|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Germany
Election in North Rhine-Westphalia
The implications of the SPDs decline
By Statement by the Socialist Equality Party (Germany)
20 May 2005
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The parliamentary election in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia
on May 22 is of great political importance. With slightly less
than 15 million voters, North-Rhine Westphalia is not only the
most densely populated of the 16 German states; containing the
Ruhr district, it also constitutes Germanys largest industrial
center. While many of the coal mines and steel mills in the area
were closed a long time ago, the area between the cities of Dortmund
and Duisburg remains the most concentrated industrial region of
the federal republic.
If the states existing SPD (German Social Democratic
Party)-Green Party government loses powerand at present,
all polls point in such a directionit would entail a major
shift in political forces in the upper house of parliament, leaving
the national government little room for maneuver. Such a development,
following on the heels of the SPDs recent loss of its majority
in the state of Schleswig-Holstein, would very likely seal the
fate of the SPD-Green Party coalition on a national level at the
next scheduled national elections in 2006. Six and a half years
after coming to power, the government is now fighting for its
survival.
For many German workers, casting a vote for the SPD was once
bound up with the hope that an SPD government could, in one way
or another, be influenced or pressured to represent the interests
of working people. The experiences of recent years have made it
clear that this is impossible.
The drastic social cuts imposed by the SPD-Green coalitions
in Berlin and Düsseldorf have been met with strong popular
resistance. As a result, the SPD has suffered heavy losses in
one state election after another. But when election results are
announced, it has become routine for the federal chancellor, Gerhard
Schröder (SPD), or a speaker from the SPD executive committee
to declare before the television cameras that the outcome will
in no way affect the direction of government politics.
When hundreds of thousands took to the streets last year to
protest against the social policies of the SPD-Green coalition,
government spokesmen declared that they would not be swayed by
street protests. Even a continuous stream of resignations
from the SPD failed to shift the orientation of the party leadership.
Quite the opposite! A not insignificant layer within the party
executive committee believe that the social cuts bound up with
the so-called Agenda 2010 and the Hartz IV laws could be implemented
more easily if advocates of social justice and equality quit the
party.
The SPD has broken completely with its grassroots and has thereby
effectively excluded the large majority of the population from
any role in political decision making. Elections have become an
insignificant routine, bringing the same consequences irrespective
of which party wins.
The role of the SPD in Rhine and Ruhr
In no other German state was the relationship between the working
class and the SPD so close and deeply woven as in North Rhine-Westphalia.
Whoever today is approaching the age of 60 between Rhine
and Weser could vote when he wanted and for whom he wanted, but
the result was always the samesocial democracy governed
the state, wrote the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung
(WAZ) some weeks ago.
For nearly four decades, the SPD held the post of prime minister
in the state capital of Düsseldorf12 years under Heinz
Kühn; then 20 years of Johannes Rau, who later became federal
president; then four years of Wolfgang Clement, who now occupies
the post of economics and employment minister in the federal government;
and since autumn 2002, Peer Steinbrück. Where, if not
here, is it possible for the SPD to draw up a balance sheet?
asked the WAZ, which has its own close links to the SPD.
The role of the SPD in North Rhine-Westphalia during the post-war
period began much earlier than when it first took over state government
in 1966. Immediately following the end of the war, when coal and
steel barons such as Krupp von Bohlen and Halbach were behind
bars convicted as war criminals, workers organised the reconstruction
of production and demonstrated calling for the pits to be
owned by the people! In this socialisation movement,
as it was later called, the SPD concentrated its efforts on restricting
the influence of communist works councils.
The SPD took advantage of the widespread revulsion over the
crimes of the Stalinist bureaucracy, which had established a brutal
regime of suppression in the Soviet Union in the late 1920s and
1930s and murdered an entire generation of Marxists in the Moscow
Trials. The first postwar chairman of the SPD, Kurt Schumacher,
designated Communists as red-painted fascists and
exploited the activities of the Stalinists in the Soviet zone
of occupation (SBZ), and later the GDR, for his propaganda.
Following the crushing by Soviet tanks of the workers
rebellion in East Berlin on June 17, 1953, and the Hungarian uprising
in 1956, the Communist Party (KPD) was banned in the federal republicthus
securing the SPD a majority in the trade unions and works councils.
Just as in the first half of the twentieth century, the SPD played
a key role after the Second World War in maintaining and stabilising
bourgeois rule in crisis situations. The reform programmes of
the 1960s and 1970s had this as their primary aim.
This was especially clear in North Rhine-Westphalia. At the
end of the 1950s, a third of the workforce was employed in the
coal and steel industries. Three decades later, at the end of
the 1980s, only 4 percent of workers in the region worked in these
industries.
When domestic coal was replaced at the end of the 1950s by
the cheaper raw material, oil, or by cheaper imported coal, the
mining industry continued to lose its leading position in North
Rhine-Westphalia. Between 1957 and 1967 alone, 51 out of a total
of 141 pits were shut down, the workforce of over 300,000 cut
in half and output reduced by around 20 percent.
In the middle of the 1960s, with public subsidies unable to
secure output, the SPDat the time still an opposition partyagitated
for a re-orientation of coal policy. In December 1964,
SPD opposition leader Heinz Kühn proposed the setting up
of a cross-party common parliamentary coal group.
Representatives of the large parties, the state government, the
federal government, the trade unions and big-business enterprises
jointly worked out models to implement the restructuring of the
industry. They pursued this policy in opposition to striking and
protesting miners.
In the spring of 1966, the decisions made by the common
parliamentary coal group led to violent conflicts with mine
workers. Ninety percent of the workers voted to strike, but the
trade union leaders called off any action before it had begun
and agreed to a miserable compromise. Furious mineworkers responded
by occupying not only the trade union center, but also the state
parliament building. Under this pressure, the SPD took over the
state government, pledging that through subsidies and supplementary
measures no miner would be left destitute.
The common parliamentary coal group became the
forerunner to the concerted action, which was established
by Federal Economic Affairs Minister Karl Schiller (SPD) after
the formation of a so-called Grand Coalition of the
Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and SPD.
The institutionalised cooperation between entrepreneurs, the
government, political parties and the trade unions continued with
the establishment of Ruhr Coal (later Ruhr Coal AG and RAG) in
the autumn of 1968. At that time, 25 coal operators were brought
together in the new enterprise. With 52 mines and more than two-dozen
coking plants it constituted over 80 percent of the German coal
mining industry.
By energetically supporting new industrial projects, the social
democratic government led by Kühn sought to keep the working
population under control and within its sphere of influence. The
opening of a new Opel auto plant on the site of a former pit in
Bochum in 1962 was considered a shining example of this strategy.
At the same time, the SPD consciously sought to separate the
working class from the student and youth protests that broke out
at the end of the 1960s. As part of an international movement,
students and young people took to the streets to protest against
the miserable conditions at German universities, the Nazi past
of federal Chancellor Kurt George Kiesinger, the Vietnam War and
the invasion of Prague by Soviet tanks in 1968.
In September 1969, when steelworkers in Dortmund, Essen and
Duisburg began strike actionagainst the will of its trade
unionand won a significant wage increase, the state government
was alarmed. It responded with a Ruhr development programme
that envisaged a rapid and well-funded development of the education
system aimed at diverting young people as quickly as possible
from radical protest.
Under the direction of Johannes Rau, who since 1970 served
as science minister in Kühns cabinet, higher education
facilities were established from August 1971 onwards in the cities
of Siegen, Wuppertal, Münster, Hagen, Essen, Lemgo, Cologne,
Dortmund, Aachen, Bielefeld, Bochum, Paderborn, Düsseldorf,
Duisburg and Krefeld. One year later, universities were established
in Duisburg, Essen, Paderborn, Wuppertal and Siegen. Today, there
are 14 universities between Duisburg and Dortmund alone. In all
of North Rhine-Westphalia there are 53.
In 1969, the SPD also won control of the national government.
Willy Brandt (SPD) became chancellor of the small coalition
comprising the SPD and the liberal Free Democratic Party (FDP).
One year later, Bavarian Prime Minister Franz Josef Strauss (Christian
Social UnionCSU) tried to topple the Brandt government with
a no-confidence vote. Workers in the Ruhr district played a key
role in defending a government that they expected would improve
their living and working conditions. They threatened to carry
out a political general strike, the opposition backed down and
workers celebrated the failure of the vote of no confidence as
a political victory.
But appearances were deceptive. Against a backdrop of social
concessions and radical phrasesDare to implement more
democracy!the Brandt government increased the powers
of the state. With the so-called radical decree, banning
left wingers from public employment, it suppressed all forms of
socialist opposition. At the peak of ensuing social conflicts,
Brandt then resigned and handed power over to Helmut Schmidt (SPD),
who implemented a drastic cost-cutting programme with the support
of the trade union bureaucracy.
