Autonomous Nationalists: Autonomia Operaia in Italy

Within the nationalist scene these days most are well known with the concept of "autonomous nationalists". But what does the concept of "autonomy" really mean? In a series of articles we will try to explain this by getting a better insight in the origin, theory, practice and future of autonomism and its meaning for revolutionary nationalism.

The origin of the autonomous movement can be found in the leftwing Italian movement of the 1960's, in which the unorganized Autonomia Operaia  (workersautonomy) developed itself. The basis of the trade union started to rebel against the vanguard pretensions of the Communist Party and its bureaucracy. It was this confrontation between the basis and the leadership that changed the behaviour of the Italian proletariat. To fight the old trade union bureaucracy the workers were forced to organize themselves. But this organisation was not a uniform process, but only accured on incidental moments during concrete events (like for instance the Workers uprise in Turin in 1962).    

While this started to develop itself further, the term autonomy got more and more meaning. Not as a symbol for a certain movement, but as a term to indicate a certain form of behavior. There was no concrete organisation, but the organisation took place on a hypodermic level; like circulating forms of struggle within different factories, who got connected with each other again. With this process the trade union basis became a force force to be reckoned with, that on itself was able to force the trade union bureaucracy to take their basis (the proletarians) serious again. Therefore autonomy represents the "mass-vanguard"; a vanguard that is not made up by individuals, but which arises on the basis of specific  battle experiences. In this no organisation structure is imposed from above, but it grows "wild" in the process of the struggle itself. Violence and direct, frontal confrontations against the bureaucracy and the State were seen as a necessary means of action.

In the 70's a new phenomena developed within the autonomous movement, the fase of "organized autonomy". In this time the economic crisis had caused several severe confrontations with the capital, that felt itself cornered by the struggle of committed workers and students. This led to a widening of the revolutionary struggle. As an answer to the workersautonomy  the politics of capital started to develop a form of democratic-reformism; a system with negotiations, mutual agreement, social partners, etc. This process of social reconstruction had as a goal to increase the production and to neutralize the political strength of the industrial workers. In '73 when the last factory occupation occured, it became clear that the industrial struggle was no longer sufficient enough and that the battle terrain needed a widening. This led towards a renewal of the practice and organisation of autonomy.

To become a factor of interest again the concept of autonomy had to be entirely re-developed. From this a new practice of proletarian struggle arose, which was mainly determined by the movement of young proletarians. These young proletarians came from the poor suburban areas and fully rejected the long-term politics of traditional organisations. They wanted to change their lives here and now and were prepared to fight for this. Their problems were from now on seen as political problems. From this grew a tendency that could be described as "organized autonomy", because it had its own specific struggle perspectives and militant methods of struggle. In this tendency all kind of small movements with their own specific details became connected on a national level, without losing their own specific identity. The cultural sphere became more and more explored and parties, concerts and meetings became the most important places where these autonomous groups crystallized themselves.      

At the end of the 1970's different tendencies had developed within the Italian autonomy. On the one hand there was the "organisation project" of autonomy: the idea that autonomy needed an organisational vanguard. On the other hand stood the traditional views about autonomy. They thought that the autonomous movement had to be used as a leverage, to become a new institutional factor which was able to negotiate with the system about new institutional opportunities. Within these two tendencies we find the majority of the autonomous movement, that rejects any attempt to build a Party or institutional movement. These are confronted with the problem of the selforganisation of all movements of all social layers. How do we realize a massive counterforce if the earlier mentioned alternatives are rejected? The answer must be found in the new experiences of the autonomous movement. The autonomous movements counterpractice can be seen as by the movement produced "micro-machines" (free radiostations, free spaces, assemblies), that undermine and destroy the "macro-machine" of the State. The power of the autonomous movement is found in its mobility and dynamics; in the eternal ability to expand its practical, political and cultural power.

Clément and Esteban: The tragedy of Idealism

On the 5th of June a young man, age 18, died in Paris. His life was taken by another young French man, age 20, - although other sources claim that he was not the main cause of the victim's dead. Clément Méric, a young man who was active for a social ideal in the circles of the Action Antifasciste became the victim of Esteban M. , a youngman who was also active within circles of social idealism, the Jeunesse Nationaliste Revolutionaire.

Should we consider this matter as a classical fight between the far "right" and the far "left"? A confrontation of nationalists against socialists, the nation against social politics?

