The GDR: “Workers’ and Farmers’ State” or “Second German Dictatorship”?
Between 1949 and 1990, the German Democratic Republic existed as an independent socialist state behind the Iron Curtain. Defining itself in its constitution as “a socialist state of farmers and workers”, it aimed to become a “socialist utopia”, without class boundaries or social restrictions. However, the controversial means of controlling the population employed by the government and the dominance of the Socialist Unity Party (Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands, SED) in East German Politics has led many scholars and experts to claim that the GDR was a “Second German Dictatorship”. Fulbrook (2009: 159) says “A combination of methods was employed to ensure the compliance of the East German populace, including terror as well as attempted ideological indoctrination, as the SED sought both to control the state means of administration, policing and justice, and to exert its influence in education, the media and all avenues of opinion formation.” Characteristics of the GDR resemble those of a twentieth century dictatorship, where oppression and fear were parts of daily life. This essay will examine the GDR, determining ultimately whether it was, as its government suggested, a “workers and farmers state” or, as suggested by many theorists, a “second German dictatorship.”
Jarausch (1999: 341) says that the SED “glorified the GDR as an egalitarian and open society on the path towards a communist utopia.” The SED used various techniques to mould the GDR into a functioning socialist state, where everyone had equal opportunities. By removing the significance of private property and making rent in the GDR notably lower than in the west, the SED were encouraging the previously exploited working classes to ascend through GDR society and improve their lives in the socialist system. The education system, which worked relatively well, was another key aspect of the GDR’s socialist regime. Dennis (1988: 167) said “The educational attainment of pupils is impressive: 85 per cent of all school leavers attain the tenth grade certificate and a highly developed vocational guidance system helps them to find ‘the right job’ and to negotiate the difficult transition from work to school” This served as a great advantage to the SED, as a successful education system ensured a new generation of skilled workers and socialist followers. Workers in the GDR were also given more advantages than ever before; with even farmers being given holidays and benefits such as free childcare. These schemes employed by the SED were introduced with the intention of alluring the populace into a sense of pride that they were living in a state ran by people who care about them. In this respect, it seemed that the GDR really was the state of Workers and Farmers.
These benefits however were achieved at a cost. Providing for its citizens and maintaining a stable economy meant the SED needed a way of controlling the population. One drastic measure they took to control the rapidly falling population was building the Berlin Wall on 13th August 1961. Fulbrook (2009: 166) says “The building of the Wall was an admission that the population had to be contained by a form of national house arrest, imprisonment within its own country.” Kitchen (2006: 338) calls the erection of the Berlin Wall “a declaration of the bankruptcy of the Communist system.” The wall trapped the East German public within the confines of the GDR Borders, separating families and removing any freedom of movement.
One of the GDR’s infamous means of controlling the Population was the Secret Police. According to CNN, in 1989 the Stasi (Staatsicherheit) had 91,000 staffers and 173,000 unofficial collaborators. The Stasi were ubiquitous, and were constantly monitoring the activities of the public, often incarcerating anyone they considered to be a problem for the government. The people therefore were too scared to speak up about the regime, and had no choice but to live with their situation. Kempe (2011: 367) says “Those who might have considered rebellion were deterred by the constant watch kept by the Stasi agents at every factory, school and apartment building.” This totalitarian method of monitoring the public, and the fear this instilled in the people is a key indicator of a dictatorship, and suggests that the SED were only concerned with maintaining their power.
The government used methods of censorship to ensure that the public were focused on the positives of life in the GDR. By controlling the media and hindering free speech, the SED could control public opinion. Jarausch (1999:213) says in reference to Twentieth Century Dictatorships “Using modern media, they perpetuate their rule and instrumentalize and establish hegemony through institutionalized ideologies.” The media in East Germany was crucial for the SED, and thus stood under a very strict system of party control. This is a key indicator of a dictatorship, as is the SED’s reluctance to give up any power or receive any criticism.
In spite of this, it is argued that the GDR offered many opportunities for the “workers and farmers” and gave a new quality of life to the working class. Emphasis in the GDR was placed on society instead of individualism, and the government tried to increase prospects for working class children. Fulbrook (2009: 173) says “At less elevated social levels a new generation was coming to maturity who had achieved upward social maturity through state policies to sponsor the children of workers and peasants. Many of these felt they had something of a stake in a system which had facilitated their rise.” The SED’s focus on equal opportunities had created a new generation of skilled people who believed in the power of the system and appreciated their educational support. Despite this, some experts believe that the class system did exist in a different way. Jarausch (1999: 267) for example claims that “members of the SED elite, functionaries in the lower apparatus and regional leaders derived an aura of special exclusivity from the idea of belonging to the working class.” This goes against the constitution’s claim to be a “workers and farmers state.”
