Part 2

In 1912 he was elected representative to the Reichstag by the people of Potsdam-Osthavelland, under the very window of the Kaiser. The announcement of his success was met with wild demonstrations of delight. The sentiments of the surging crowds before the office of the Berlin _Vorwärts_ when the result of the election was made public were voiced by a young workingman, when he exclaimed, "The new voice of freedom will be heard from now on in the Reichstag." In the Reichstag Liebknecht hurled with renewed zeal his invectives against the huge armaments and militarism of Germany.

Liebknecht the man is of the kindest nature and frankest personality. There is to be seen in his make-up no grain of pretentiousness, of false pride--indeed, he usually lunches quite happily upon a sandwich in the train, too busy to find any other time for his meal. His home life is ideal. His present wife--his first died in 1912--is a Russian by birth, a graduate of the University of Heidelberg, and an ideal companion and helpmate.

THE FIRST DAYS

On August 3rd and 4th, 1914, the Social-Democratic members of the Reichstag called a special meeting in order to decide what stand the party should take on the War.

At the first vote taken, ninety-four members were for voting for the budget and only fourteen against. At the last there were only three who held out to the end--Liebknecht, Ledebour, and Haase.

The officials of the party tried to give the impression that there were no differences of opinion in the party, but Liebknecht wrote the following letter, which was published in the _Bürger Zeitung_, Bremen, September 18, 1914.

"I understand that several members of the Socialist Party have written all manner of statements to the press with regard to the deliberations of the Socialist Party in the Reichstag on August 3rd and 4th.

"According to these reports, there were no serious differences of opinion in our party in regard to the political situation and our own position, and decisions to assent to war credits are alleged to have been arrived at unanimously. In order to prevent the dissemination of an inadmissible fiction I feel it to be my duty to put on record the fact that the issues involved gave rise to diametrically opposite views within our party parliament, and these opposing views found expression with a violence hitherto unknown in our deliberations.

"It is also entirely untrue to say that assent to the war credits was given unanimously."

LIEBKNECHT'S VISIT TO BELGIUM

On September 16th, 1914, Liebknecht went to Belgium to inform himself about the situation, and here is what Camille Huysmans, the secretary of the International Socialist Bureau, writes about Liebknecht's visit to Belgium:

To P. Renaudel, Editor of _L'Humanité_.

"MY DEAR RENAUDEL,--Liebknecht came to Belgium on September 16th, 1914. He met several friends, and he came to see me at Brussels, at the Maison du Peuple, in the afternoon. I asked him into my office and we had a conversation which lasted more than two hours. I took him to dinner at a restaurant in the town, and we again talked at length. I invited other friends to meet him, among them our comrade Vandersmirsen. The next morning we went out in two motor cars. We passed through several districts. We tried to see Louvain, but the military authorities would not allow us to do so.

"At Tirlemont, through the mistake of an officer, we were caught in some shrapnel fire, and we had to remain through the engagement. I showed Liebknecht what actually took place. He questioned the Belgians. He talked with the German soldiers. He was thus able to form his own opinion on the spot.

"To sum up: Liebknecht, when he came, knew nothing of what had happened in Belgium. He went away convinced that the Belgians had not been sold to Great Britain, that they had not organized bands of _francs-tireurs_, that they had not assassinated the German wounded, and that the German executions in Belgium were unjustifiable.

"He came to Belgium honorably and honestly to gain information. Anything else is calumny. Those Belgians who regarded the reception by me of a German as an act of treason grasped him effusively by the hand when they learned that he came to find out and to speak the truth.

"Yours,

"CAMILLE HUYSMANS."

DID NOT CHEER THE KAISER

BERLIN, _October_ 24, 1914.

Editor, _Berliner Tageblatt_.

Berlin.

DEAR SIR:

In your report of the meeting of the Prussian Assembly on the 22nd of the month you say that during the reading by Dr. Delbrück of the greetings of the Kaiser the whole house stood (that means, the Social-Democrats also). That does not correspond with the truth. The Social-Democratic members of the Assembly, who were in their places, remained seated.

With reference to the closing speech of the President your report reads that the whole House applauded and took part in the cheers for the Kaiser. That also is not true. Five members (Hofer, Adolf Hoffmann, Paul Hoffmann, Liebknecht and Ströbel,--_S. Z._) of the Social-Democratic representation in the _Landtag_ (that means half) left the room when this speech of the President was delivered.

I would ask you to print the above correction according to paragraph II of the Press Law.

Respectfully,

KARL LIEBKNECHT.

LIEBKNECHT DISAPPROVES OF MAJORITY SOCIALISTS OF GERMANY

The Swiss Socialist paper _Volksrecht_ published in November, 1914, the following statement, signed by Karl Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg, Franz Mehring and Clara Zetkin.

