|
|
The left in Germany
Which way forward?
While the grand coalition government of the
conservative CDU/CSU and social democratic SPD carries on with
neo-liberal attacks on the working class, a big debate is taking place
within the German left about the unification of different forces and
parties. SASCHA STANICIC, general secretary of Sozialistische
Alternative (SAV – CWI Germany) and active member of the Party for Work
and Justice - The Electoral Alternative (WASG) analyses the background
and perspectives for this debate.
THE LEFT WAS the only true winner of last
September’s general election. Their numbers in parliament grew from two
lonely MPs to 54. Over 4.25 million people, 8.7%, gave their vote to the
electoral bloc of WASG and Linkspartei.PDS. At the same time, the
so-called ‘winners’, the Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD)
and the Christlich Demokratische Union/Christlich Soziale Union (CDU/CSU)
saw their votes fall by nearly three million and 1.8 million
respectively. (see Socialism Today No.95, October 2005)
For legal reasons (at least that was the official
justification), the left was only able to contest the elections under
the name of Linkspartei.PDS, the renamed Partei des Demokratischen
Sozialismus (PDS), and this party dominated the electoral bloc. In the
2002 general election the then PDS won 1.9 million votes. The 2.2
million jump in votes last year reflected both the disillusionment with
Gerhard Schröder’s government and, in particular, the huge appeal of the
newly-formed WASG and its most prominent support Oskar Lafontaine.
However, only twelve of the 54 members of the left
parliamentary group are WASG members. Among them is Lafontaine. In 1999,
the Sun newspaper (London) dubbed him the "most dangerous man in
Europe". At the time, the Keynesian Lafontaine was finance minister in
the then newly-elected SPD-Green party coalition government. A short
while later, the capitalists and the bourgeois media pressured him out
of office because he was unwilling to carry out neo-liberal policies.
Germany changed during the seven years of
‘Red-Green’ government, but not in accordance with the hopes of many
workers and unemployed people. Rather, their worst fears were confirmed.
The government, led by the former workers’ party – the SPD – used its
close connections with the trade union leaders and the fears of many
workers that conditions under a CDU/CSU government would be a lot worse,
to carry out an unprecedented attack on social standards and workers’
rights. With the so-called ‘Agenda 2010’ and Hartz laws, social security
systems were largely ruined and living conditions lowered. Mass
unemployment rose to record highs. The capitalists enforced wage cuts
and longer working hours. Poverty increased and became a mass
phenomenon, not only among the long-term unemployed. The phenomenon of
the ‘working poor’, previously unknown in Germany, appeared because
there was no minimum wage. For example, a hairdresser in Saxony, east
Germany, earns €3.06 per hour!
The government also started a new, aggressive course
in foreign policy. It broke the post-second world war ‘taboo’ against
sending the army into foreign countries. In the Balkans and Afghanistan,
German soldiers are fighting in wars for the first time since 1945.
Founding the WASG
IN AUTUMN 2003 and during the whole of 2004, mass
protests against government policies erupted. Hundreds of thousands took
to the streets and in some cities strike movements took place against
cuts in social spending. As a reaction to the SPD’s shift to the right,
these protests led to the formation of two groupings in early 2004. Out
of these, the WASG association was formed which later became a party in
the beginning of 2005. Significantly, an important layer of
medium-ranking trade union officials had broken with the SPD and called
for the foundation of a new party. Unemployed activists are also an
important part of the base of the WASG. Individuals and members of some
socialist organisations joined, including SAV, which had for the last
few years propagated the need for a new mass workers’ party.
The foundation of the WASG was also a reaction to
the policies of the PDS. This former governing party in the Stalinist
GDR had, after German reunification, transformed itself into a ‘normal’
reformist party. It was socialist in words, parliamentary and conformist
in deeds. It had a strong base only in the east; in the west it could
never develop roots among sections of the working class and youth – its
failure to distance itself from its Stalinist past prevented this. Most
importantly, it was incapable of leading determined battles in the
interests of workers and the unemployed.
