|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Germany
Germany: PSG election meeting in Giessen
Everything depends on a new political development by
the working class
By our correspondent
31 December 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The Partei für Soziale Gleichheit (PSG, Socialist Equality
Party) held a public meeting on December 18, 2007 to discuss the
partys socialist programme for the Hesse state election.
The meeting was attended by a number of supporters and readers
of the World Socialist Web Site.
The partys lead candidate in Hesse, Helmut Arens, drew
up a devastating balance sheet of the Christian Democratic Union
(CDU) state administration under Roland Koch. He paid particular
attention to the wave of privatisations that has characterized
Kochs neo-liberal economic policies, detailing the prime
example of the privatisation of the Giessen University Health
Clinic. A few days earlier, the WSWS had carried a
report including interviews with clinic staff and student medics
entitled Health does not belong in private hands.
What has been very noticeable so far in the election
campaign is the level of general anger with official politics,
stressed Arens. According to a new opinion poll, only 15 percent
of the population think economic conditions are fair. In Hesse,
this anger is particularly pronounced and perfectly understandable,
in view of the political balance sheet of the Koch administration,
Arens said. However, in all the decisions he has taken, Koch has
been able to count both on the preceding work, and tacit agreement
of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) in Hesse. If the SPD
had seriously sought to mobilise the general population against
the attacks of the Koch government, Arens said, Koch
would never have been able to carry them through.
At the beginning of his contribution, PSG chairman Ulrich Rippert
posed the question: Why is a new party needed? He
dealt with the breath-taking level of social polarization that
has developed in Germany between the rich and poor, and described
the widening gulf that separates a fabulously wealthy elite and
the bottom ten percent of society who are condemned to a life
of poverty. Developments in Germany have often been belatedly
compared to other countries; however, once they begin, they unfold
more violently and more quickly, Rippert explained.
He explained that the central problem facing the electorate
was that despite the existence of widespread and genuine anti-Koch
sentiments, no alternative exists within official politics. A
new SPD state administration would not provide a solution, since
the SPD is responsible for the social attacks being carried out
through its coalition with the CDU in the federal government.
The Left Party of Gregor Gysi and Oskar Lafontaine
also does not represent an alternative, since wherever it has
entered government it has carried out exactly the same welfare
cuts as the other bourgeois parties.
Rippert detailed the scandalously high salaries being paid
to top managers, which are receiving much press coverage at present,
as well as the reaction of many of Germanys works councils
(Betriebsrat -joint union-management boards) and union officials
to this phenomenon. Union functionaries such as Erich Klemm at
Daimler-Chrysler, Uwe Hück of Porsche and Berthold Huber,
the new IG-Metall union chair and a member of the Siemens supervisory
board, have publicly defended and justified this orgy of personal
enrichment. The strike by German train drivers was met by the
other trade unions, headed by Transnet, with open strike-breaking
and defamation.
Rippert then dealt with the conditions in German society today.
He explained that the American credit crisis has unleashed a financial
crisis of international proportions. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
should be understood in this context, as well as the threat to
Iran. As in the periods before the First and Second World Wars,
the imperialist powers are reacting to the crisis with new struggles
over access to the worlds raw materials. Germany was also
preparing to participate in the struggle for these vital oil and
energy resources. In parallel with the social cuts, Germany
is rapidly re-arming, Rippert said. We live in a society
and an economic system that has failed and is headed towards disaster.
Finally, Rippert dealt with a third development that accompanies
the preparations for warthe dismantling of fundamental democratic
rights. Social inequality is incompatible with democracy,
he said. The state is increasingly becoming a police state,
one that monitors and controls its citizens. Social divisions
lead inevitably to social explosions, and it is for this that
the ruling elite is now preparing.
But what form should our preparations take? Rippert
asked at the end of his contribution. It requires a party
that will enable the working class to intervene independently
in events. He called on all those present to actively participate
in the building of such a party.
Lively discussion
Following the contributions, a lively discussion ensued about
the way in which Marxists participate in parliament and how a
socialist programme could be practically implemented.
One participant raised the question: Is it possible to
participate in parliament without becoming opportunist?
A member of the Left Party complained that it is not difficult
to criticise the competition (i.e. the Left Party),
but if one participates in parliament, how can one prevent
being part of the attacks on the general population? Another
asked: If the PSG received over fifty percent of the voices
for the federal parliament, how practically would it implement
socialism?
Rippert countered, What would a society look like in
which we received fifty percent of the vote? He explained
that this would only be possible in a situation that was being
convulsed by violent social conflicts, in which the Marxists had
gained wide influence. Workers will establish factory committees
and workers council to politically challenge the corrupt works
councils and would act independently of them. Such self-organization
of the working class would play a central role in the transformation
of society, Rippert maintained.
Marxists have historically used their participation in bourgeois
parliaments as a platform to educate the general population. The
example of outstanding Marxists such as Karl Liebknecht shows
that it is quite possible to use parliamentary work as a platform
to educate the working class concerning the intrigues of the bourgeoisie,
without betraying the working class.
The politicians of the Left Party, however, objectively play
the role in parliament of containing the growing resistance of
the general population, directing it into harmless channels. Wherever
the Left Party has taken on government responsibility, it adopts
the rightwing programme of the SPD and carries out the dictates
of big business. The best example of this, Rippert said, was in
the Berlin city legislature, where for six years a coalition of
the SPD and Left Party has governed, and where more low-paid jobs
have been created than anywhere else in Germany.
One participant, who reported that she had to survive on welfare
payments, said: It is impossible to take the Left Party
seriously. She explained that those looking for work faced
a job market today that was dominated by temporary labour agencies,
short-term contracts and low-wage labour. She described her own
experiences working at a call centre that only employed people
on a low-wage basis, who were expected to work even if they were
ill.
Rippert reported in detail from Berlin, and pointed to the
connection between the government participation of the Left Party
and an increase in right-wing radicalism. When the Left
Party is involved in pushing through cuts in social programmes,
when the wider population perceives it as being jointly responsible
for low-wage jobs or the closure of libraries and other facilities,
then this inevitably produces very great frustration. This is
then immediately exploited by the right, he explained. For
example, in the Schwerin state parliament, the right-wing extremist
German National Party was able to reap the fruits that had been
sown by the reactionary policies of the SPD and the Left Party.
A member of the Left Party who was present vehemently denied
this link. Another participant cited the experiences in France,
where at the end of the 1990s, a left-wing government
ruled for five years under Lionel Jospin. Its anti-social policies
produced widespread frustration in the population which found
expression in the 2002 presidential elections with the right-wing
extremist Jean Marie Le Pen of the National Front coming in second,
pushing Lionel Jospin into third place.
Another participant asked whether socialism meant everything
was planned and directed from above and thus that
freedom was threatened. Rippert explained that, in reality, the
task of the party was a completely different one: the development
of class consciousness. Everything depends on a new political
development by the working class, said Rippert. As
the class that creates surplus value, the working class is the
only social force that plays a progressive role. But it is not
only oppressed physically, but also ideologically and culturally,
he explained.
Rippert said that a Marxist party would by no means dictate
every decision in advance and implement it from above.
Its goal consists in mobilizing the entire creative potential
of the international working class in all its facets so that the
acute problems of society could be solved.
See Also:
Germany: PSG holds first election meeting
in Hesse
[17 December 2002]
The Hesse state election:
The Left Party offers its services to the SPD
[14 December 2007]
Germany: a positive response to the PSG
election campaign in Hesse
[13 December 2007]
PSG election meeting in Frankfurt
For a socialist answer to the social disaster
[12 December 2007]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |