Russian Empire. As the Czar's Army neared Berlin, Jogiches, refusing to accept defeat, lead a final attack on the Russian lines, resulting in his death. Germany fell under Allied occupation soon after.

Leo Jogiches -->

Leo (n) Jogiches (lahir 17 Juli 1867 – meninggal 10 Maret 1919 pada umur 51 tahun juga dikenal dengan nama partainya yaitu Leon Tyszka (Tyska, Tyshko, Tyshka)) adalah seorang Marxis revolusioner aktif di Lithuania, Polandia, dan Jerman bergabung dengan kalangan pekerja sosial demokratis sebelum dipaksa ke pengasingan. Pada tahun 1893 ia membantu membentuk Partai Demokratik Sosial Kerajaan Polandia bersama Rosa Luxemburg.

Antara Luxemburg dan Jogiches terdapat jalinan cerita yang romatis yang berlangsung dalam seluruh kehidupan mereka akan tetapi sampai akhir hayatnya percintaan pasangan ini tdk pernah dapat berlangsung kedalam sebuah pernikahan akan tetapi dalam hal pekerjaan dari keduanya tidak dapat dipisahkan antara Jogiches sebagai pelaksana agenda dengan Luxemburg yang cenderung teoretis.

Jogiches adalah seorang anggota dari Liga Spartakus, yang revolusioner sayap kiri organisasi dari Partai Sosial Demokrat Jerman, yang dibentuk pada awal Perang Dunia I oleh Karl Liebknecht, Luxemburg, Franz Mehring Pada tanggal 1 Januari 1919 di Liga Spartakus menjadi Partai Komunis Jerman.

Liga Spartacus di Jerman dapat disebut sebagai revolusi awal komunis pada tahun 1918/1919, yang gagal, setelah itu Rosa Luxemburg dan Karl Liebknecht diperkirakan dibunuh oleh pasukan pemerintah dan kemudian Jogiches ikut diperkirakan dibunuh di Berlin ketika mencoba untuk menyelidiki sebab kematian dari Rosa Luxemburg dan Karl Liebknecht.

Love Story

In the feverish atmosphere that gripped Europe after the Russian Revolution, there were many who saw insurrection as a gateway to the future: 1919 brought revolutionary uprisings in Budapest, Munich and Berlin. In Germany, the newly installed Social Democratic Government bloodied its hands suppressing the revolts. Since the regular troops could not be relied on, the SPD Defence Minister Gustav Noske gave the notorious Freikorps &ndash forebears of Hitler&rsquos Einsatzgruppen &ndash carte blanche to act against the insurgent crowds. During the weeks of terror that followed, two of the revolutionary leaders, Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht, went into hiding in Berlin. Betrayed, they were arrested on 15 January 1919, taken to the Freikorps divisional headquarters at the Hotel Eden, interrogated and beaten. Luxemburg was thrown, dead or dying, into the Landwehr canal where, months later, her body was found floating on Noske&rsquos orders, it was hurriedly transported to a military base outside Berlin. The woman who talked her way past the grey-coated guards to identify the body &ndash from a scrap of velvet dress, a golden clasp and a &lsquopair of gloves which I had bought&rsquo &ndash and who determinedly drove away with the coffin, ensuring Luxemburg the full honours of the public funeral the Government had been so anxious to avoid, was Mathilde Jacob.

In the biographies she is always described as &lsquoLuxemburg&rsquos secretary&rsquo. Her name flits through accounts of the Spartakus League and the early days of the German Communist Party: a foot-soldier in the German opposition to the First World War a mute, almost faceless presence, waiting outside prisons or bent over a typewriter, banging out the anti-war &lsquoLetters from Spartakus&rsquo. The year after Luxemburg&rsquos death, staying at the house of Luxemburg&rsquos great friend and comrade Clara Zetkin to recover from a bad spell in prison, Jacob began work on a memoir. No great writer, she seems to have been dissatisfied with the result, and made several more attempts over the next decade and a half. Various unfinished drafts went off in the suitcases of friends and colleagues fleeing Germany in the late 1930s in 1939 she entrusted the earliest manuscript &ndash liveliest and most immediate of all, although perhaps, to her anxious eyes, lacking in historical weight &ndash to Ralph Lutz, to deposit at the Hoover Institute at Stanford. (Her own increasingly desperate applications to US Immigration met with no success and in 1942 she, too, was rounded up by grey-coated soldiers she died at Theresienstadt on 14 April 1943.) First published in Germany in 1988, under Jacob&rsquos original title, Rosa Luxemburg and her Friends, in War and Revolution 1914-19, this urgent little book is compiled mainly from later drafts, with excerpted material from the first version bracketed in the text. It turns out to be a love story, as one might have guessed.