When, towards the end of the 1990s, the PDS started
to form coalition governments with the SPD on state level which carried
out social cuts and privatisation, the hope that this party could
develop into a left alternative with mass influence died for many lefts.
The PDS’s move to the right accelerated as a result. At its 2003
congress in Chemnitz, the PDS adopted a programme that accepted the
capitalist, market economy, stating that "entrepreneurial behaviour and
the profit interest are important prerequisites for innovation and
productivity". In Berlin, which has been governed by an SPD/PDS
coalition since 2001, many left-wing PDS members joined the WASG.
The WASG and PDS stood in the May 2005 elections for
the parliament of western Germany’s biggest state North
Rhine-Westphalia. The WASG gained three times the vote of the PDS. The
SPD suffered a devastating defeat and, on election night, Schröder
called an early national general election for autumn 2005.
Lafontaine had in previous weeks declared his
sympathy for the WASG. He had, however, never called on people to vote
for it, nor had he joined. Now he declared his willingness to stand in
the general election, provided the WASG and PDS formed an electoral
alliance. This is what happened, although many left critics warned that
an alliance on the basis of PDS policies would always be in danger of
becoming conformist. The united election campaign – although on the
renamed Linkspartei list – was declared as the beginning of left
unification in Germany. Those in favour of this course saw themselves
justified and declared that the four million plus people who had voted
for the alliance had also voted for a unification of WASG and
Linkspartei.PDS.
However, there is no proof for this. The electoral
result, as positive as it was, fell short of many opinion poll
predictions. The active participation of left-wing activists in the
campaign was limited, not least because leading members of WASG and
Linkspartei.PDS started to question some of the central demands in the
middle of the campaign. A move towards conformity was already being
signalled.
At its national conference in July 2005 and
subsequent ballot, the WASG started a discussion on the formation of a
new left alliance. This was to explicitly include other left-wing forces
apart from the WASG and Linkspartei.PDS. The so-called ‘new formation
process’ of the left has become more difficult than the WASG and
Linkspartei.PDS leaders would have liked. There is mounting criticism on
two major counts. Firstly, the policy of the Linkspartei.PDS joining
coalition governments, and the statement by its chairman, Lothar Bisky,
that the new formation would have to prepare for coalition with the SPD
on national level. Secondly, criticism of the undemocratic character of
the unification process, which leaves the base of the WASG and forces
outside both parties out of the loop. There have also been small numbers
within the WASG who oppose unity with the Linkspartei.PDS from a
right-wing basis.
The Berlin question
THIS CONFLICT IS especially tense in Berlin. Since
2001, the capital has been governed by an SPD and Linkspartei.PDS
coalition. This so-called ‘lesser evil’ has, when compared to other
states, played a vanguard role where social cuts and attacks on
public-sector workers are concerned. The misnamed ‘Red-Red’ coalition
has voted for privatisation and the neo-liberal draft EU constitution.
It pulled out of the national public-sector pay bargaining structure and
used this to blackmail Berlin city workers and enforce massive wage
cuts. A gardener sent a letter to the SAV newspaper, Solidarität,
explaining that this cost him €180 per month. Christmas and holiday pay
for civil servants was cut, and other federal states followed suit.
Since 2002, 15,000 jobs have been cut, and another 18,000 are to be axed
in the coming six years. Lower fares for people on benefits using public
transport were abolished, then reinstated after massive protests, but
only after a massive price increase. The free provision of school books
and other learning materials was abolished, fees for kindergartens
raised. Council flats were privatised, as was public water provision.
During a scandal involving a city-owned bank, rich investors’ potential
losses of billions of euros were covered up by the city.
Yet Linkspartei.PDS draws a positive balance sheet
from this. The city’s economics senator, Harald Wolf, said in September
2004: "The red-red coalition has had considerable achievements. The
central task for the government, consolidation, was carried out in a
determined fashion. It has tidied up, cleaned up and – not least – built
up. It had the courage and the strength to go into necessary
confrontations and especially to survive them". It justifies these
policies by pointing to the catastrophic financial situation facing the
city. But, instead of fighting side-by-side with the working class for
more resources, it passes the problems onto the workers and the
unemployed. This is in a city with above average unemployment, where
every sixth person survives on less then €600 per month. At its last
conference, the Linkspartei.PDS decided to carry on the coalition after
next September’s city elections.