Ninety years ago another viewing point was chosen in the matter of "the nation against social politics". This happened on the "Erweiterten Exekutive der Kommunistische Internationale" on the 20th of June 1923. Better said, from the position of Karl Radek on Leo Schlageter. A tradegy of a national activist, who was active in the Freikorps. Schlageter was a young man of only 29 years old, who gave his life at the hands of the reaction in the struggle for the nation and the liberation from French imperialism.

"When in circles of German fascists, who only want to serve the German people, they cannot understand the meaning of the faith of Schlageter, that would mean Schlageter fell for nothing and they should write on his grave: The wanderer into nowhere." Thus a citation from the Schlageter speech from Radek. Later on in this speech, he would illiustrate how Schlageter in his naive period of 1920 helped to knock down German mineworkers in the Ruhr area, because according to his believes at that time they were the main enemy. An enemy who stood in the way of national liberation. From 11 january 1923 - the invasion of the Ruhr area by French and Belgian imperialists, by the Entente in the name of the French capital - Schlageter was forced to reconsider about his enemy and his idealism. His enemy turned out to be the same as the enemy of the workingclass he hated earlier on; the enemy was capitalism. Therefore Radek forgave his earlier judgment; "Schlageter, the brave soldier of the contra-revolution, deserves to be honored manly and reputable by us, soldiers of the revolution."    

The death of SA-man Horst Wessel, a young man, 23 years of age, is also an example that runs parallel with the tradegy in Paris. The idealist Wessel found his death in his struggle for national and social liberation of the German workingclass. For this struggle he gave up his study together with his ensured bourgeois future. He moved to the neighbourhoods of the lumpenproletariat in Berlin and wanted to marry with a prostitute. A unprecedented act for the, by the bourgeoisie dominated, nationalism of that time. Wessel's struggle was ended in 1930 by a co-warrior for the proletariat, the communist Ali Höhler. Again the reason of this was a conflict between two idealists, who had the same vision, but did not understand each other.  

The nation and socialism do not out-rule each other, on the contrary they fullfill each other. The nation needs socialism as the only security for an equal and sincere society and economy for her people - the working producers and the working class. The ideal of socialism needs the nation for her sense of community as wel as an answer to globalism.

Where the nations of socialism, like the Sovjet Union and the Peoples Republic of China, were held in high regard by the "left", in Southern Europe the working masses, general strike and social care are held in high regard among the far "right". A fight between two idealists - who both stood for the interests of the working masses - let a third party prevail: the bourgeoisie and capitalism. There is nothing that they rather see more than these two parties fighting each other. However when they would both open their eyes - and get the insight that the State is the true enemy - the rule of capitalism and the bourgeois State would soon be dealt with.    

Another important lesson for idealists is that of misuse by their own movements. This is embodied by bureaucracy. The tradegy of the Dutchman Marinus van der Lubbe is probably the most noteworthy if it comes to this. As an idealist and soldier of the workingclass he wanted to make a a real difference for the German proletariat. In the Netherlands he was mocked on many occasions because of his idealism - this because of severe fights with the police and his radical tone in combination with his confused appearence. Many perceived him as a dreamer. When in 1933 in Germany Hitler arose to power, van der Lubbe thought that the working class in Germany would finally come into resistance against the upcoming fascism. Using his last bit of money he travelled towards Berlin; his class fought there, so he had to be there! This however wasn't true, the working class did nothing. Almost defeated by disappointment he tried to go home, but not before he set the Reichstag ablaze, the symbol of parliamentarism. The action succeeded, but he got arrested. His initiative didn't get any support or following from his own movement. Their own ideals were betrayed by their own bureaucrats - even by radical council-communists such as Anton Pannekoek. And so this young "dreamer" who believed in the pretty revolutionary words of his own circles, became outcasted because he wanted to put his words to action for a higher cause then himself: an ideal.

And so it seems Clément and Esteban appear not to be each others opposites. They both belonged to a political movement for revolutionary change. Both were young, belonged to a subculture and were fascinated by violence, driven by myth as a social force. For social justice and equality for people and nation. The hate for the system was important for both, but they - just as Schlageter in the beginning - looked the wrong way. They saw the enemy in each other instead of fighting together against the real enemy: State and capital. A misjudgment and so their respective quests for the right direction was prematurely terminated.  