One cannot however undermine the benefits of being a working class person in the GDR. An important achievement of the SED was the revolution in the workplace. Unlike the GDR’s free market western neighbours, the amended constitution gave East Germans the “right and duty to work”, meaning the public would not have to worry about unemployment or poverty. Women were also introduced into the workplace, with 91% of women 16 – 60 in work by the 1980s, and only 6% of women without qualifications, compared to 24% in the FRG. Workers were also given more advantages than ever before, with 80% of people being able to take holidays by the 1980s, free childcare and healthcare provided by most trade unions and special advantages for those doing dangerous jobs. The “workers and farmers state” in this respect had lived up to its name, but the people stilled lacked freedom of speech and the right to decide how their country was governed.
In fact, the German Democratic Republic wasn’t very democratic at all. Patrick and Osmond (2002: 4) say that although the SBZ proclaimed to be a multi-party system, “Many of the decisions taken within the SBZ were reached for pragmatic ‘imperial’ gain rather than ideological correctness.” The SED under Ulbricht and Honecker was the powerhouse of East German Politics, and remained in power throughout almost all of East Germany’s existence. Possibly the most important characteristic of a dictatorship is a ruling party, this was a clear characteristic of the GDR. This illustrates the nature of East German politics, and supports the claim of many scholars that the GDR was in fact a dictatorship.
A key indicator of the success of the “worker’s and farmer’s state” is the happiness of the East German people. The GDR wanted to create a socialist utopia, where everyone was equal and lived an ideal life. It is however debatable how happy the East German public were. Western media represents the GDR as a dreary place, with miserable oppressed citizens under the thumb of communist rule, the validity of this however is questionable. According to a Spiegel online, over half of former East Germans defend the GDR. When asked his opinion of the GDR, a former anonymous GDR citizen said "Most East German citizens had a nice life; I certainly don't think that it's better [in reunified Germany]. In the past there was the Stasi, and today (German Interior Minister Wolfgang) Schäuble -- or the GEZ (the fee collection centre of Germany's public broadcasting institutions) -- are collecting information about us. The people who live on the poverty line today also lack the freedom to travel." This alternative view is shared by many former East Germans, who miss the security of socialism. This data suggests that the SED may have been successful in winning over the East German public, and although the GDR no longer exists, there is a lasting positive legacy of socialism in East Germany.
Having reviewed everything, I must conclude that the German Democratic Republic was in fact a dictatorship, but one of different sorts. Its policies and characteristics resemble those of other dictatorships at the time, and the SED’s reluctance to give up its power is a key indicator of the totalitarian nature of East German Rule. However, unlike most of its fellow dictatorships at the time, the GDR did offer its citizens many benefits, and a revolutionary new system which was achieved through unique, but often immoral means. Referring to the GDR as a “modern dictatorship” I feel is appropriate, as this statement doesn’t exclude the GDR’s success stories in removing the class system and becoming a successful world economy with a well-educated populace and a respectable quality of life. As a state, it strode to help the “workers and farmers” as it claims, but one cannot forget the immoral and dangerous methods employed by the SED for selfish political gain.
Word Count: 1638
Bibliography
Hovestädt, D. (2013). Germany's Stasi past looms over NSA spying furor. Available: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/10/29/opinion/nsa-germany-stasi-shadows/. Last accessed 10th Jan 2014.
Kitchen, M. 2006. A History of Modern Germany 1800 – 2000. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing
Dennis, M. 1988. German Democratic Republic: Politics, Economics and Society. London: Pinter Publishers
Jarausch, K. ed. 1999. Dictatorship as Experience: Towards a Socio-Cultural History of the GDR. New York: Berghahn Books.
Fulbrook, M. 2009. A History of Germany 1918 – 2008: The Divided Nation.3rd ed. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Patrick, M. and Osmond, J. eds., 2002. The Workers’ and Peasants’ State: Communism and society in East Germany under Ulbricht 1945 – 71. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Kempe, F., 2002. Berlin 1961. New York: Penguin Group
Bonstein, J. (2009). Homesick for a Dictatorship: Majority of Eastern Germans Feel Life Better under Communism. Available: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/homesick-for-a-dictatorship-majority-of-eastern-germans-feel-life-better-under-communism-a-634122.html. Last accessed 15th January 2014.