The WASG Berlin opposes these policies and supports,
among others, workers at the university hospital, Charité, who are
fighting against wage cuts and the threatened privatisation of the
hospital. One WASG member said: "If this national ‘new formation
process’ didn’t exist, we wouldn’t even ring up the PDS". But this
process does exist and the leaderships of both parties are using
considerable pressure to ensure unification in Berlin as well. With
regard to September’s elections in Berlin, the WASG has declared that a
united candidature is only possible if the Linkspartei.PDS changes
course. This inevitably has to include it leaving the governing
coalition.
Berlin is not a special case but a precedent. If
during the new formation process the wing responsible for the present
Linkspartei.PDS policies wins out, there is a big danger that a great
historic chance to form a new workers’ party will be lost. Instead,
there could be a party that goes through the same process as the SPD and
the Greens did, degenerating into a basically purely capitalist
formation, but at much higher speed. That would not be an alternative
for the working class and youth.
The policies of the Berlin SPD/Linkspartei.PDS
government are so blatantly directed against the working class, that no
one in the WASG openly supports it. Despite that, there is a massive
dispute within the WASG in Berlin, and especially now on a national
level, over whether or not the Berlin WASG should stand independently in
September’s elections. Thinking that standing independently would put
the unification process into danger, some within the WASG tried to delay
a decision to such an extent that the preparation for an election
campaign would not have been possible. These forces – an alliance of
reformists, Linksruck (the sister group of the British SWP), and
supporters of participation in government – did not succeed. Late last
year, a Berlin WASG congress decided to put a number of political
demands on the Linkspartei.PDS, including one for a decisive change of
course. The final decision on the WASG’s election strategy is now due at
the end of February, meaning that there will be time to prepare for an
election campaign.
The role of Sozialistische Alternative (SAV)
MEMBERS OF SAV play an important role in the Berlin
WASG. Two SAV members have been elected into the local leadership: Lucy
Redler onto the executive; and Turkish trade unionist, Hakan Doganay,
got the highest number of votes for the wider steering committee. There
was quite a reaction among other leading members of the WASG and the
Linkspartei.PDS, and in the media. A leading member of the Bundestag
left group, Ulrich Maurer, attacked "Trotskyists" because of the
problems in Berlin. He ironically tried to ‘defend’ Leon Trotsky by
saying he would "turn in his grave" if he could witness the politics of
SAV. This was from a former chairperson of the SPD in Baden-Württemberg
who for years supported a coalition between SPD and CDU in that federal
state! In reply, SAV said that August Bebel, a historic leader of German
social democracy, would turn in his grave if he could read Maurer’s
remarks. Der Spiegel, a leading weekly news magazine, said that SAV was
the main enemy of the Linkspartei.PDS. These developments have increased
the public profile of SAV, and given a new direction to the debate on
left unification, politicising it enormously. Because of the united
candidature during the 2005 general election, many people thought that
both parties were already a single organisation. Now, an increasing
section of working-class people, especially the advanced layers, realise
that there are not only two different organisations but also that there
are significant differences on questions of participation in cuts and
privatisation between WASG and Linkspartei.PDS.
Linksruck argues that WASG and Linkspartei.PDS are
two reformist parties and that the political differences exist within
both parties. They draw the conclusion that there cannot be any argument
against uniting both parties and that unification overrides any other
issues. This includes the question of the WASG standing in the Berlin
elections. In principle, Linksruck argues against participation in
government. It is, however, prepared to support a united candidature of
WASG and Linkspartei.PDS without putting forward any political demands,
as long as the Linkspartei.PDS does not issue a pre-election statement
about continuing the coalition with the SPD (as opposed to a declaration
opposing such a continuation outright), and as long as WASG members are
included on the election lists.