Let us not limit Clément and Esteban to being martyrs and POW's in their own respective movements. Let this again be an example of how it shouldn't go on. Let the socialist thesis and the nationalist antithesis become a synthesis for a higher goal: the national and socialist liberation of globalisation, wageslavery and an end to the exploitation of one man by another. This in the context of the struggle against bureacracy, the bourgeoisie and capitalism worldwide. Let them not become wanderers into nowhere.

Thus: The  remarkable tradegy of idealism

With thanks to the comrades of the National&Socialist Action
   

Resist Magazine

We are proud to present the very first edition of "Resist magazine". Resist magazine is a publication linked to the Anti-Capitalist Network (ACN/AKN). 

In this first edition:

"Social-Fascism": The Fascism of the Leftwing

1st of May - Get on the streets

Anarchism and Fascism: Antagonists?

National Resistance and Anticapititalist struggle in Italy

The Folk Community as an alternative for Capitalism 

The true roots of Ecological activism

Interview with the Dutch NSA/ANS collective for the ACN/AKN

What is Fascism?

Globalisation and the loss of our Enviroment

The National revolutionary movement in the Weimar Republic 

Greece Ruin concerns us all

The economic crisis; Going along or fight back?

Introduction fo the Dutch section of the ACN

Is there a "Fascist" danger today?

Squatting: still a legitimate mean of action

Squatting is the occupation of property without the permission of the owner. It grew as a reaction to the enormous housing shortage of the sixties. During the crisisyears of '70 and '80 squatting became more popular and a squatters movement developed with a  predominantly "leftwing" ideological character. Therefore squatting as a means of action led to a long and intense debate within the nationalist movement. Since 1 october 2010 squatting is punishable in the Netherlands through the new squatting law, but this doesn't make the discussion about the legitimacy of squatting less important.  

We want to make clear that squatting is NOT an exclusive right of the "leftwing movement". Although historically squatting is associated with the "leftwing movement", they certainly don't have the monopoly on the struggle for housing rights. The residential struggle concerns us ALL. In a time that fellow countrymen have to stay on long waiting lists, which lasts for years, to be in the running for an overpriced "social" rental house, in which fellow countrymen are still wandering the streets without shelter and in which property is massively exploited by unscrupulous landlords and speculators for their own selfish profits, resistance is an absolute duty!

The unlimited victory of capitalism has created a society in which the pursuit of money has become the highest goal in life. Profit and economic growth, how worthless as it maybe, is worshipped, greed and selfishness are present everywhere. Also housing policy has become just another new path for the rich to get richer. The housing shortage is only increased by the policy of homeowners, privatized housing corporations and institutional investors, who demolish houses from an economic perspective, then failing to meet their promise to rebuild affordable social housing. In their vision housing is not a primary necessity of life for the people, but merely a product on which they can make a profit. The housing shortage provides speculators and slumlords a means to raise the rents to maximalize their profits over the welbeing of the people. With this they forfeit their rights on property! Primary needs should not be privatized!  

The same government who failed to provide its people, which they are supposed to represent, with the primary need of housing has now implemented a (squatting) law which offers protection to speculators and slumlords, who enrich themselves by disturbing the balance of the housingsupply. Squatting and other forms of protest against this injustice and the exploitation of our people are a fully legitimate form of resistance!  Housing is an absolute right for every fellow countryman to enjoy!

The squatting law must be seen in the context of the repressive legislation that the establishment uses to oppress the people. Through this repressive legislation they try make every attempt to protest against the mismanagement of the government impossible and they protect the speculators who exploit our people. This law is not and will not be an attack on "leftwing structures" or "Antifa strongholds", almost all of their significant spaces are already legalized and/ or bought, but an attack on the right of our people to defend themselves and an attack on the right to actively resist against the establishment that destroys her existence and self-determination! Capitalism is meant to subjugate, to oppress and to exploit the people. By means of repressive legislation, like the squatting law, they take away the means of the people to resist the malpractices of speculators and slumlords, something the state itself fails to tackle. So support of the squatting law is equal to supporting (even more) repression!            

It's the duty of the nationalist movement to participate in the housing struggle. A means of action like squatting is not to be left unused. By squatting, nationalist autonomous zones can be created, hotbeds of radical resistance. Occupied property can provide living space for fellow countrymen, it can accommodate cultural and social initiatives and much more. The practice of nationalist autonomous zones like "the barracks" in Eindhoven en "the haunted house" in Monster, clearly showed that squatting was and still is a legitimate and necessary means for nationalists to use. With or without a squatting law, squatting will continue!

Source: Vrije Nationalisten Noord-Brabant / Netwerk Nationale Socialisten

The cultural revolution of Mao Zedong

The great proletarian cultural revolution was a movement of students, scholars and young workers against the bureaucratised Communist Party of China. The goal of this movement was to make sure that the revolutionary, militant tendency of the revolution would not be erased. Mao realized that since the Communists came to power in the Peoples Republic of China, the revolutionary anti-Statist Party became precisely like the system before after consolidating its power; an institutionalized and bureaucratised State-party (like the Russian CPSU, the Italian PNF and the German NSDAP before).

The "cultural revolution group" (known as the "Gang of Four" by opponents) took the leadership of the revolutionary movement upon itself. The leading figures of this group were Wang Hongwen, Zhang Chunqiao, Yao Wenyuan and Mao's wife Jiang Qing. She also had the leadership over the group, although Mao himself ofcourse had the final say.

The "cultural revolution group" conducted the movement and in 1966 the cultural revolution was launched. The purpose of this revolution was to save the pure revolutionary doctrine from demise. According to Mao all Chineze were equal, there could be no difference between poor and rich. In this context the newly formed "upperclass" (caste of new "red" bureaucrats) was sent to re-education camps to study the theories of Marx, Lenin and Mao, as wel as to exercise selfcriticism. This was of importance so nobody would deviate from the original doctrine, so that they would not become an anti-popular and reactionary system. The revolutionary element had to be maintained and leading at all costs. The re-education camps lasted untill after the official completion of the cultural revolutionion in 1969, so all could be reminded about the basics of equality and (national) solidarity.            

The old feodal and capitalist society/culture had to be replaced with a new popular revolutionary culture. The new upperclass was sent to farms or industries to participate in fysical labour. The new bosses who normally lived a comfortable life in the city, now had to work on the land or in the fabric where they got the same ammount of food as the workers and farmers. So they would learn to be solidary with the proletariat. This was necessary if one wanted to understand the original doctrine. The Red Guards were indispensible in this revolution, they broke the old capitalist China down to the ground. They had leadership over the re-education camps, where mostly "rightwing elements"* were re-educated (like many teachers, intellectuals and bosses, etc.) so the revolutionary origin would not be forgotten (according to Mao's credo "Never forget the class struggle"). By the re-education of teachers the educational system was cleansed from Western decadent capitalist influences. On a big scale feodal and capitalist art and literature was destroyed, which was seen as harmful and corrupted.          

Why is it so important to learn from this? It's because we stand in the same tradition as the cultural revolution. The cultural revolution is in a sense the second revolution, the socialist revolution, that could only start after the completion of the first national revolution (Nationale Erhebung). If one comes to power the real work starts. The second revolution the Sturm Abteilung pursued, had a lot of similarities with the cultural revolution. Chief of Staff from the SA Ernst Röhm also saw that things were going wrong. Within the NSDAP a new upperclass of bosses and bureaucrats was formed and there was a derogation of the original, purely revolutionary line (the 25-point program).    

He was right. The new upperclass, the Von-Staufenberg-gang, even attempted a coup d'êtat by trying to assassinate Adolf Hitler in 1944. Other prominent figures like Göring and Himmler betrayed the Reich and tried to putch Hitler during the last hours of the Reich to save their own ass.

We learn from the revolutionary struggle against the degradation of Party and State. Mao shows us how a bureaucratised Stateparty can be transformed in a rigorous-radical way to a revolutionary avant garde party aimed at the interests of the masses of the people. Maoism is not Marxism, but represents a national-communist tendency, a typical Chinese form of national-socialism. We hail Mao for the same reasons we hail the RAF and Ché Geuvara, because of their revolutionary warrior spirit and their consistent loyalty towards the armed struggle.

* With "rightwing elements" they meant the new "red" bureaucrats in the Party and State, those who wanted to enter the bourgeois, pro-capitalist route.

Mao inspired the cultural revolution by the statements he made which are bundled in the "Red Book". Some of his famous quotes:

Rebellion is justified!

Bomb the headquarter!

Dare to fight - dare to conquer - all power to the people!

Source: ANS/NSA Den Haag

National Resistance and Anticapitalist struggle in Italy. For a Social Revolution!

Since its inception, Italian Resistenza Nazionale (National Resistance) movement has developed as a form of non-hierarchical militant activism completely disconnected from classical structures such as political parties and leadership centralism. Taking the example from european Autonome Nationalisten front, RN try to express a new type of involvement, a grassroots activism, often individual and independent, in which there are not leaders, bosses, secretaries, managers, owners and more and where each group and individual members come together to achieve commonly agreed objectives.