Jacob was born in Berlin in 1873, a Jewish butcher&rsquos daughter, the eldest of eight. Socially and politically fearful, she grew up in rough streets, alert to &lsquothe pogrom mood&rsquo. In photographs she is watchful and anxious, a guarded glance at the camera from a sensitive, fleshy face. A conscientious student &ndash she had to leave the sixth form when her father went bankrupt, and later supported her widowed mother and younger sisters as a stenographer, running a typing and duplicating service from their flat. Luxemburg first came banging on the door in January 1914 and here the memoir begins.

Luxemburg was nearly 43. For more than two decades she had been one of the leading theoreticians of the Socialist International&rsquos Left: an eloquent, caustic voice, urging on Lenin and the Bolsheviks something of the West&rsquos understanding of mass democracy, while trying to infuse the huge Social Democratic Party with some of the revolutionary energies of the East. Dumpy, sharp and charismatic, she limped round Jacob&rsquos flat, trying to help with the duplicating machine. The effect on Jacob was immediate: Luxemburg&rsquos &lsquoall-understanding eyes . . . made my heart beat faster for her&rsquo. With respectful restraint she explains how a conversation with Luxemburg, followed by that &lsquounderstanding look&rsquo and a warm handshake, would leave her &lsquowith hopes renewed&rsquo.

Luxemburg decided to recruit her in the autumn of 1914. War hysteria was at its height. Cheering crowds flocked to the stations to wave the troops off to the Front SPD leaders pledged that the German Empire would take civilisation to Russia on the points of its bayonets. The Socialist International was in ruins, and beleaguered oppositionists had to restart their political agitation from scratch, in the teeth of military censorship and rigid party discipline. Luxemburg was expecting arrest for her anti-war speeches at any moment. Before it came, she invited Jacob to attend her Sunday lecture, and afterwards took her home for a talk. Jacob was shown her paintings and prints &ndash she liked the Turners &ndash and introduced to the cat, who would become her special responsibility. Luxemburg was imprisoned early in 1915 and condemned to spend most of the rest of the war &lsquoadmiring world history&rsquo, as she put it, &lsquothrough the bars of my cage&rsquo. Her closest colleagues (Zetkin, Franz Mehring, Leo Jogiches) recognised that Jacob, anonymous and reliable, was better suited than any of them to play the role of official prison visitor. Tersely, Jacob explains her own dedication: &lsquoIf there was anything to be done for her, my motto was, &ldquoenough is not enough.&rdquo&rsquo

Such a love does not paint a living portrait. Luxemburg springs from these pages in her own words &ndash in the prison letters, quoted here at length, and in the histrionic prose of the anti-war leaflets that Jacob smuggled out from her cell &ndash rather than in her friend&rsquos descriptions. But Jacob&rsquos account of the Spartakus opposition makes a useful corrective to a story often told in triumphalist terms. She stresses instead the apparent &lsquohopelessness&rsquo of the time, the seemingly unending war, the merciless state machine that turned against anyone who resisted, threatening penal servitude if evidence could be produced against them, or the trenches if it could not. By 1917, she writes, many were too frightened to continue the campaign against the war, while &lsquomany others withdrew, tired of fighting, because everything seemed so useless,&rsquo or because they could no longer cope with the strain. Jacob&rsquos role pitted her against state bureaucracy: any tiny thing she might bring the prisoner &ndash pencils, biscuits, socks &ndash required a judge&rsquos permission, and she spent hours in cold waiting rooms and polished corridors, wangling permits and filling out forms. Luxemburg herself could be difficult on prison visits, temperamental or paranoid by turn, ill from the isolation and stress. She was plagued by dreams in which she found herself having to take a stand on her own:

I dreamt I was to sing a song and play my own accompaniment on the piano, at a concert . . . Suddenly, at seven o&rsquoclock in the evening, I realise that I can&rsquot play the piano. Who will accompany me? I must quickly fetch my niece. Then I remember that my niece does not play the piano but the violin &ndash and in horror, I wake up.

When Jacob came to see her, Luxemburg would climb onto her lap and bury her face in her shoulder to cry &ndash &lsquointimacies she would never normally have allowed&rsquo or refuse to see her at all if she suspected Jacob had made some concession to a prison supervisor she loathed.