In a situation where thousands of youth, workers and
unemployed are angry about the cuts conducted, this means capitulating
in the face of the concrete political conflicts going on in Berlin.
Already, these policies have lost the PDS support in eastern parts of
the city. It would mean denying the Berlin working class a chance to
express its protest against four years of anti-working class policies.
Fascists from the National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD) could
profit, potentially, by steering some of the anger by means of social
demagogy into an anti-foreigner direction.
In reality, Linksruck is in alliance with the
majority of the WASG leaders who wish to push the fusion through with no
political discussion at all. Linksruck now publicly distinguishes itself
from what it calls the "radical left" in the WASG which, in this case,
means the Berlin region. Linksruck has been in the forefront of arguing
that the WASG should only have a limited programme and not attempt to
argue for a socialist alternative. In her election address for the WASG
national executive, Christine Buchholz, a Linksruck leader, declared: "I
regard the idea of narrowing the WASG with an anti-capitalist or
socialist programme as a serious error". This is because Linksruck
rejects the idea that it is possible for socialists to build a
non-sectarian new party while proposing a transitional programme that
links campaigning on the immediate issues that face working people with
the need to argue for a socialist alternative.
The character of the WASG
ALTHOUGH IT IS true that both the WASG and
Linkspartei.PDS have a reformist character and that within both parties
there are similar discussions about participating in government, the two
parties play very different roles among the left and in society.
Within Linkspartei.PDS there is currently no
noticeable left opposition resisting the policies of the leadership. It
is estimated that this party has 60,000 members, mainly pensioners. The
active membership is about 6,000, mainly full-timers and members sitting
in various local, regional and national parliaments. It has almost no
roots among the youth and in workplaces. It has moved to the right very
quickly. Many workers still do not support it because of its Stalinist
past.
The WASG is an opposition force with important
connections to trade unions and social movements. It has two main
policies directly contradicting the Linkspartei.PDS conduct in
government. The WASG programme says: "We are in opposition to the ruling
neo-liberal policies. We will only participate in a government at state
or national level if this leads to a major political change in the
direction of our demands". And in its election manifesto: "We will not
participate in, or support, a government that carries out social cuts".
The WASG is the dynamic part of the ‘new formation process’. Last
September’s 2.2 million new votes for the left indicate the potential
support the WASG can gather. It can have a great attraction to trade
unionists, activists in social movements and layers of the working class
who have not been active until now.
The PDS was sinking into the abyss until it was
resurrected last year by the WASG and Lafontaine. Socialists should
defend the positive aspects of the WASG while pointing out the dangers
of a programme that remains reformist.
SAV was the only political force within the WASG
arguing against the Keynesian character of its programme during the
programmatic debate within the WASG in spring 2005. SAV explained that
the many good and correct demands for shorter working hours, a minimum
wage, investment programmes, etc, would not be sustainable within the
constraints of a capitalist society. Because of the crisis character of
the capitalist economy and massively increasing global economic
competition, positive change for the majority of the population could
only be achieved through mass struggle and could only be sustained if
capitalism was abolished and replaced by a socialist democracy.
SAV explained that the question of a socialist
programme is not merely an ideological question but that it would
determine the concrete policies of the party during day-to-day
struggles. Only a party that was not constrained by capitalist economics
would, for example, be able to develop a programme about how to defend
jobs in the car industry. When looking at the global 25% overcapacity,
it is clear that the principle of profit and competition has to be
removed so that factories and machines can be used to produce things
that are actually needed by society. Without the nationalisation of the
car industry under democratic workers’ management and control, this
would not be possible. This would be a concrete application of a
socialist programme in the battles of car workers in Germany and
worldwide.