A sort of 'militant voluntarism', which does not follow ‘fashion political tendencies' or the symbolic stereotyped nationalism, but, based on radical values and irreducibly concepts and with heterogeneous references, creates new paths and a new style of opposition, becoming the point of reference for anyone who really seek an alternative to passive acceptation of the system!

Facing the situation of economical, social and political breakdown, anticapitalism soon emerged like a milestone in our struggle, becoming an important battlefront for RN activists, a complaint against exploitation, greed, violence, imperialism of large corporations, globalization and anti-democratic oligarchy, the rule of profit on protection of the environment, criminal consumerism, against the alienation caused by a system that is based entirely on greed and selfishness.

The new permanent structure of global capitalism (in fact, we do not call this situation ‘a crisis’, because this is not a temporary situation, but the new structural reality of our society) have in fact produced an economical falling down of the European economy that begins to be felt heavily in several nations, like in Italy! Relocations, foreclosures and layoffs are taking place every day across our nation and in many European countries. There is a whole continent that is loosing its factories complex and undergoes almost in silence the devastating effects of decades of economic turbocapitalism and globalization.

In 2009 activists around the RN front started the Stop Capitalismo Network (http://stop-capitalismo.blogspot.it/ ), a mix of projects, events and propaganda that tries to make social communication, political and cultural anti-capitalism for an ongoing campaign against capitalism and globalization, trying to spread awareness! Because national anticapitalist politics come from real lives and the real world, they are a necessity, not a theory! We believe that even if you’re thinking big, it’s the small things you do every day that make a difference!

So, from the beginning Stop Capitalismo focussed its attention on precarity and criminal flexibility, making several street actions inviting peoples to become aware of the fact that this is a situation that is completely new and different from what we have seen in the past, a STRUCTURAL STANDING with negative effects that will be felt for decades!

We think that spreading awareness of the real situation is the first step toward a Social Revolution! Capitalism has nothing to offer us except an endless cycle of precarity, poverty, exploitation, recession and unemployment. Without understanding that capitalism is not only petty shopping, big malls and stupid consumerism but a system run purely for profit in the interests of privileged at the expense of all the others, a systematic project of exploitation of land and people for financial profit of a small group of élites at the expense of the lives of the masses, we can’t think about a Revolution!

All these experiences make us aware that there is a need of convergence of European national anti-capitalist struggles, that true European national-anticapitalists needed a common strategy and vision. This led in the end of 2011/beginning of 2012 to the birth of ACN/AKN! This is the way forward!

CAPITALISM is burying EUROPE!  Don't sit on the sidelines, join the struggle!

The BVG Strike: A co-operation between National-Socialists and Communists

"It doesn't matter if we are communists or national-socialists, because our stomachs have the same hunger, we must unite to steer the SPD bosses and to accomplish our goal." 

This statement is from a NSBO-assembly during the '30's. This assembly was attended by 350 people, communists as well as national-socialists. The day before, several national-socialists joined a KPD congress and two years later in November 1932 it was finally time to still the "hunger" against the hated system. But what was the attraction between these two seemingly antagonist political movements? And should we take this unique historical situation as an example for the modern national and communist movements?

To answer these questions we have to look at the political and economic relations during the last four years of the Weimar republic. After the first hyperinflation crisis of '23 in the defeated Reich a second wave of economic crisis and social instability hit Germany in '29. The social democrats of the SPD, known as "social fascists" by the communists - fascists pretending to be socialist -, drastically deteriorated the circumstances for the German workers, thereby decreasing wages (up till 8%!) and increasing unemployment. Also the police repression and ban on the Wehrverbande SA and RFB led to discontent among the far right and far left in the political spectrum against the hated "sozi's" (social democrats).
   
During times of total crisis in the Weimar republic the national socialists as well as the communists saw themselves in the first place as socialists and their ideology as the only solution for the bad situation in Germany and that of the German proletariat. Next to the fact that they saw Germany as a semi-colony that was chained by the Diktat of Versailles and its eternal repatriations to the Dawes and later Youngplan, they saw a united enemy in the betrayers of the German social democracy. Both groups knew a strong anti-capitalist tendency. Although their anti-capitalism came from a different angle, this didn’t stop them supporting each other. For instance Ruth Fischer, leader of the leftwing of the KPD (Communist Party), spoke on a nationalist gathering for students in Berlin and met the anti-Semitic anti-capitalist critiques of the NSDAP: "Who comes into resistance against the Jewish capital, is a class warrior! (..) Trample these Jewish capitalists, hang them on lampposts, mash them and break them." Ernst Thalmann, chairman of the KPD, called out for a co-operation with the national socialists: "When strikes are organized in companies, it’s of fundamental importance that Nazi’s are also included in the strike committees". By this he meant the proletarian elements within NSBO and SA - the so called Nazi-prolets (Nazi proletarians).            

Within the transportation company BVG the "brown" workers fraction of the national socialists was represented by the NSBO, the union organization of the NSDAP. The red fraction was represented by the RGO, the Red union opposition of the KPD. Together national socialists and communists founded a central strike leadership that actualized demands such as more salary, a 40 hour workweek, better working conditions and most important the abolition of the agreements system (Hoffmannschen Akkordsystem).

Soon workers without a Party affiliation and members of the ADGB were drawn to the meetings of the national socialists and communists. The KPD remained in a dominant position in the committee, who tried to convert the whole events at the BVG as "an up rise of the class conscious workers masses". But in fact the KPD had lost much influence in most industry and workplaces in Berlin; over 80% of the KPD support was jobless. The national socialists, who formed a minority among the strike leaders, left it unattended because for them the wage demands and struggle against BVG leadership was of foremost importance.

On the 3rd of November 1932 the strike started. Eight national socialists had occupied a tram stop, but were beaten away by the police whilst two SA men were arrested. A half hour later several national socialists and communists in the Reichs capital occupied several tram- and U-bahn stations, stopped the passing transport and removed all passengers from the vehicles. Armed with shields, the protesters put up a blockade against the police, whilst workers were informed to lay down their work. Scraps were attacked and their way to work was blocked. The communists handed out flyers against the SPD and the unions; remarkable was the fact that no single word of criticism of the communist propaganda was aimed against the NSDAP. In the late hours of the 3rd and 4rd of November street fights broke out with the police, streets and vehicles were destroyed and so-called "strike kitchens" appeared. In the heat of the battle many SA, SS and RFB members as well as many non-Party workers joined the protest. In these events the SA could be seen as the main engine of resistance and violence. Some SA members wanted to invigorate the strike by experimenting with explosives, this in disfavor of the communists. The streets of Berlin became the arena of mass activity of big social discontent aimed against the system in which the KPD leadership through the committee and her publications provided theoretical interpretations. But the real vigor on the streets was provided by the SA and SS.            

On the third day of the strike, known as "Red Friday", several people were killed among the national socialists, communists and other workers, among the deadly victims was the well known SA-man Kurt Reppich. 47 people were wounded and 583 arrests followed the events. The leaderships of the NSDAP and KPD in the person of Joseph Goebbels and Walter Ulbricht interfered in the protests to win votes for the upcoming elections which followed on Sunday. Hitler’s decision to call the SA back to the barracks quickly ended the strike. The SA, who formed the true vigor and force behind the strike were now restricted in numbers and could no longer participate in sabotage actions.

Despite the fact that the co-operation during the BVG strike was not a matter of "hand in hand", but rather a matter of "shoulder against shoulder", it cannot be denied that both parties swapped their political interests for economic interests - both longed to change the conditions they lived under. During rallies, gatherings and protests there were clashes of violence between communists and national socialists, but on many occasions they also supported each other because they lived in the same neighborhoods and knew each other pretty well. This took shape in common actions against evictions, rent increase and so on. One must not look in black and white shades if it comes to the relations between communists and national socialists in the Weimar era.  

A RFB-Führer during the strike shouted: "When the Party (KPD) will not fight the struggle against the fascists (the social democratic reaction), we will simply join forces with the Nazi's." Johannes Engel, founder of the NSBO who continued to strike even after the Party leadership in Munich had stopped to support the strike, can be cited through this words: "Who under the current situation does not yet have the courage to openly count himself to the national socialists, has to vote on the communist candidates, but certainly not on the free unions ("Freie Gewerkschaften")! I support the supervisory for the same reason the communists do." Engel his steadfastness costed him the prospect on a better position within the NSDAP.

If there is one thing the events during the BVG strike teach us is that the nationalist and socialist movement does not rule out each other, but complement each other because they have a common enemy: the ruling capitalist system and its crisis.

Source: Nationale Socialistische Actie / Autonome Nationale Socialisten