Today we mark the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall by
publishing an article from the current edition of Socialist Appeal
which analyses why the events of 1989 have not had the outcome which
the West expected.
You can also access a talk (audio and video) by Heiko Khoo on the events of 1989 – just click here .
Twenty years ago as the Berlin Wall
came tumbling down the bourgeoisie in the west was euphoric, rejoicing
at the “fall of communism.” Twenty years later things look very
different as capitalism has entered its most severe crisis since 1929.
Now a majority in the area covering the former East Germany votes for the left and harks back
to what was positive about the planned economy. After rejecting
Stalinism, they have now had a taste of capitalism and the conclusion
drawn is that socialism is better than capitalism.
year 2009 is a year of many anniversaries, including the murder of
Luxemburg and Liebknecht, the founding of the Communist International
and the Asturian Commune. None of these anniversaries find any echo in
the capitalist press. But there is one anniversary they will not
forget: On the 9th of November, 1989, the Border separating Western
from Eastern Germany was effectively opened.
The fall of the Berlin Wall has passed into history as a synonym for
the collapse of “Communism”. In the last 20 years since those momentous
events, we have witnessed an unprecedented ideological offensive
against the ideas of Marxism on a world scale. This is held up as
decisive proof of the death of Communism, Socialism and Marxism. Not
long ago, it was even presented as the end of history. But since then
the wheel of history has turned several times.
The argument that henceforth the capitalist system was the only
alternative for humanity has been exposed as hollow. The truth is very
different. On the twentieth anniversary of the collapse of Stalinism,
capitalism finds itself in its deepest crisis since the Great
Depression. Millions are faced with a future of unemployment, poverty,
cuts and austerity.
This vicious anti-Communist campaign is being intensified during
this period. The reason for this is not difficult to understand. The
worldwide crisis of capitalism is giving rise to a general questioning
of the “market economy”. There is a revival of interest in Marxist
ideas, which is alarming the bourgeoisie. The new campaign of slanders
is a reflection of fear.
Caricature of socialism
failed in Russia and Eastern Europe was not communism or socialism, in
any sense that this was understood by Marx or Lenin, but a bureaucratic
and totalitarian caricature. Lenin explained that the movement towards
socialism requires the democratic control of industry, society and the
state by the proletariat. Genuine socialism is incompatible with the
rule of a privileged bureaucratic elite, which will inevitably be
accompanied by colossal corruption, nepotism, waste, mismanagement and
chaos.
The nationalised planned economies in the USSR and Eastern Europe
achieved astonishing results in the fields of industry, science, health
and education. But, as Trotsky predicted as early as 1936, the
bureaucratic regime ultimately undermined the nationalised planned
economy and prepared the way for its collapse and the return of
capitalism.
In the 1980s, the USSR had more scientists than the USA, Japan,
Britain and Germany combined, and yet was unable to achieve the same
results as the West. In the vital fields of productivity and living
standards the Soviet Union lagged behind the West. The main reason was
the colossal burden imposed on the Soviet economy by the bureaucracy –
the millions of greedy and corrupt officials that were running the
Soviet Union without any control on the part of the working class.
The suffocating rule of the bureaucracy eventually led to a sharp
fall in the rate of growth in the USSR. As a result, the Soviet Union
was falling behind the West. The costs of maintaining high levels of
military expenditure and the costs of maintaining its grip on Eastern
Europe imposed further strains on the Soviet economy. The emergence of
a new Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1985 signalled a major turn in
the situation.
Gorbachev represented that wing of the Soviet bureaucracy that stood
for reform from the top in order to preserve the regime as a whole.
However, the situation deteriorated further under Gorbachev. This
inevitably led to a crisis, which had an immediate effect in Eastern
Europe, where the crisis of Stalinism was exacerbated by the national
question.
Ferment in Eastern Europe
1989, from one capital to another, a tidal wave of revolt spread,
overthrowing one by one the Stalinist regimes. In Romania, Ceausescu
was overthrown by a revolution and sent to a firing squad. A key factor
in the success of the popular uprisings was the crisis in Russia. In
the past Moscow had sent the Red Army to crush uprising in East Germany
(1953), in Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968). But Gorbachev
understood that this option was no longer possible.
The mass strikes in Poland in the first part of the 1980s were an
early expression of the impasse of the regime. If this magnificent
movement had been led by genuine Marxists, it could have prepared the
ground for a political revolution, not only in Poland but throughout
Eastern Europe. But in the absence of such a leadership, the movement
was derailed by counterrevolutionary elements like Lech Walesa.