As the war entered its third year, with food shortages, a deteriorating military situation and growing discontent, Luxemburg was transferred from the capital to the old fortress in Wronke. Feeling &lsquolike a foreign interloper&rsquo, Jacob made the journey deep into occupied Polish territory to find local SPD members (a bargeman and his wife) who would cook for the prisoner, and walked through the forests to gather flowers for her cell: asters, rowan leaves, golden rod, Turkish cherry and willow-leaved sea buckthorn &ndash &lsquothe whole bouquet a veritable autumn painting&rsquo, Luxemburg wrote in her thank-you note, now regaining something of her warm and professional prison persona. They planned holidays together, Jacob writing from a brief trip to Württemberg &ndash this is an account of her own development, too &ndash extolling the museums, Engels&rsquos Peasant War in Germany and, with proto-feminist enthusiasm, Charlotte von Stein. To which Luxemburg replied that it would be a punishment to visit museums and the like &ndash they would just give her a headache. &lsquoThe only relaxation for me is to stroll about or lie in the grass in the sun, where I can examine the tiniest bugs or stare up at the clouds.&rsquo As for Frau von Stein, &lsquoGod punish me, but she was a cow. When Goethe gave her her marching orders she behaved like a screeching washerwoman, and I stand by my opinion that the character of a woman does not show itself where love starts but where it ends.&rsquo

Where it ends: paradoxically, the most intimate portrait in Jacob&rsquos memoir is that of Luxemburg&rsquos éminence grise and former lover, Leo Jogiches. Tall and domineering, with dark blond hair and (according to Luxemburg) golden eyes, Jogiches took control of the underground opposition network in 1916, after Liebknecht&rsquos arrest. He came to Jacob&rsquos flat every night to dictate the anti-war bulletins that made their way through a web of clandestine distributors to the factories, the railways and the Front and her account of him is written with warmth, directness and understanding. Proud and ultra-secretive, with much of his political career still shrouded in mystery, Jogiches has had the misfortune to become known to the world largely through the letters of his ex-mistress (sadly, his letters are lost). Lovers since their student days, they had a 16-year affair which ended in 1907 in a painful and protracted break &ndash death threats the least of it &ndash with Luxemburg accusing him of being cold and dictatorial, of squandering his life, manipulating others, and being incapable of a single generous act (he would never let her give him a baby).

Most striking in Jacob&rsquos account is Jogiches&rsquos patience and tenderness. His responsibilities were phenomenal: shouldering the tasks of those in prison, he took charge of the entire underground anti-war network, as well as determining the political direction of the Spartakus League, yet Jacob remarks on how calmly he used to work. After three or four hours&rsquo dictation he would break off, stretch his arms and relax by telling silly stories about the old days &ndash tales that end with Luxemburg having to sit down on the pavement because she is laughing so much. Then again, speaking of her &lsquoextraordinary kindness&rsquo, he remembered how, as a student in Zurich, he had complained to Luxemburg about not having any tea to drink &ndash his addiction. &lsquoTake this,&rsquo she had said at once, handing him a packet that her parents had just sent from Warsaw. Nearly thirty years later, he was still wondering at this &ndash &lsquoNaturally,&rsquo he quickly adds, &lsquoI didn&rsquot take it.&rsquo This, Jacob suggests, was the real story of their relationship: &lsquoIt was always impossible to get him to accept anything.&rsquo

Trained from his youth in tsarist Vilna in the disciplines of clandestinity, Jogiches clearly felt safe enough with Jacob to think aloud with her. He was doubtful about the strategy of splitting the SPD to found the German Communist Party (KPD), critical of what Jacob calls &lsquothe putschist tendency&rsquo &ndash he and Luxemburg inserted a clause in the infant KPD&rsquos programme declaring that it would never attempt to take power without the majority support of the German working class &ndash and highly sceptical, later, of Liebknecht&rsquos tactics in the uprising of 1919. Almost the last words Jacob records him saying come from the period of strikes and street fighting some months after Luxemburg&rsquos murder, just before he himself was beaten to death &ndash in some accounts, shot in the back &ndash in a police cell: &lsquoWhen all this is over, I might go to Scandinavia. It&rsquos the only place I liked that I&rsquove been to without Rosa. Anywhere else, I would miss her too much.&rsquo

The enormous events that form the background to this memoir are, for the most part, curiously unseen &ndash as if either taken for granted or else too vast to be discussed. The February and October Revolutions, the American intervention, the collapse of the German offensive amid a wave of strikes and mutinies, the abdication of the Kaiser and proclamation of the Republic in November 1918 &ndash all figure mainly by inference here. The last few insurrectionary months after Luxemburg&rsquos release from prison rush by in confusion, Jacob toiling non-stop in the ill-lit Rote Fahne office, typing, collating, organising, while the half-starved crowds of soldiers and workers surge through the street below. There are non-stop meetings, the revolutionary committees sit in permanent session, the word &lsquoBolshevik&rsquo &ndash as threat or example &ndash is brandished everywhere. The SPD Government, struggling for control the High Command, regrouping in defeat the Empire in ruins inflamed ranks of loyalists calling for revenge the chaotic founding of the KPD the Government&rsquos move against Berlin&rsquos leftist police commissioner and the occupation in protest at this action of Vorwärts, the SPD&rsquos newspaper, by Liebknecht and the KPD &ndash all this passes in a blur. More important for Jacob is a tragically one-sided breach with Luxemburg. She, it seems, had invited another young woman to come and live at the Südende flat &ndash &lsquooffering her &ldquomy&rdquo room&rsquo. When the girl arrived, Jacob immediately packed her bags and left. &lsquoFrom then on I could no longer bring myself to visit . . . when I occasionally did so, I suffered such torments that I decided to stop.&rsquo

