What do you think?
Rate this book
Rosa Luxemburg
Striking the right balance between personal insight and political analysis, this biography traces Rosa Luxemburg's development from a humble Polish girl with a keen interest in herding geese to the most important leader of the German Communist Party.
340 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1928
22 people are currently reading
597 people want to read
About the author
Paul Frölich
17 books1 followerJournalist and left wing political activist who was a founding member of the Communist Party of Germany and founder of the party's paper, Die Rote Fahne. A Communist Party deputy in the Reichstag on two occasions, Frölich was expelled from the Party in 1928, after which he joined the organized German Communist Opposition movement. Frölich is best remembered as a biographer of Rosa Luxemburg.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
August 29, 2013
beautiful. even though i knew she was murdered at the end, i still cried... :(
July 13, 2017
This biography is an intensely passionate, emotionally gripping and highly informative account of the life of an incredible 20th-century figure. Rosa Luxemburg nowadays is unfortunately usually known through badly summarized second-hand accounts at the hands of either liberals, tyros seeking in her figure (though never in her texts, or in facts) an "uncorrupted" version of socialism through the inexistent movement of "Luxemburgism," Trotskyists seeking to find in her yet more proof of the mysteriously infallible words of Trotsky, or ignorant Marxist-Leninists who see her through the lenses of an anachronistic and absolutely outdated inner Party struggle in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Lastly, many still judge her from her "debates" with Lenin, which are for the most part irrelevant today, and only reflect two or three occasions when they debated incredibly specific topics on the nature of Party organization, the national question (which, in Luxemburg's case, was rightfully different, considering Poland), and other moments which say little about the both of them, and much about the context in which they debated. None of these, however, help elucidate Luxemburg's legacy, brilliance, and importance for anyone trying to understand Socialist and Communist history. While Frölich is undoubtedly a partisan in these struggles (caught in the confusing and at times impossible political positionings of the Party purges of the 'left' and 'right' deviationists), his perspective only comes to light toward the end, and it does not, for the most part, take away from the bulk of his achievement.
The most impressive and intellectually enlightening account one can take from this book is to situate Rosa Luxemburg in her time period. Anyone who judges her from the atrocities and near-helplessness of the KPD leadership in January of 1919 is missing the wider scope of her contribution. After the October Revolution in Russia, the German movement moved from the spotlight of the international socialist arena, progressively toward the shadows, especially after 1923, and later, in 1933.
Before then, however, specifically before the vexing about-face of the entirety of the Second International in 1914 (this book convincingly shows that the actions of many Social Democrats at the time was absolutely not determined by the course of the Parties, and could have been otherwise, especially after the resolutions of the Stuttgart congress), the term "social-democrat" was still a radical term, much like in the 19th century the term "republican" was used as a rallying cry for radicalism by Wilhelm Liebknecht and others who sought a better world.
Rosa Luxemburg developed as an activist, theorist, thinker, and successful agitator in this time period when social democracy still frightened the European bourgeoisie. This was a time when Lenin and the Bolsheviks were still seen by everyone as a fringe group, a time when Lenin still saw Kautsky as a leftist (not to mention role-model for him) in the Party, and a time when anyone trying to build a working-class Party would have looked to Germany. Luxemburg also developed at a time when the left-wing of the entirety of the Second International could be counted on one's fingers, and when the women within this group accounted for an even smaller number. She also lived in a time when being a woman, not to mention Jewish, were both factors used against ordinary people, not to mention a radical activist.
Within this context, Rosa Luxemburg rose to challenge Party leaders on a daily basis, earned their respect, and also came to be known as one of the leaders of the left within Social Democracy, along with Jean Jaures, Lenin, and many others who would later become symbols of the working class against the war. On top of this, she was an immigrant, and at times her accent showed, something which made her self-conscious at times, but never stopped her from making the most incisive and critical speeches in front of hundreds of people, including those who wished to see her dead or in prison.
To describe her a brave, radical woman active in the workers movement at the turn of the 20th century still doesn't do her justice. Rosa Luxemburg also wrote profusely, and was one of the very few in the International who studied Marx, Engels, Smith, Ricardo, and many other political economists in order to understand the complex dynamic processes of Capitalism. Her scathing critique of Bernstein's work humiliated a well-respected Socialist of her day, but also surpassed Kautsky's same criticism to the point where his is virtually unknown. Kautsky was the theorist and popularizer of Socialism par-excellence, and yet, Luxemburg's works became known among the most brilliant minds, often surpassing his position in the Party. Her work on the "Mass Strike" introduced a huge number of Socialists in her day to the idea of using the General Strike as a tool (many do not know that before this time period, the concept of "mass strike" was virtually only an anarcho-syndicalist tactic) and pushed the Party to the left progressively from 1905-1907 both theoretically, and through her militancy.
Luxemburg also, perhaps almost uniquely, held the unique position as someone equally acquainted with the Russian, Polish, and German working classes. While at times her knowledge of the inner-Party politics of the Bolsheviks was scant, she nevertheless remained in contact with these three Parties for a long time, influenced and debated their programs and daily questions, and fought alongside a variety of different people in the 1905-1906 period. It should be remembered that during much of the time when she jumped into the frontlines in 1905-1906 and other occasions, Lenin was in exile, which gave him time to write which she did not have.
And yet, we have vast volumes of her written work today, as she, in the midst of numerous dangerous struggles, repeated prison terms, incredibly violent and risky situations, she managed to write works such as "The Accumulation of Capital," whose surrounding debates Frölich convincingly debunks or contextualizes.
Rosa Luxemburg is a hero, and I recommend this biography to anyone trying to understand not only her, but the world of Social Democracy, of Lenin, and of International Socialism during a highly contentious, and dangerous time period.
The most impressive and intellectually enlightening account one can take from this book is to situate Rosa Luxemburg in her time period. Anyone who judges her from the atrocities and near-helplessness of the KPD leadership in January of 1919 is missing the wider scope of her contribution. After the October Revolution in Russia, the German movement moved from the spotlight of the international socialist arena, progressively toward the shadows, especially after 1923, and later, in 1933.
Before then, however, specifically before the vexing about-face of the entirety of the Second International in 1914 (this book convincingly shows that the actions of many Social Democrats at the time was absolutely not determined by the course of the Parties, and could have been otherwise, especially after the resolutions of the Stuttgart congress), the term "social-democrat" was still a radical term, much like in the 19th century the term "republican" was used as a rallying cry for radicalism by Wilhelm Liebknecht and others who sought a better world.
Rosa Luxemburg developed as an activist, theorist, thinker, and successful agitator in this time period when social democracy still frightened the European bourgeoisie. This was a time when Lenin and the Bolsheviks were still seen by everyone as a fringe group, a time when Lenin still saw Kautsky as a leftist (not to mention role-model for him) in the Party, and a time when anyone trying to build a working-class Party would have looked to Germany. Luxemburg also developed at a time when the left-wing of the entirety of the Second International could be counted on one's fingers, and when the women within this group accounted for an even smaller number. She also lived in a time when being a woman, not to mention Jewish, were both factors used against ordinary people, not to mention a radical activist.
Within this context, Rosa Luxemburg rose to challenge Party leaders on a daily basis, earned their respect, and also came to be known as one of the leaders of the left within Social Democracy, along with Jean Jaures, Lenin, and many others who would later become symbols of the working class against the war. On top of this, she was an immigrant, and at times her accent showed, something which made her self-conscious at times, but never stopped her from making the most incisive and critical speeches in front of hundreds of people, including those who wished to see her dead or in prison.
To describe her a brave, radical woman active in the workers movement at the turn of the 20th century still doesn't do her justice. Rosa Luxemburg also wrote profusely, and was one of the very few in the International who studied Marx, Engels, Smith, Ricardo, and many other political economists in order to understand the complex dynamic processes of Capitalism. Her scathing critique of Bernstein's work humiliated a well-respected Socialist of her day, but also surpassed Kautsky's same criticism to the point where his is virtually unknown. Kautsky was the theorist and popularizer of Socialism par-excellence, and yet, Luxemburg's works became known among the most brilliant minds, often surpassing his position in the Party. Her work on the "Mass Strike" introduced a huge number of Socialists in her day to the idea of using the General Strike as a tool (many do not know that before this time period, the concept of "mass strike" was virtually only an anarcho-syndicalist tactic) and pushed the Party to the left progressively from 1905-1907 both theoretically, and through her militancy.