SAV has never turned the adoption of a socialist
programme into a precondition for constructive joint work to build the
party, as long as the WASG gives workers and youth the opportunity to
express their political interests and to defend these interests. Despite
this, in early 2005 the rightwing of the WASG around regional trade
union official, Klaus Ernst, tried to expel SAV. This failed because of
the resistance of the base of the WASG who made it clear that socialists
and Marxists have a legitimate place in it and that there should not be
exclusions on political grounds. Because of the debate surrounding the
question of uniting with the Linkspartei.PDS in Berlin, Ernst and others
are trying to renew the campaign against SAV. The press spokesman for
the WASG has written an eight-page document in which he, using many
untruths, explains why he refuses to work with SAV. In a text, Ernst
attacked "dogmaticians" who are "not capable of developing a party". The
rightwing will fail again with its attempt to marginalise socialists. In
reality, the base is increasing the pressure on the leadership.
Linkspartei.PDS & WASG cooperation
THIS IS ESPECIALLY because of the third ‘cooperation
agreement’ reached between the two national leaderships. The new
agreement includes a positive reference to the political strategy of
Linkspartei.PDS. The central part of this is participating in
governments with the SPD. The agreement also rules out that both
organisations should ever stand against each other in elections. And
this at a time when exactly this question is being discussed in Berlin,
with the majority of the membership moving in the direction of standing
independently!
There was no chance to discuss the text of this
agreement within the WASG – branches and regional groups could not
influence it in any way. This blatantly undemocratic way of going about
things led to sharp attacks on the national leadership, even from
members who do not oppose the text of the document. The WASG leadership
in the state of Saxony declared: "It is intolerable in what an arrogant
fashion the leadership, since the party was founded, very offensively
and continuously ignores the democratic rules that have laid the base of
our party". And: "This way of doing things can be seen as fundamentally
damaging for the process of forming our party. All our bodies demand
that the base should not only be the carrier but also the initiator of
the new formation process. The national leadership acts contrary to
these demands and damages fundamental elements of the spirit of our
party, such as fairness, sensibility, solidarity and a democratic
forming of opinion".
Within the membership of the WASG there are
currently discussions about alternative ways to bring about a new
formation process of the left. No one is opposed to this as such,
including SAV. Only unity between WASG and Linkspartei.PDS without any
preconditions, is being opposed, and the defence of fundamental
opposition to any form of social cuts and privatisation is being
demanded, as is a democratic process that includes forces outside both
parties. A new left party should have left politics!
Many regions are demanding the national leadership’s
resignation and the election of a new one. This could well happen at the
next national congress, which will take place in April. Within the
national leadership, differences are starting to appear. Three of its
members have published a declaration that has a noticeably more critical
and left-wing tone than a declaration from the majority of the
leadership. Linksruck leader, Buchholz, belongs to the majority,
increasingly aligning herself with the dominant bureaucratic forces
within the national leadership.
The further development of the WASG and the new left
formation process depends not least on the development of class
struggles in the coming months. The grand coalition under Angela Merkel
(CDU) and Franz Müntefering (SPD) has decided on many attacks on the
working class. The bulk of these measures – raising VAT, worsening
rights at work, raising the retirement age, less money for the
unemployed, and many more – will be implemented on a drip by drip basis.
This year is being presented as the year of economic upswing (with
minimal investment). The biggest attacks will come in 2007. In some
areas, for example the health system, the CDU/CSU and SPD have been
unable so far to come up with a united policy. But further attacks on
the working class are certain.
The trade union leaders have so far not organised
any protests against the government nor proposed any either. Social
movements are planning a national demonstration on 1 April and are
currently trying to mobilise support within the trade unions. At least
these are now calling for support for the protest against the EU’s
Bölkestein directive in February, a protest that the SPD has said it
will support – to try to show its ‘social’ face!
It is an open question whether there will be a
generalised movement against the government this year, as we saw in 2003
and 2004 against the Schröder government. The potential is there, but
neither the trade union leaders nor the new left parliamentary group are
attempting to mobilise it.
At the same time, there is a continuing wave of
attacks on wages, working hours and jobs. Many battles are taking place.
Especially in manufacturing, these are against closures, the transfer of
factories and job cuts. Dockworkers had a successful European strike on
11 January against deregulation (Port Package II). Thousands of German
dockers participated. In March, there will be a new round of pay
negotiations in the manufacturing sector. Warning strikes and real
strikes for pay rises are possible. But these battles are currently
isolated, defensive and often very short. Linking-up these struggles and
developing a united strategy are urgently needed, but the trade union
leaders prevent this, and the left in the workplaces is in parts too
weak or incapable of developing such a strategy.
Nevertheless, it cannot be ruled out that these
isolated protests will occur more often and that quantity will develop
into quality. Such a development would influence the WASG, the left
parliamentary group and the new formation process. If a few thousand
workers who are prepared to fight joined, then this could radicalise the
process. But the question of the timing of different events is
important. Up to now, the left parliamentary group has developed little
initiative and attraction. Should there be a decision to unite both
parties on the basis of Linkspartei.PDS policies, then there is the
danger that left-wing activists will retreat from the WASG and that the
united party will not attract workers and youth. This will be even more
true if a united party – as is planned – participates in state
governments and their attacks against workers.
A crucial time
A LOT DEPENDS on Berlin. It is not to be expected
that the Linkspartei.PDS will change course. If the WASG stands
independently on a principled programme and with an active campaign, and
if it wins the support of trade unionists and activists from social
movements and initiatives, it has a chance of gaining the necessary 5%
to enter the Berlin parliament. This would have a great effect on the
national new left formation process and would strengthen anti-capitalist
and socialist forces. A unification of both parties without any
preconditions, however, would make it more difficult to build the new
formation and a new pole of attraction and reference for left and
critical activists.
Whether the leaderships of Linkspartei.PDS and WASG
will watch such a development without doing anything about it, or
whether they will turn the threats they made in November after the
Berlin WASG conference into reality – that they would exclude people or
even split the organisation – remains to be seen. In any case,
anti-capitalist and socialist groups in the WASG have to prepare for
such a possibility. Stronger and better coordinated cooperation of these
forces is needed and is being prepared.
The development of the WASG and the debate about the
formation of a new left party opens a new chapter in the history of the
German workers’ movement. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the working
class was pushed onto the defensive. On the ideological front, the
bourgeoisie started a massive offensive. Internationally, the
bourgeoisification of the traditional workers’ parties and the move to
the right by trade union leaderships contributed to the decrease of
socialist ideas within the working class and even basic class
consciousness.
Now the wind has started to change. Confronted with
a continuing neo-liberal offensive and the questioning of the principal
achievements of the workers’ movement, important layers of workers and
youth are looking for a way of resistance and for political
alternatives. The creation of broad parties of workers, unemployed and
youth – bringing together trade unionists, socialists and activists from
social movements (women’s movement, anti-globalisation, anti-fascism,
environmentalism, etc) and also fresh layers of workers entering
struggle – is now an important and necessary step.
These are no substitute for the development of mass
workers’ organisations with a Marxist programme, but they are necessary
to start a process in which, as Karl Marx formulated it, "the
class-in-itself" (a social-economic class) becomes "a class-for-itself"
(a conscious political force). The conscious and targeted intervention
and participation of Marxist organisations like SAV is important.
Firstly, to reach a wider audience for Marxist ideas and, secondly, to
speed up the development of these parties and make them successful.
Without a socialist programme, workers’ parties will, in today’s period
of capitalist decline, soon reveal their limitations. This is the lesson
from the decay of the old workers’ parties and their complete
transformation into capitalist bodies.
Globalised capitalism, marked by stagnation,
recession and increasing international competition, does not leave much
space for reforms. The achievement of reforms needs mass action. Even
moderate demands, on the basis of mass struggles, can have a
quasi-revolutionary character. The time of stable reformist parties with
a mass membership, as we knew them in many countries after 1945, have
gone. There will be new attempts to build workers’ parties. Many will
not last for long because reformist forces will drag them into
participation in governments where they will implement social cuts. They
will therefore not become lasting poles of attraction. But in these
processes and class struggles, there will develop a new generation of
fighters who will start the fight for a true new workers’ party and who
will be open to Marxist ideas. The WASG is a first such step in Germany.
It is the task of German Marxists to do everything they can to develop
this embryonic formation into a mass workers’ party, with a socialist
programme.
Translated by Christian Bunke
|