At
first, the Polish Stalinists tried to hold the movement down through
repression, but in the end Solidarity had to be legalized and allowed
to participate in parliamentary elections on June 4, 1989. What
followed was a political earthquake. Solidarity candidates captured all
the seats they were allowed to contest. This had a profound effect in
the neighbouring countries.
In Hungary Janos Kadar – in anticipation of what was to come ‑ had
already been removed as General Secretary of the Communist Party the
previous year in 1988 and the regime had adopted a “democracy package”,
including elections. Czechoslovakia was very soon also affected and by
November 20, 1989 the number of protesters assembled in Prague went
from 200,000 the previous day to half-million. A two-hour general
strike was held on November 27.
These dramatic events marked a major turning-point in history. For
almost half a century after World War II the Stalinists had ruled
Eastern Europe with an iron hand. These were monstrous one-Party
states, backed by a powerful apparatus of repression, with army, police
and secret police, and informers in every block of flats, school,
college or factory workshop. It seemed almost impossible that popular
uprisings could ever succeed against the power of a totalitarian state
and its secret police. But in the moment of truth these apparently
invincible regimes were shown to be giants with feet of clay.
East Germany
Of all the regimes of Eastern Europe, the German Democratic Republic
was one of the most industrially and technologically advanced. The
standard of life, although not as high as in West Germany, was good.
There was full employment, and everyone had access to cheap housing,
free medicine and education of a high standard.
the rule of a totalitarian one-Party state, with its ever-present
secret police (the notorious Stasi) with its army of informers, the
corruption of the officials, and the privileges of the elite, were a
source of discontent. Before the erection of the Berlin Wall in 1961,
about 2.5 million East Germans had emigrated to West Germany, many over
the border between East and West Berlin. In order to halt this
haemorrhage, the regime had the Berlin Wall built.
The Wall and other fortifications along the 860-mile
(1,380-kilometre) border shared by East and West Germany succeeded in
stemming the exodus. This action probably helped to boost economic
growth in the GDR. But it caused suffering and hardship for the
families that were divided and it was a propaganda gift to the West,
which presented it as yet another example of “Communist tyranny”.
By the end of the 1980s the situation in the GDR was explosive. The
old Stalinist Erich Honecker was implacably opposed to reform. His
regime even prohibited the circulation of “subversive” publications
from the Soviet Union. On 6 October and 7 October, Gorbachev visited
East Germany to mark the 40th anniversary of the German Democratic
Republic, and he put pressure on the East German leadership to accept
reform. He is quoted as saying: “Wer zu spät kommt, den bestraft das
Leben” (He who is too late is punished by life).
By now the East German people had become openly rebellious.
Opposition movements began to sprout up like mushrooms. These included
the Neues Forum (New Forum), Demokratischer Aufbruch (Democratic Awakening), and Demokratie Jetzt (Democracy Now). The largest opposition movement was created through a Protestant church service at Leipzig’s Nikolaikirche,
German for Church of Saint Nicholas, where each Monday after service
citizens gather outside demanding change in East Germany. However,
these movements were confused and politically naïve.
wave of mass demonstrations now swept through East German cities,
acquiring particular strength in Leipzig. Hundreds of thousands of
people joined these demonstrations. The regime entered into crisis that
led to the removal of the hard-line Stalinist leader, Erich Honecker,
and the resignation of the entire cabinet. Under the pressure of the
mass movement, the new Party leader, Egon Krenz, called for democratic
elections. But the reforms proposed by the regime were too little and
too late.
The “Communist” leaders considered using force but changed their
mind (with a little prodding from Gorbachev). Events were now spinning
out of control. In the following days, one could almost speak of
anarchy: Shops stayed open all hours, a GDR passport served as a free
ticket for public transport. In the words of one observer: “in general
there were more exceptions than rules in those days”. Power was lying in the street, but there was nobody to pick it up.
Faced with a mass revolt, the seemingly all-powerful East German
state collapsed like a house of cards. On November 9, 1989, after
several weeks of mass unrest, the East German government announced that
all GDR citizens could visit West Germany and West Berlin. This was the
signal for a new eruption of the masses. Spontaneously, crowds of East
Germans climbed onto and crossed the Wall, joined by West Germans on
the other side.