Luxemburg also, perhaps almost uniquely, held the unique position as someone equally acquainted with the Russian, Polish, and German working classes. While at times her knowledge of the inner-Party politics of the Bolsheviks was scant, she nevertheless remained in contact with these three Parties for a long time, influenced and debated their programs and daily questions, and fought alongside a variety of different people in the 1905-1906 period. It should be remembered that during much of the time when she jumped into the frontlines in 1905-1906 and other occasions, Lenin was in exile, which gave him time to write which she did not have.
And yet, we have vast volumes of her written work today, as she, in the midst of numerous dangerous struggles, repeated prison terms, incredibly violent and risky situations, she managed to write works such as "The Accumulation of Capital," whose surrounding debates Frölich convincingly debunks or contextualizes.
Rosa Luxemburg is a hero, and I recommend this biography to anyone trying to understand not only her, but the world of Social Democracy, of Lenin, and of International Socialism during a highly contentious, and dangerous time period.
July 14, 2021
Não correspondeu às - talvez elevadas- expectativas.
O tom predominantemente hagiográfico da biografada, aqui retratada como algo próximo ou pouco menos do que santa do socialismo, não ajudou à adesão entusiasta que esperava sentir com esta leitura.
Porém, não deixa de ser um manancial de informação interessante, não poucas vezes relatado de modo pouco estimulante, mas que veicula informação importante sobre a vida de Rosa Luxemburgo, mulher irrefutavelmente extraordinária e com uma visão do mundo muito mais avançada do que alguns -demasiados-dos contemporâneos desta leitora- à parte de simpatias e concordâncias políticas.
O tom predominantemente hagiográfico da biografada, aqui retratada como algo próximo ou pouco menos do que santa do socialismo, não ajudou à adesão entusiasta que esperava sentir com esta leitura.
Porém, não deixa de ser um manancial de informação interessante, não poucas vezes relatado de modo pouco estimulante, mas que veicula informação importante sobre a vida de Rosa Luxemburgo, mulher irrefutavelmente extraordinária e com uma visão do mundo muito mais avançada do que alguns -demasiados-dos contemporâneos desta leitora- à parte de simpatias e concordâncias políticas.
December 25, 2021
A classic biography of Rosa Luxemburg by a no less interesting historical figure of the German Marxist left, who knew what he was talking about; indeed, to a considerable degree he had lived it.
August 4, 2022
Anarchists, Socialists, Fascists, Communists, Nazi. If not alive, someone else is bound to write another ”Mein Kampf”, and another.
Luxemburg has the sad achievement to have done much more after her death, than while alive.
Luxemburg has the sad achievement to have done much more after her death, than while alive.
January 10, 2020
I highly recommend this. It gives a good introduction to Luxemburg's political struggles and her character as a revolutionary leader. The book is helpful in understanding the degeneration of the Social Democratic Party from a Marxist into a pro-imperialist party. I found it very inspiring and thought-provoking.
September 1, 2019
There's nothing wrong with Rosa Luxemburg. In fact she's captivating and brilliant. This biography, however, is neither. Instead, I think this is a series of unrequited love epistles that some publisher labeled 'biography' to save the author embarrassment.
Read
March 21, 2025my copy was used and fell apart on me so we’ll have to try this again some time
November 10, 2022
I have a lot of mixed feelings about Paul Frölich’s famous biography of Rosa Luxemburg. A lot of what is written in the book strikes me as ultra-left, maybe even Trotskyist; and since I am not expert on Luxemburg’s life and her theories, I find it difficult to determine how much of the ultra-leftism, encompassing everything from dubious economic conclusions to outright anti-Sovietism, is an accurate reflection of Luxemburg’s political ideas or the author’s own bias.
Polish Bourgeoisie vs. Russian Bourgeoisie?
In the chapter “The National Question as a Strategic Problem,” which to my dismay offers little insight into Luxemburg’s violent dispute with Lenin on the right of nations to self-determination, Frölich examines Luxemburg’s opposition to Polish independence from Russia. Among the reasons Luxemburg opposed Polish independence, Frölich writes, was because “Russian and Polish capitalism were bound to each other by a strong solidarity of interests, that they depended on each other and profited from each other” (p. 27). Those “Tsarist measures adduced as evidence of anti-Polish economic policies all aimed in reality at prodding Polish industry into purchasing Russian, rather than foreign, raw materials. And, finally, Russian expansionist policies led Tsarism to form stronger ties with Polish, than with native Russian, industry, because Polish industry was better equipped to take advantage of the expanding market” (p. 27).