"In the Socialist press of the neutral countries of Sweden, Italy and Switzerland, Comrades Dr. Suedekum and Richard Fischer have attempted to portray the attitude of the German Social-Democrats towards the present War in the light of their own ideas. We feel ourselves forced therefore to explain through the same mediums that we, and certainly many other German Social-Democrats, look on the War, its causes and its character, as well as on the rôle of the Social-Democrats at the present time, from a standpoint which in no way corresponds to that of Dr. Suedekum and Herr Fischer. At the present time the state of martial law makes it impossible for us to give public expression to our views."

REICHSTAG MEETING, DECEMBER 2, 1914, AND LIEBKNECHT'S DOCUMENT EXPLAINING WHY HE VOTED "NO"

At the second War Session of the Reichstag, Dec. 2, 1914, Karl Liebknecht not only voted against the War Budget--the only member of the Reichstag so to vote--but also handed in an explanation of his vote, which the President of the Reichstag refused to allow to be read, nor was it printed in the Parliamentary report. The President banned it on the pretext that it would entail calls to order. The document was sent to the German Press, but not one paper published it.

The full text of the protest was received by way of Switzerland. It runs as follows:

"My vote against the War Credit Bill of to-day is based on the following considerations. This War, desired by none of the people concerned, has not broken out in behalf of the welfare of the German people or any other. It is an Imperialist War, a war over important territories of exploitation for capitalists and financiers. From the point of view of rivalry in armaments, it is a war provoked by the German and Austrian war parties together, in the obscurity of semi-feudalism and of secret diplomacy, to gain an advantage over their opponents. At the same time the war is a Bonapartist effort to disrupt and split the growing movement of the working class.

"The German cry: 'Against Czarism!' is invented for the occasion--just as the present British and French watchwords are invented--to exploit the noblest inclinations and the revolutionary traditions and ideals of the people in stirring up hatred of other peoples.

"Germany, the accomplice of Czarism, the model of reaction until this very day, has no standing as the liberator of the peoples. The liberation of both the Russian and the German people must be their own work.

"The war is no war of German defense. Its historical basis and its course at the start make unacceptable the pretense of the capitalist government that the purpose for which it demands credits is the defense of the Fatherland.

"A speedy peace, a peace without conquests, this is what we must demand. Every effort in this direction must be supported. Only by strengthening jointly and continuously the currents in all the belligerent countries which have such a peace as their object can this bloody slaughter be brought to an end.

"Only a peace based upon the international solidarity of the working class and on the liberty of all the peoples can be a lasting peace. Therefore, it is the duty of the proletariats of all countries to carry on during the war a common Socialistic work in favor of peace.

"I support the relief credits with this reservation: I vote willingly for everything which may relieve the hard fate of our brothers on the battlefield as well as that of the wounded and sick, for whom I feel the deepest compassion. But as a protest against the war, against those who are responsible for it and who have caused it, against those who direct it, against the capitalist purposes for which it is being used, against plans of annexation, against the violation of the neutrality of Belgium and Luxemburg, against unlimited rule of martial law, against the total oblivion of social and political duties of which the Government and classes are still guilty, I vote against the war credits demanded.

KARL LIEBKNECHT.

BERLIN, _December 2, 1914._"

KARL LIEBKNECHT CONDEMNED BY HIS PARTY FOR VOTING "NO" ON DECEMBER 2, 1914, AND HIS ANSWER

In December, 1914, the Social-Democratic representation of the Reichstag censured Karl Liebknecht for voting "No" in the open meeting of the Reichstag.

At a meeting on February 2, 1915, the Reichstag Socialists adopted a resolution condemning his stand and repudiating alleged misleading information he had spread about the Party. To this Liebknecht answered in the _Vorwärts_ of February 5, 1915, as follows:

BERLIN, _February_ 5, 1915.

Editor _Vorwärts_,

BERLIN.

DEAR COMRADE:--

Concerning the resolution adopted by the Social-Democratic Deputies of the Reichstag I wish to remark: (1) I voted against the war credits because the vote for the war credits is in my opinion in sharp contradiction not only to the interests of the proletariat, but also to the resolutions of the Social-Democratic Party and of the International Socialist Convention. And the Social-Democratic Deputies in the Reichstag are not justified in recommending a violation of the Program and party decisions.

In a letter of Dec. 3, 1914, addressed to the Chairman of the Social-Democratic Deputies of the Reichstag I made my stand clear.

(2) Misleading information about the Party I have not given out. The Social-Democratic Deputies in the Reichstag, who are not the proper authorities for such decisions, voted down my motion to postpone making any decision on this point until a thorough discussion had taken place.

KARL LIEBKNECHT.

A NEW YEAR'S GREETING TO ENGLAND

I am pleased to be able to write a message of brotherhood to British Socialists at a time when the ruling classes of Germany and Great Britain are trying by all means in their power to incite bloodthirsty hatred between the two peoples. But it is painful for me to write these lines at a time when our radiant hope of previous days--the Socialist International--lies destroyed on the ground with a thousand expectations, when even many Socialists in the belligerent countries--for Germany is not an exception--have in this most rapacious of all wars of robbery willingly put on the yoke of the chariot of Imperialism, just when the evils of capitalism were becoming more apparent than ever. I am, however, particularly proud and happy to send my greetings to you, to the British Independent Labour Party, who, with our Russian and Servian comrades, have saved the honor of Socialism amidst the madness of national slaughter.

Confusion reigns among the rank and file of the Socialist Army and many blame Socialist principles for our present failure. It is not our principles which have failed, however, but the representatives of those principles. It is not a question of changing our principles, it is a question of applying them to life, of carrying them into action.

All the phrases of "national defense" and the "liberation of the people" with which Imperialism decorates its instruments of murder are but deceiving tinsel. Each Socialist Party has its enemy, the common enemy of the International, in its own country. There it has to fight it. The liberation of each nation must be its own work.

Only blindness can order the continuation of the slaughter until the "enemy" is crushed. The well-being of all nations is inseparably connected; the struggle of the organized working class can only be carried out internationally.

Those who are seven times wise and whose weak souls are easily carried away by the whirls of diplomatic winds and lost in the gulfs of jingoism, say that the labor movement will no longer be international.

The world war which has smashed the International must, however, be realized as a powerful sermon making clear the need for a new International, an International of another kind, with a different force from that which the capitalist powers so easily scattered on August 4, 1914.

Only in the coöperation of the working masses of all countries, in times of war as in times of peace, does the salvation of humanity lie. Nowhere have the masses desired this war. Nowhere do they desire it. Why should they, then, with a loathing for war in their hearts, murder each other to the finish? It would be a sign of weakness, it is said, for any one people to suggest peace; well, let all the people suggest it together. The nation which speaks first will not show weakness but strength. It will win the glory and gratitude of posterity. It is the duty of every Socialist at the present time to be a prophet of international brotherhood, realizing that every word he speaks in favor of socialism and peace, every action he performs for these ideals enflame similar words and actions in other countries, until the flames of the desire for peace shall flare high over all Europe. The example which you and our Russian and Servian comrades have given to the world will have an emulating effect wherever Socialists have been ensnared by the designs of the ruling classes, and I am sure the mass of the British workers will soon rally to the International Labor Party. Already among the German workers there is far greater opposition to the war than is generally supposed, and the louder the echo of the cry for peace in other countries the more vehemently and energetically will they work for peace here. Thus shall the working classes of all the belligerent countries become conscious of the necessity to fight for a peace consistent with the principles of Socialism, a peace without conquest and without humiliation, a peace based not on hatred but on fraternity, not on force but on freedom, a peace which, because of its justice, may be everlasting. In this way, even during the war, the International can be revived and can atone for its previous mistakes. Thus it must revive, a different International, increased not only in numerical strength but in revolutionary fervor, in clearness of vision and in preparedness to overcome the danger of absolutism, of secret diplomacy, and of capitalist conspiracies against peace.

Workers of the World, unite!

Unite in a war against war!

With Socialist greetings,

KARL LIEBKNECHT.

BERLIN, _December, 1914_.

SPEECH DELIVERED AT THE WAR MEETING OF THE PRUSSIAN ASSEMBLY, TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1915

The Censor forbade the printing of the following speech in Germany. It is a clear analysis of the franchise question. Dr. Liebknecht also blames the personal régime and rule of Bureaucracy for the War. According to the _Vorwärts_ reports, when Liebknecht began to speak the Free Conservatives, most of the National Liberals and the Centrum left the chamber in a demonstrative manner.

_Present_: The Minister of the Interior: Discussion about the Prussian electoral reform, care for those disabled by war, and democratization of external politics.

Taking part in the discussion: Dr. Busse (Cons.), V. Papenheim (Cons.), Dr. v. Zedlitz and Neukirch (Free Cons.), v. Loebell (Secretary of Interior), Dr. Friedberg (Natl. Lib.), Cassel (Progressive People's Party), Dr. Liebknecht (Soc.-Dem.).

_Dr. Liebknecht_ (Social-Democrat): Gentlemen, first I wish to protest against the fact that Russian workingmen are treated differently from the civilians of other enemy countries. Such differential treatment cannot be justified--indeed, must be condemned as sharply as possible.

As to the care to be taken of those disabled by war, I can only support the heart-felt words which came from all parts of this house on this question and echoed in our hearts, that we demand action on this matter without delay and do everything possible to keep these unfortunate people from all need and misery. But I do not wish to mistake what experience teaches us--that we have every right to take words uttered in days such as we are passing through with a great deal of criticism and suspicion. On that account I would not like to throw all the words uttered to-day in the scales as solid weight. We will see if, in the future, deeds will follow.

The great zeal with which this all-important question, which arouses all human emotions, was discussed, has for me a special significance because these debates serve to hide the complete silence of the bourgeois parties on the decisive and important suffrage question. ("Very true" from the Soc.-Dem.)

Gentlemen, you can be assured that those who are in the field and the unfortunate invalids in the hospitals will be convinced that everything necessary is done in this important question only when we make it possible for them at the settlement of the question to be guaranteed necessary influence in legislation and administration. (Approval from the Soc.-Dem.) They will not rely on the good will of the ruling parties, and if the good words which were spoken with relation to the care to be taken of the war invalids do not go hand in hand with willingness to give to the mass of the people more rights, to make possible a democratization of Prussia, then they preach to deaf ears even if the words sound so very friendly. ("Very true" from Soc.-Dem.)

Gentlemen, the 27th of February of this year will become a historical day for Prussia. It was a critical day. In the Budget Committee the Minister refused to give any assurance, even of a general nature, about a future suffrage reform; and to-day also we heard nothing about it. The Progressive Party expects, according to the speech delivered by Assemblyman Pachnicke, suffrage reform after the war; they expect at least the secret and the direct vote. The Centrum appeals to its "clear and unmovable" position on the suffrage question, which no one knows (Assemblyman Ströbel, Soc.-Dem., "Very good!"), and explains its present silence by the party truce. The National Liberals put the question of suffrage reform behind the task of winning the war. The Free Conservatives, through Frhr. v. Zedlitz, give a straightforward refusal, which Frhr. v. Zedlitz underlined three times last night in the _Post_. ("Very true" from the Free Conservatives.) I hear again a "Very true" from the midst of the Free Conservatives, and emphasize it again thus--according to them the war has brought out strong counter-reaction against any democratization and Frhr. v. Zedlitz must surely know it, because he warms himself behind the political stove. He considers the discussion of the election reform as superfluous, a discussion which endangers the party truce and which over-balances the discussions about the Budget; and he scoffs at the idea about a general fraternization on the foundation of the introduction of the suffrage law for the Reichstag in Prussia. ("Hear! hear!" from the Soc.-Dem.) The German Conservative Party was silent and by its silence showed that it approved the provoking refusal of Frhr. v. Zedlitz. ("Very true!" from the Soc.-Dem.) To-day also was this approval repeated in an unmistakable sense.

_That clears the situation_, gentlemen,--clears it delightfully. Clearness is especially necessary at this time. ("Very true!" from the Soc.-Dem.) It never was so necessary as to-day, when the word "party truce" and the false conceptions of class harmonies, of unity and unanimity of the people and other beautiful descriptive words about a free German people of the future becloud many a mind. Gentlemen, we are glad that this fog was blown away. The naked truth is: In Prussia everything remains as it was before. Gentlemen, on October 22nd of last year our warning with reference to the election reform was received by this house partly with cold silence and partly with indignant murmur. It was astounding to the gentlemen that the representatives of the third class of Prussian helot voters dared, at this time, to raise the demand of the people. The government was silent then. On February 9th the same performance, and now the Committee's deliberations and the debates of to-day which clarify the situation so well! Everything remains as it was before--that is the significance of the day for Prussia. From the papers we already knew that, gentlemen. Already in September, 1914, upon the victory of the German troops, so many swelled up as "German friends of the people." An apotheosis of Militarism, an apotheosis of Monarchism, an apotheosis of the three-class system of voting and of all "Prussian egotism" we found in the reactionary papers,--in the papers not only of the Conservative Parties but even in those of the so-called Liberal Parties. ("Very true!" from the Soc.-Dem.)

Gentlemen, in 1866 it was said: The schoolmaster, the Prussian schoolmaster was victorious. To-day it is said: the Prussian system of voting is victorious in this war or will be victorious in this war. ("Very true!" from the Soc.-Dem.)

What progress! It will be said, as it was said: The Prussian three-class system of voting was victorious over democracy,--by which Russia is naturally left out of consideration as a good friend of the past and surely as a good friend of the future. The conclusion will be drawn which was drawn in such an open way by Frhr. v. Zedlitz. But I should like to advise you in your own interests not to forget that if this war, especially in the first months, awakened a strong enthusiasm in the German people, you must thank above all the fact that it was to be against Czarism--against the Russian reaction,--("Very true!" from Soc.-Dem.), against barbarism, unrighteousness; that it was thought to be a struggle for the freedom of Europe. ("Very true!" from the Soc.-Dem.)

And, gentlemen, do not forget the disastrous influence the backward conditions in Prussia and in Germany, which conditions were combated by us, had on the attitude of the Neutrals against Germany in this war! ("Very true!" from the Soc.-Dem.)