Counterrevolution
Berlin Wall was a symbol and a focal point for all that was hated about
the East German regime. The demolition of the Wall began quite
spontaneously. Over the next few weeks, parts of the Wall were chipped
away. Later on industrial equipment was later used to remove almost all
of the rest. There was a celebratory atmosphere, a mood of euphoria,
more like a carnival than a revolution. But that is true of the early
stages of every great revolution, beginning with 1789.
In November of 1989, the population of the GDR was overwhelmed by
emotional moods – a sense of liberation, accomplished by a general
feeling of elation. It was as if a whole nation was experiencing a
general inebriation, and therefore was open to suggestions and sudden
impulses. Overthrowing the old regime proved far easier than anyone had
dared imagine. But, once having overthrown it, what was to be put in
its place? The masses that had brought about the overthrow of the old
regime, knew very well what they did not want, but did not have quite clear what they wanted, and nobody was offering a way out.
All the objective conditions for a political revolution were now
given. The great majority of the population did not want the
restoration of capitalism. They wanted socialism, but with democratic
rights, without the Stasi, without corrupt bureaucrats and without a
dictatorial one-party state. If a genuine Marxist leadership had
existed, this could have led to a political revolution and the
establishment of a workers’ democracy.
of the leaders of the opposition had no clear programme, policy or
perspective, beyond a vague desire for democracy and civil rights.
Photo by ssgt F. Lee Corkran However, the fall of the
Berlin Wall did not result in a political revolution but
counterrevolution in the form of unification with West Germany. This
demand did not feature prominently at the beginning of the
demonstrations. But given the absence of a clear programme on the part
of the leadership, it was introduced and gradually came to occupy a
central role.
Most of the leaders of the opposition had no clear programme, policy
or perspective, beyond a vague desire for democracy and civil rights.
Like nature, politics abhors a vacuum. The presence of a powerful and
prosperous capitalist state next door therefore played a determining
role in filling the vacuum.
West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl was an aggressive representative
of imperialism. He used the most shameless bribery to persuade the East
German people to agree to immediate unification, offering to exchange
their Ostmarks for Deutschmarks on a one-to-one basis. But what Kohl
did not tell the people of East Germany was that unification would not
mean that they would have West German living standards.
In July 1990, the final obstacle to German unification was removed
when Gorbachev agreed to drop Soviet objections to a reunited Germany
within NATO in return for substantial German economic aid to the Soviet
Union. Unification was formally concluded on October 3, 1990.
The masses deceived
people of the GDR had been deceived. They were not told that the
introduction of a market economy would mean mass unemployment, factory
closures and the virtual destruction of large parts of the industrial
base of the GDR, or a general rise in prices, and the demoralization of
a section of the youth, or that they would be looked down upon as
second-class citizens in their own country. They were not told these
things but they have found them out through bitter experience.
Reunification precipitated a disastrous collapse in real Eastern
German GDP, with falls of 15.6 per cent in 1990 and 22.7 per cent in
1991 cumulating to a one third decline. Millions of jobs were lost.
Many eastern factories were bought by western competitors and shut
down. From 1992, East Germany experienced four years of recovery, but
this was followed by stagnation.
Before the Second World War, East German GDP per capita was slightly
above the German average, and both at that time and in the GDR, East
Germany was richer than other eastern European countries. But 20 years
after unification, living standards in East Germany still lag behind
the West. Unemployment is double western levels, and wages are
significantly lower.
In the GDR unemployment was practically unknown. But employment
declined by 3.3 million people from 1989-1992. East German real GDP has
barely risen above its 1989 level, and employment languishes at 60 per
cent of its 1989 level. Currently, unemployment in Germany as a whole
is about 8%, but the figure for East Germany is 12.3%. However, some
unofficial estimates put it as high as 20%, and amongst the youth even
50%.
Women, who achieved a high degree of equality in the GDR, as in
other countries of East Europe, have suffered most. The German
Socio-Economic Panel data for the mid-1990s indicate that 15 per cent
of the eastern female population and ten per cent of the male
population were unemployed.
In July 1990 the “chancellor of unity”, Helmut Kohl, promised: “In a
joint effort we will soon turn [the East German regions]
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Saxony-Anhalt, Brandenburg, Saxony and
Thuringia into flourishing landscapes.” Fifteen years later, a BBC
report admitted that “the statistics are bleak.” Despite the capital
injection of an estimated 1.25 trillion euro (£843bn, $1,550bn), the
East’s unemployment rate was still 18.6% in 2005 (before the present
recession) and in many regions it is more than 25%.