Nobody I can think of has ever denied that capitalism was more highly developed in Poland than in Russia. But to argue that tsarist Russia favoured the Polish bourgeoisie and Polish industry over the Russian bourgeoisie and Russian industry, and that tsarist Russia was content being a source of raw materials for Polish industry, seems extremely dubious if not completely false. If this were true, that would mean tsarist Russia was basically captive of Polish capitalism, almost like a reverse colonialism. It would also imply that the Polish bourgeoisie were the impetus for Russian expansionism in Central Asia and other Russian colonial territories; Russia exploited Central Asia for raw materials such as cotton, which, if what Luxemburg (or Frölich?) wrote is true, would mean that Russian expansionism in Central Asia ultimately benefited the bourgeoisie of Poland more than the bourgeoisie of Russia. None of this seems accurate to me.
Too Much
Throughout the book Frölich credits Luxemburg with ideas and successes as if she was single-handedly responsible for them all. This distorts not only the history of Luxemburg but also of those ideas and successes. For example, when examining Luxemburg’s most important theoretical work, The Accumulation of Capital, Frölich credits the theory of imperialism to Luxemburg’s genius — and only her genius. According to Frölich, “Rosa Luxemburg had solved a problem with which economists had wrestled for a fully century, ever since the first great economic crisis in 1815; a problem with had withstood even the intellectual powers of Marx” (p. 158). Just read this passage on page 164:
The Accumulation of Capital did more than solve an abstract theoretical problem: it also proved that imperialism, with all its typical accompaniments — the rivalry of capitalist states for colonies and spheres of influence, for investment possibilities for European capital and raw-material resources; capital export; high protective tariffs; the predominant role of bank and trust capital; the armaments race, etc. — was not an accidental by-product of certain political measures, nor did it serve merely the interests of narrow capitalist cliques (the armaments industries); rather it was a historically necessary phase of capitalist development — in fact, the final stage of that development…”
Not a single word about J. A. Hobson, Rudolph Hilferding, Lenin, etc. The theory of imperialism was an achievement of Luxemburg and Luxemburg alone. This is not the only remarkable achievement attributed to Luxemburg by Frölich. Even the October Revolution of 1917, writes Frölich, “was the first triumph of Rosa Luxemburg’s ideas[!!!]…” (p. 233, emphasis added).
Socialism in One Country and the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact
According to Frölich, Luxemburg opposed “socialism in one country” advocated by Stalin, believing that without a world revolution socialism was doomed to fail in the Soviet Union. Frölich defends Luxemburg’s Trotskyist position by claiming that the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact of 1939 proves without a doubt that socialism had failed in the USSR! (p. 252). What nonsense!
Conclusion
I wouldn’t recommend this book. Rosa Luxemburg was no doubt a brilliant Marxist theoretician and a fiery orator (her condemnation of Kautsky was excellent!), but this book does not provide an accurate historical account of her ideas or her life as a person. Frölich’s book strikes me as a biography of an important Marxist theoretician through the perspective of a disgruntled Trotskyist.
Polish Bourgeoisie vs. Russian Bourgeoisie?
In the chapter “The National Question as a Strategic Problem,” which to my dismay offers little insight into Luxemburg’s violent dispute with Lenin on the right of nations to self-determination, Frölich examines Luxemburg’s opposition to Polish independence from Russia. Among the reasons Luxemburg opposed Polish independence, Frölich writes, was because “Russian and Polish capitalism were bound to each other by a strong solidarity of interests, that they depended on each other and profited from each other” (p. 27). Those “Tsarist measures adduced as evidence of anti-Polish economic policies all aimed in reality at prodding Polish industry into purchasing Russian, rather than foreign, raw materials. And, finally, Russian expansionist policies led Tsarism to form stronger ties with Polish, than with native Russian, industry, because Polish industry was better equipped to take advantage of the expanding market” (p. 27).