At the end of the KPD founding conference in late December 1918, Luxemburg formally asked for Jacob to be assigned as her assistant, but then kept her waiting in the crush of events there was a falling out and &lsquono time left for mutual understanding&rsquo. Jacob stormed off to work with Jogiches instead. Luxemburg had no idea what was going on. &lsquoI can&rsquot understand why you don&rsquot come to see me,&rsquo she complained to Jacob, who coldly replied that she &lsquoworked till late every evening with Leo&rsquo. Jacob describes a final meeting in the clandestine flat where Luxemburg and Liebknecht were in hiding, after the January uprising. They read Tolstoy and Goethe together, and Jacob makes an impassioned confession: &lsquoRosa, I was always in the wrong when I felt offended . . . it is madness to want to claim you for myself.&rsquo &lsquoBut Mathilde, don&rsquot you understand . . . my relation with that young girl is a completely different one.&rsquo As they said goodbye &ndash it would be final &ndash &lsquoI kissed her hand. As usual she pulled it away, embraced me and kissed me heartily on the mouth.&rsquo Here, for the first time, one&rsquos confidence in Jacob&rsquos account falters: is the reconciliation simply wish-fulfilment? More convincing is the agony of remorse Jacob describes after Luxemburg is killed, her belief that had she persuaded Luxemburg to leave the intransigent Liebknecht, she might have been saved from the Freikorps, the Hotel Eden and the canal. As she writes to Clara Zetkin, &lsquoMy hatred for Karl is well-founded. It is an emotional thing, but despite my political immaturity my emotions have never betrayed me.&rsquo

Luxemburg&rsquos worries about the Berlin uprising are well known (&lsquoBut what about our programme, Karl?&rsquo): they are not Jacob&rsquos. Arrested for the last time, Luxemburg was not expecting to die &ndash perhaps she did not quite realise that the Bolshevik Revolution had changed everything. All the same, defiance was her choice. &lsquoSun, peace and liberty,&rsquo she had exulted on her release from prison in 1906, &lsquothe finest things in life &ndash apart from sun, storm and liberty.&rsquo &lsquoAnd in the end,&rsquo she wrote in her last letter to Zetkin, &lsquowe have to take history as it comes.&rsquo

Leo Jogiches

Leo Jogiches (17. juli 1867–10. mars 1919) (Tyzka) var ein sosialistisk polsk-tysk politikar, og han var med på grunnlegginga av Det tyske kommunistpartiet KPD. Han var fødd i det polske Vilna, no Vilnius i Litauen, og døydde i Berlin.

Jogiches stod Rosa Luxemburg nært, og var medlem i Sosialdemokratiet i Kongeriket Polen og Litauen (SDKPIL). Han var skeptisk til bolsjevikane si linje i det russiske sosialdemokratiet.

Under første verdskrigen levde han i skjul i Berlin. Saman med blant andre Franz Mehring, Karl Liebknecht og Rosa Luxemburg var han med å grunnleggje Spartakusforbundet og 1. januar 1919 Det tyske kommunistpartiet KPD.

Etter den tyske novemberrevolusjonen, under spartakistoppstanden i Berlin, vart Rosa Luxemburg og Karl Liebknecht myrda av høgre-ekstreme frikorps-soldatar. Dette skjedde 15. januar 1919. Etter dette vart Jogiches leiar i partiet. I mars 1919 vart han arrestert, og den 10. mars vart han myrda i fengselet i Berlin-Moabit.

Leo Jogiches hadde til liks med den fremste teoretikaren i partiet, Rosa Luxemburg, vendt seg imot ei leiande rolle for det russiske kommunistpartiet (bolsjevikane) i internasjonal arbeidarrørsle. Først etter han var død begynte KPD å bli meir avhengig av Moskva. På grunn av misnøye med denne innverknaden frå Moskva såg etterfølgjaren til Jogiches, Paul Levi, seg nøydd til å trekkje seg som partileiar, i februar 1921.

Både Jogiches og Levi var døme på ein type tidlege «luxemburgske» kommunistar som var annleis enn den bolsjevikiske typen som sidan vart bestemmande i kommunismen overalt.

Watch the video: Revisiting Rosa Luxemburg in times of Fascism (January 2022).

Video, Sitemap-Video, Sitemap-Videos