Halle in Saxony-Anhalt, once an important centre for the chemical
industry with more than 315,000 people, has lost nearly a fifth of its
citizens. Before the Berlin Wall came down in 1989, the “chemical
triangle” Leuna-Halle-Bitterfeld gave employment to 100,000 people ‑
now 10,000 jobs remain. Gera once had large textiles and defence
industries, and some uranium mining. They have gone, and much the same
happened in most other state-owned industries since 1989.
Eastern GDP per capita improved from 49 per cent of the western
level in 1991 to 66 per cent in 1995, since which time convergence has
ceased to advance. The economy was growing by about 5.5% a year, but
was not creating many new jobs. As a result the East is emptying. Since
unification some 1.4 million people have moved to the West, most of
them young and well-educated. Emigration and a steep fall in fertility
have caused the eastern population to decline each year since
unification.
It is a supreme irony of history that 20 years after reunification,
people are leaving East Germany, not this time to flee from the Stasi, but to
escape unemployment. Of course, some have done well. The BBC report
says: “Grand bourgeois houses, many riddled with World War II bullet
holes until 1989, have been restored to their old glory.”
Marxism revives
Like many other East Germans, Ralf Wulff said he was delighted about
the fall of the Berlin Wall and to see capitalism replace communism.
But the euphoria did not last long. “It took just a few weeks to
realize what the free market economy was all about,” said Wulff. “It’s
rampant materialism and exploitation. Human beings get lost. We didn’t
have the material comforts but communism still had a lot going for it.”
(Reuters report)
Hans-Juergen Schneider, a 49-year-old trained engineer has been
unemployed since January 2004. He has sent out 286 job applications
since then, without success. “The market economy can’t solve our
problems,” he says, “big business is just grabbing the profits without
accepting any responsibility.” He is not alone. A poll by Der Spiegel stated that 73% of East Germans believe that Karl Marx’s critique of capitalism is still valid.
Another poll published in October 2008 in the magazine Super Illus
stated that 52% of people in Eastern Germany think that the market
economy is “inept” and “rundown”. 43% would prefer a socialist economic
system, because “it protects the small people from financial crises and
other injustices”. 55% rejected banking bailouts by the state.
Of young people (18 to 29 years), who never lived in the GDR, or did
so only briefly, 51% want socialism. The figure for people 30 to 49
years old is 35%. But for those over 50 years it is 46%. These findings
are confirmed in interviews with dozens of ordinary easterners. “We
read about the ‘horrors of capitalism’ in school. They really got that
right. Karl Marx was spot on,” said Thomas Pivitt, a 46-year-old IT
worker from East Berlin. Das Kapital was a best-seller for
publisher Karl-Dietz-Verlag, selling over 1,500 copies in 2008, triple
the number sold in all of 2007 and a 100-fold increase since 1990.
“Everyone thought there would never ever again be any demand for
‘Das Kapital’,” managing director Joern Schuetrumpf told Reuters. “Even
bankers and managers are now reading Das Kapital to try to understand what they’ve been doing to us. Marx is definitely ‘in’ right now,” he said.
The crisis of capitalism has convinced many Germans, both East and
West, that the system has failed. “I thought communism was shit but
capitalism is even worse,” said Hermann Haibel, a 76-year old retired
blacksmith. “The free market is brutal. The capitalist wants to squeeze
out more, more, more,” he said. “I had a pretty good life before the
Wall fell,” he added. “No one worried about money because money didn’t
really matter. You had a job even if you didn’t want one. The communist
idea wasn’t all that bad.”
“I don’t think capitalism is the right system for us,” said Monika
Weber, a 46-year-old city clerk. “The distribution of wealth is unfair.
We’re seeing that now. The little people like me are going to have to
pay for this financial mess with higher taxes because of greedy
bankers.”
Even more significant than opinion polls were the results of the
recent German elections. The Left Party registered a significant
advance, getting almost 30% of the vote in the East. In the East there
is now no majority for the bourgeois parties. What this shows clearly
is that the people of East Germany do not want capitalism but socialism
– not the bureaucratic totalitarian caricature of socialism that they
had before, but genuine democratic socialism – the socialism of Marx,
Engels, Liebknecht and Luxemburg.