Nobody I can think of has ever denied that capitalism was more highly developed in Poland than in Russia. But to argue that tsarist Russia favoured the Polish bourgeoisie and Polish industry over the Russian bourgeoisie and Russian industry, and that tsarist Russia was content being a source of raw materials for Polish industry, seems extremely dubious if not completely false. If this were true, that would mean tsarist Russia was basically captive of Polish capitalism, almost like a reverse colonialism. It would also imply that the Polish bourgeoisie were the impetus for Russian expansionism in Central Asia and other Russian colonial territories; Russia exploited Central Asia for raw materials such as cotton, which, if what Luxemburg (or Frölich?) wrote is true, would mean that Russian expansionism in Central Asia ultimately benefited the bourgeoisie of Poland more than the bourgeoisie of Russia. None of this seems accurate to me.
Too Much
Throughout the book Frölich credits Luxemburg with ideas and successes as if she was single-handedly responsible for them all. This distorts not only the history of Luxemburg but also of those ideas and successes. For example, when examining Luxemburg’s most important theoretical work, The Accumulation of Capital, Frölich credits the theory of imperialism to Luxemburg’s genius — and only her genius. According to Frölich, “Rosa Luxemburg had solved a problem with which economists had wrestled for a fully century, ever since the first great economic crisis in 1815; a problem with had withstood even the intellectual powers of Marx” (p. 158). Just read this passage on page 164:
The Accumulation of Capital did more than solve an abstract theoretical problem: it also proved that imperialism, with all its typical accompaniments — the rivalry of capitalist states for colonies and spheres of influence, for investment possibilities for European capital and raw-material resources; capital export; high protective tariffs; the predominant role of bank and trust capital; the armaments race, etc. — was not an accidental by-product of certain political measures, nor did it serve merely the interests of narrow capitalist cliques (the armaments industries); rather it was a historically necessary phase of capitalist development — in fact, the final stage of that development…”
Not a single word about J. A. Hobson, Rudolph Hilferding, Lenin, etc. The theory of imperialism was an achievement of Luxemburg and Luxemburg alone. This is not the only remarkable achievement attributed to Luxemburg by Frölich. Even the October Revolution of 1917, writes Frölich, “was the first triumph of Rosa Luxemburg’s ideas[!!!]…” (p. 233, emphasis added).
Socialism in One Country and the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact
According to Frölich, Luxemburg opposed “socialism in one country” advocated by Stalin, believing that without a world revolution socialism was doomed to fail in the Soviet Union. Frölich defends Luxemburg’s Trotskyist position by claiming that the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact of 1939 proves without a doubt that socialism had failed in the USSR! (p. 252). What nonsense!
Conclusion
I wouldn’t recommend this book. Rosa Luxemburg was no doubt a brilliant Marxist theoretician and a fiery orator (her condemnation of Kautsky was excellent!), but this book does not provide an accurate historical account of her ideas or her life as a person. Frölich’s book strikes me as a biography of an important Marxist theoretician through the perspective of a disgruntled Trotskyist.
June 3, 2020
An incredible biography, of an incredible humanist, complemented by a great analysis of Loureiro.
August 21, 2017
3.5 stars. I'm glad I read it, but it had its moments and got pretty dry in parts.
October 26, 2021
amei conhecer mais sobre a história e as ideias de Rosa nesse relato apaixonante, mas que infelizmente por vezes se tornou cansativa
September 21, 2019
Biografía escrita por Paul Frölich sobre la revolucionaria alemana nacida en el seno de una familia judía en un poblado llamado Zamosc, al este de la actual Polonia, ️🇵🇱️entonces bajo gobierno del Imperio Ruso. En su juventud se mudó a Varsovia para continuar con sus estudios y desarrollar su vida cada vez más politizada.
Posteriormente se mudaría a Zúrich, donde conoce a Leo Jogiches y Clara Zetkin, mientras el capitalismo polaco se expande ante la complicidad del imperialismo ruso, sin importarles las jornadas laborales de hasta 16 hrs para los trabajadores. Conforme madura su lucha política, se opone a la línea de karl Kautsky. Llega a dirigir el periódico "Sächisische Arbeiterzeitung", pero su visión de la lucha popular choca con los argumentos de otros compañeros del diario. No se detiene y sigue colaborando en otras publicaciones como "Die Neue Zeit" y "Lepziger Volkszeitung".