With the intensification of the international economic crisis,
attacks on workers have continuously increased. In this respect,
the century contract, negotiated in 1975 after prolonged
struggles and aimed at easing the wind-down of the coal mining
industry, was no exception. It was financed not by big business,
but by the energy tax on coal, a supplement to the
electricity tariff to be paid by everyone.
The effects of globalisation
The right-wing trajectory of the SPD and the political bankruptcy
of the trade unions have deep objective causes. The globalisation
of production, which enables international companies to scour
the globe for the lowest wages, cheapest raw materials and best
conditions for exploitation, have undermined the basis for national
state welfare policies.
Anyone, therefore, who genuinely believes in the recent critique
of capitalism made by SPD Chairman Franz Münteferingand
sees in it the possibility of a renewal of the SPDis either
a hopeless fool or political scoundrel. Münteferings
platitudes about the need for more social responsibility by business,
and his comparison of international companies and fund managers
with plagues of locusts that have beset the country,
serve only to mask the policies of the Schröder government.
Cynics in the SPD party executive committee have concluded
that in the face of increasing popular resistance, it is advisable
to develop a double strategy. While Müntefering calls for
social responsibility, Chancellor Schröder announces further
tax cuts for big business. With regard to this double strategy,
the Süddeutsche Zeitung commented recently, It
is undoubtedly strange how Franz Müntefering grumbles about
locusts that are eating the country bare while Gerhard Schröder
provides them with additional fodder.
The campaigns waged by former SPD leader Oskar Lafontaine and
the so-called Election Alternative (WASG) serve the
same purpose. Their claim that it is possible to return to the
social reformism of the 1970s is misguided and politically reactionary.
Such illusions serve to keep workers within the orbit of the SPD
and divert them from a socialist orientation.
One only has to look at what is happening in the factories,
such as Opel, to see that the transfer of production to other
countries is not an empty threat, but is taking place continuously.
It is used to play off one location and workforce against another.
Big business pursues an international strategy while the SPD and
trade unions, including their appendages such as the WASG, do
everything to prevent an international strategy of the working
class.
The most important task confronting the working class is to
free itself from these nationally based bureaucracies. However,
this entails more than just organisational measures such as party
resignations. The working class must be politically reoriented,
which requires a new political perspective. Not a single problem
confronting workers in any part of the world can be resolved today
within the national framework.
Wethe Socialist Equality Partydecisively reject
any efforts to revive the SPD and the programme of social democracy.
The issue is not life-support measures for a political corpse,
but a thorough analysis of the consequences of SPD-Green policies
on a national and state level. Only such a political balance sheet
and polemic over the programme and ideology of social democracy
and the Greens can create the conditions for an independent movement
of the working class.
The working class must counter the globalisation of production
and the associated attacks on all social gains and democratic
rights with its own conception of a new society, based not on
egoism, profit and welfare cuts, but rather on solidarity and
social progress. It must take up a political perspective that
places the needs of the population above the profit interests
of big business. This requires an international socialist programme
and the building of a new revolutionary party.
Rarely in history has the contrast between the enormous social
possibilities opened up by the development of technology and increased
productivity, and the destructive way in which this potential
is abused, been so extreme as it is today. Instead of utilising
modern technology for a rational development of society in the
interests of all, the ruling elite exploits the private ownership
of the means of production in order to enrich themselves and terrorise
the rest of society.
Karl Marxs statement that private ownership of the means
of production is incompatible with the social character of the
productive forces is more relevant today than ever before. Only
an international unification of workers on a socialist basis can
bring global companies under social control.
Beginning in the mid-1920s, the Left Opposition led by Leon
Trotsky defended the Marxist programme of international socialism
against the Stalinist degeneration of the Communist parties. The
Left Opposition went on to found the Fourth International, with
which the Partei für Soziale Gleichheit (PSGSocialist
Equality Party) is affiliated today. The PSG was founded in 1997
and, like its predecessor the Bund Sozialistischer Arbeiter (League
of Socialist Workers), is the German section of the International
Committee of the Fourth International.
The collapse of the Stalinist regimes 15 years ago and now
the political bankruptcy of the SPD represent a historical confirmation
of the Trotskyist programme. They pose the necessity of the working
class reorienting itself to the great socialist and democratic
traditions of the workers movement. The most important instrument
for such a political and organisational rearming of the working
class is the World Socialist Web Site (WSWS), which is
published in more than 10 languages by the International Committee
of the Fourth International.
See Also:
60 years since the end of World War II
Editorial of Gleichheit, magazine of the Socialist Equality
Party (Germany)
[11 May 2005]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |