Workers' Councils

GA 331a — 17 June 1919, Stuttgart

On Cooperation with Labor Parties

Meeting with party representatives of the Stuttgart workers

SOURCE INFORMATION: There are no minutes of this meeting, only a few keywords from the discussion recorded by Rudolf Steiner in his notebook. The present text is an attempt at reconstruction based on these keywords and should therefore be regarded as incomplete and only partially authentic. The documents used are printed in Appendix I. The text passages taken from them are set in italics in the present text.

The chairman mentions that today's meeting will report on the results of yesterday's party meeting. The main issue there was whether activity in the workers' committee of the Federation for Threefolding was compatible with membership in the USPD and, above all, whether supporters of threefolding were allowed to hold party office at all. The question of whether the idea of social threefolding was compatible with Marxist thinking was also discussed.

[Comrade Wörner] reports that he was present that evening. First, they talked about Heuser and his essay, which had been mentioned three days earlier by Dr. Steiner at the last discussion evening with the workers' committees. The author had demanded: “All political power to the workers' councils, all economic power to the works councils, and all intellectual power to the intellectual workers' councils!” In doing so, he had sided with the threefold social order advocates.

[Comrade Wörner]: But one must ask the question: Can someone who writes such things still be considered a communist? The answer is simple: Anyone who can write such things is not a communist. This man has been bribed; he has been bribed by the capitalists to divert the working class from its true goals. And it is from this perspective that one must also view the activities of Rudolf Steiner.

Comrade Stetter: What applies to Heuser applies at least equally to Steiner. His threefold movement is not simply a mischievous action, but a very deliberate maneuver by the bourgeois capitalists. It is pure comedy that is being played out before the workers. We must not simply overlook the class difference; Steiner is not a proletarian, but basically a representative of the bourgeoisie and thus of the capitalist class. And what is the aim of the latter? To take away the proletariat's fighting spirit. They want to render the proletariat incapable of action. And we must not forget: Rudolf Steiner is not a Marxist. Therefore, I recommend studying Karl Marx's “Capital” rather than Steiner's “Key Points.” That was the unanimous opinion that emerged that evening. And this opinion is also shared by a large majority in the workers' council.

Comrade Gönnenwein: What is represented in these “Key Points” is not a private matter for Rudolf Steiner. They provide the necessary images for the recovery of the social organism. And that is by no means a comedy. I can well imagine having economic life to oneself, relying on oneself.

Regarding Wörner's accusation of bribery: If we are talking about bribery, where do we actually have bribery? It is the leaders who bribe the workers, they abuse them in order to build up a position of personal power. What is meant is the thirst for prominence of all those who act as leaders, and they can only do so because it is a fact that people simply want leadership.

This is typical of the course of the meetings so far: the workers do not know the “core issues,” they have no idea about the necessities of social life. They live in mere prejudice: there is Marx's system—that is good—and there is the other—that is not good.

Comrade Wörner: As an academic, Rudolf Steiner certainly has more ability to study books than the worker. But in Berlin, he cannot achieve the slightest thing with his ideas; people there are hostile to his ideas. For the workers' councils there, Marx is the most brilliant man who ever lived, and they believe that it is impossible to write such a confused book against him as Steiner has done. Every reasonable worker, even if he is a member of the USPD, must come to this conclusion.

It is further reported that the members of the action committee were asked to return their mandates to the party. The members of the Workers' Committee objected to this, arguing that something like the threefold social order could only be achieved through a dictatorship of the proletariat, which initially satisfied everyone, and the expulsion of the members of the Workers' Committee from the party was not pursued. This seemed all the more correct to those present because one of the comrades pointed out that the Steiner system was already on the wane again.

When asked whether it would not be a good idea to speak directly with Rudolf Steiner, such a discussion was rejected on the grounds that it was no longer necessary. Marxism provided everything that was necessary, and one only needed to act in accordance with Marx's teachings. Furthermore, Rudolf Steiner did not take a clear class position.

Comrade Benzinger: I regret this decision, which is based solely on the fact that Dr. Steiner also speaks to the bourgeoisie and not only to the workers. This is the reason for the mistrust towards him, which is completely unjustified.

There is agreement that the threefold social order should be pursued without the direct support of the socialist parties. The election of works councils in the spirit of the threefold social order should be pursued externally, in clear distinction from all party efforts. In this sense, further cooperation with the workers' council hardly seems sensible anymore.