En esos años, la avanzada formación teórica de Rosa Luxemburgo se pone a prueba en los intensos debates con Plejanov, Kautsky, Leo Jogiches, Eduard Bernstein, Jaurès, y otros socialistas de la época. En esos intercambios políticos se hablaba sobre lo conveniente o no de utilizar la vía electoral para llegar al poder e incidir en mejoras a la clase trabajadora.
Así llegó la Revolución Rusa de 1905 con las primeras huelgas masivas en ese país. Eran los días en que Lenin trabajaba en Rusia y ahora, como líder de la clase obrera, pasaba a la acción. Este evento político comienza a incidir en los obreros alemanes del Ruhr, al declarar más huelgas, pues comienzan a ser aplicadas las ideas revolucionarias de R. Luxemburgo.
En su folleto "La crisis de la socialdemocracia" ("Juniusbroschüre") hace un análisis detallado sobre la realidad a principios del siglo XX del imperialismo europeo y el movimiento obrero en ese continente.
Posteriormente comienzan a usar la huelga política de masas como un instrumento de presión contra las patronales, a fin de conseguir más avances sociales. También fue maestra con grandes dotes pedagógicas, lo cual ayudó a difundir las ideas marxistas en Alemania. Conociendo la teoría económica y social, además de ser una destacada militante de la causa proleteria, Rosa Luxemburgo desmenuzaba "El Capital" a través de preguntas concisas para sacar a sus alumnos del mundo de ensoñación y eliminar los prejuicios en sus mentes.
Al escribir "La acumulación del capital", Rosa Luxemburgo analiza y resuelve problemas económicos que habían sido planteados por Marx. Pasó un año en la cárcel tras oponerse a las guerras imperialistas de Europa que usaban a la clase trabajadora como carne de cañón.
Algunos de los análisis políticos de Luxemburgo se volvieron trágica realidad cuando, deécadas después. un puñado de políticos redujo la democracia en la URSS, misma que fue disuelta en los 90.
Como pensadora política y fundadora de la Liga Espartaquista que posteriormente parió al Partido Comunista Alemán (KPD, por sus siglas en alemán), el gran legado de esta estratega y teórica es imborrable. Sigamos sus pasos de lucha y entrega porque a pesar de estar enferma por largos periodos jamás dejó de ser solidaria con otr@s compañer@s, siempre lo dio todo para mejorar las condiciones de la clase trabajadora. Esa seguridad siempre fue necesaria en los momentos más difíciles los trabajadores alemanes tuvieron al enfrentar a la patronal.
Murió asesinada en enero de 1919 junto a su colega Karl Liebknecht por el gobierno socialdemócrata de Friedrich Ebert, sumiso a la burguesía alemana. Rosa Luxemburgo es una mártir de nuestra clase social, la trabajadora.
Se cumplieron sus palabras a Sonia Liebknecht: "Espero morir en mi puesto, en una batalla callejera o en prisión". Su cráneo fue despedazado a culatazos por esbirros a sueldo. Un siglo después sería asesinado del mismo modo nuestro mártir chileno 🇨🇱️Víctor Jara. Siempre transmitamos esto a las nuevas generaciones para que no se acaba la semilla.
DE = Trotzalledem!
ES = ¡A pesar de todo!
Editorial Ocean Sur
362 páginas.
Posteriormente se mudaría a Zúrich, donde conoce a Leo Jogiches y Clara Zetkin, mientras el capitalismo polaco se expande ante la complicidad del imperialismo ruso, sin importarles las jornadas laborales de hasta 16 hrs para los trabajadores. Conforme madura su lucha política, se opone a la línea de karl Kautsky. Llega a dirigir el periódico "Sächisische Arbeiterzeitung", pero su visión de la lucha popular choca con los argumentos de otros compañeros del diario. No se detiene y sigue colaborando en otras publicaciones como "Die Neue Zeit" y "Lepziger Volkszeitung".
En esos años, la avanzada formación teórica de Rosa Luxemburgo se pone a prueba en los intensos debates con Plejanov, Kautsky, Leo Jogiches, Eduard Bernstein, Jaurès, y otros socialistas de la época. En esos intercambios políticos se hablaba sobre lo conveniente o no de utilizar la vía electoral para llegar al poder e incidir en mejoras a la clase trabajadora.
Así llegó la Revolución Rusa de 1905 con las primeras huelgas masivas en ese país. Eran los días en que Lenin trabajaba en Rusia y ahora, como líder de la clase obrera, pasaba a la acción. Este evento político comienza a incidir en los obreros alemanes del Ruhr, al declarar más huelgas, pues comienzan a ser aplicadas las ideas revolucionarias de R. Luxemburgo.
En su folleto "La crisis de la socialdemocracia" ("Juniusbroschüre") hace un análisis detallado sobre la realidad a principios del siglo XX del imperialismo europeo y el movimiento obrero en ese continente.
Posteriormente comienzan a usar la huelga política de masas como un instrumento de presión contra las patronales, a fin de conseguir más avances sociales. También fue maestra con grandes dotes pedagógicas, lo cual ayudó a difundir las ideas marxistas en Alemania. Conociendo la teoría económica y social, además de ser una destacada militante de la causa proleteria, Rosa Luxemburgo desmenuzaba "El Capital" a través de preguntas concisas para sacar a sus alumnos del mundo de ensoñación y eliminar los prejuicios en sus mentes.
Al escribir "La acumulación del capital", Rosa Luxemburgo analiza y resuelve problemas económicos que habían sido planteados por Marx. Pasó un año en la cárcel tras oponerse a las guerras imperialistas de Europa que usaban a la clase trabajadora como carne de cañón.
Algunos de los análisis políticos de Luxemburgo se volvieron trágica realidad cuando, deécadas después. un puñado de políticos redujo la democracia en la URSS, misma que fue disuelta en los 90.
Como pensadora política y fundadora de la Liga Espartaquista que posteriormente parió al Partido Comunista Alemán (KPD, por sus siglas en alemán), el gran legado de esta estratega y teórica es imborrable. Sigamos sus pasos de lucha y entrega porque a pesar de estar enferma por largos periodos jamás dejó de ser solidaria con otr@s compañer@s, siempre lo dio todo para mejorar las condiciones de la clase trabajadora. Esa seguridad siempre fue necesaria en los momentos más difíciles los trabajadores alemanes tuvieron al enfrentar a la patronal.
Murió asesinada en enero de 1919 junto a su colega Karl Liebknecht por el gobierno socialdemócrata de Friedrich Ebert, sumiso a la burguesía alemana. Rosa Luxemburgo es una mártir de nuestra clase social, la trabajadora.
Se cumplieron sus palabras a Sonia Liebknecht: "Espero morir en mi puesto, en una batalla callejera o en prisión". Su cráneo fue despedazado a culatazos por esbirros a sueldo. Un siglo después sería asesinado del mismo modo nuestro mártir chileno 🇨🇱️Víctor Jara. Siempre transmitamos esto a las nuevas generaciones para que no se acaba la semilla.
DE = Trotzalledem!
ES = ¡A pesar de todo!
Editorial Ocean Sur
362 páginas.
October 31, 2020
A thorough account of Rosa's journey.
February 5, 2024
beautiful read
December 16, 2025
Well written and engaging biography of Luxemburg and the context in which she organized. Gets pretty hagiographic at times which gets a bit tiring.
December 19, 2015
I really enjoyed this biography. It was organized by theme and also chronologically. I've seen several Rosa Luxemburg straßen but never really looked into her life. She spent so much time in jail just for her writing and organizing. I'm glad that it touched upon the German revolution after WWI because it's something that no one really talks about: I mean, it was a bourgeois revolution and the Spartakus folk lost, but to tie all that in with what was happening in the young Soviet Union really brought her ideas to the front. She was all about critique and never following dogma. She was radically democratic and influenced politics today no doubt. This is a shit review but the book was good, heh.
April 29, 2012
Rosa Luxemburg is an active intellectual. She exercised her intellects to process the theories and strategies and then applies them to life. She was passionate in her conviction, her vision for the welfare of the working class that physical discomfort and danger did not put her off her “duties”. Whilst an evenly spread wealth is an ideal, I don’t think this is an ideal which will ever be applicable to real life. This is primarily due to the one human fault / factor, greed, which will always be there. At least 1 in 10 people will fall in this category and I’m being very generous with my estimate.
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews