For Freedom and Social Justice

FOR FREEDOM AND SOCIAL JUSTICE

Social democratic political platforms and practical politics since the middle

of the 19th century

An Exhibition by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung




of the 19th century

Imprint

© Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung

Publisher:

Published on behalf of the

Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung by

Dieter Dowe and Michael Schneider

Conceptual design, texts and selection

of photographs:

Mario Bungert

Copyright questions:

Petra Giertz

Layout:

Pellens Kommunikationsdesign GmbH, Bonn

Production of exhibition:

ComExpo, Bonn

Print:

Printed in

Programmes have played an essential role in the history of democratic parties, but

in the history of German Social Democracy in particular. Since as early as the 1848

Revolution Social Democracy has drafted programmes in response to changing

economic, social, cultural and legal conditions. New challenges call for new

solutions. The abiding task is to project the fundamental values of Social

Democracy – freedom, justice and solidarity – onto the prevailing circumstances

and constantly to renew them. Only by the recognition and acceptance of reality

can Social Democracy preserve its essence and its identity – both in transfor -

mation and through it.

The Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung has dedicated itself to strengthening Social

De mocracy. Its focus has always been to impart democratic values, both in its

educational activities in Germany and in its international work. The point is not

to supply other countries, other societies with the German model of democracy.

Each country, each society must fi nd its own path of democratic cooperation.

Rather in our partner countries we seek to give an impetus, contribute to con-

solidating civil society structures and organizations, promote democratic partici-

pation and decision-making processes, reduce the potential for confl ict and

facilitate cooperation on the basis of equality. It is in this spirit that we support

our partners – trade unions, cooperatives, women‘s and educational networks

– on the ground: the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung sees itself as a Social Democratic

“think and do tank”.

This exhibition by the FES‘s History Department on the history and development

of Social Democratic programmes is therefore not intended as a model or blueprint

for others, but rather to illustrate that in Germany too the path to a democratic

society has not been straightforward, but long and fraught with diffi culties.

A path, which, though sometimes accompanied by violent controversies, failures

and setbacks, ultimately led to success: a society in which the core Social

De mocratic values of freedom, social justice and solidarity have eventually come

to prevail.

Anke Fuchs

Chairwoman

Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung

Foreword

Freedom and social justice

Principles of social democratic policy

Working Men of All Countries, Unite!’

A fi rst answer to the Industrial Revolution –

The Communist Manifesto of 1848

We shall take matters into our own hands’

The statute of the ‘Arbeiterverbrüderung’ of 1848

Early programmatic analysis of the situation in the 1860s

Lassalle’s ‘Open Letter’ of 1863 –

The Allgemeine Deutscher Arbeiter-Verein (ADAV)

Early programmatic analysis of the situation in the 1860s

Vereinstag deutscher Arbeitervereine (VDAV)

‘New times have dawned’

The Eisenach Programme of the Social Democratic Labour Party of 1869

‘The liberation of labour must be achieved by the working class itself’

The unifi cation of Social Democracy – The Gotha Programme of 1875

‘Fight … exploitation and oppression of every kind!’

The Erfurt Programme of 1891

Revolutionary class struggle or a policy of continuous reform

The revisionism dispute 1896-1903

The relationship between party and trade unions

From the mass strike debate to the ‘Mannheim Agreement’ of 1906

‘Party truce’ or fundamental opposition?

The split of Social Democracy during the First World War (1914–1918)

Revolution and foundation of the republic

Intensifi cation of the split of the workers’ movement (1918/19)

On the way towards a people’s party

The Görlitz Programme of the SPD, 1921

Content

For Socialism and freedom – the European perspective

The Heidelberg Programme of 1925

Analysis of recent developments and programmatic consequences

‘Organised capitalism’ and ‘economic democracy’

During the Great Depression – defeat at the hands of National Socialism

Political and programmatic dilemma, 1930–1933

Exile and resistance to National Socialism

From the ‘Prague Manifesto’ to plans for a democratic

post-war order, 1933–1945

Commitment to the aims of freedom and social justice

From the fi rst policy guidelines to the Dortmund/Berlin

action programme of the SPD (1945–1952/4)

From liberation to new bondage

Forced amalgamation and a ‘party of a new type’, 1945–1953

The transformation of the SPD into a modern people’s party

The Godesberg Programme of 1959

‘The opportunity for a new German policy must not be lost’

The SPD in government since 1966

Offering political orientation

Programmatic developments in the 1970s

‘Tackling new tasks in a new way’

From the Irsee draft to the Berlin Platform, 1984–1989

‘Through social justice to a society in solidarity’

The Berlin Programme of 1989

‘Shaping unity – social and just’

The Leipzig Programme of the SPD in the GDR, 1990

‘Innovation and social justice’ – ‘The courage for change’

From the beginnings of the ‘Red-Green project’ to the ‘Agenda 2010’,

1998–2005

Modernising Germany in justice and fairness’

On the road to a new programme – ‘Social Democracy in the 21st century’

The power for renewal – for a social Germany

The Hamburg Programme of 2007

Social Democracy – identity in transition

Results and future prospects

List of Personalities

Ferdinand Lassalle

August Bebel

Eduard Bernstein

Karl Kautsky

Rosa Luxemburg

Kurt Schumacher

Willy Brandt

Frei und links

Sozialdemokratische Programmatik und Politik seit der

Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts

Eine Ausstellung der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung



of the 19th century


‘Constant revolutionising of production, uninterrupted disturbance of

all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation’, in this way

the Communist Manifesto described the dawning times in 1848. We

live under such conditions. A party not facing up to these changes and

refusing to adapt its means to altered conditions will be subject to

paralysis and lose its creative power.

German Social Democracy has constantly given proof of its courage for

reorientation. By changing itself, it has been able to preserve its identity

in different political and social systems: during the 1848 revolution, the

German Confederation, the German Empire, the Weimar Republic,

National Socialist dictatorship, old and new Federal Republic of

Germany.

Even now, in times of globalisation, the Sozialdemokratische Partei

Deutschlands (SPD, Social Democratic Party of Germany) is laying down

guidelines of its political action with a new political platform and pro-

gramme.

The exhibition not only highlights the development of Social Democra-

cy from a proletarian class party to a reform-oriented people’s party. It

also makes clear that party programmes for Social Democrats have always

expressed the moral basis of their political actions consistently in pursuit

of one guideline: a striving for freedom which is based on social justice

and proves its strength in solidarity.

LPRINCIPC LPRINCIPPRINCIPLPRINCIP

Freedom and social justice

Principles of social democratic policy

A party that does not adapt to constantly changing circumstances

in its party programme and policy will be paralysed and eventually

lose its creative power. The SPD has always shown the courage

and the strength for reorientation and so has maintained its

political and programmatic identity. Like no other party it looks

back on a long history, dating back to the middle of the 19th

century, one which has always been characterised by a striving

for freedom and social justice in solidarity.

c pp eess o ssooc a de oc at c po cy

UCLASS STRUCLASS STRULASS STRUCLASS STRCLASS STRU

In the middle of the 19th century the Industrial Revolution accelerated

the formation of a new social stratum, the working class. The effects of

industrial production methods under capitalist conditions on the newly

formed proletariat were, amongst other things, the division of labour

and the fragmentation of production under conditions of monotony,

dirt, noise, stench and risk to health. (1) With the dissolution of feudal

ties and protection, the introduction of freedom of trade and rapid

population growth, combined with increasing urbanisation and

pauperisation (2, 3), lead to a culmination of accumulated political and

social confl icts and demands for radical social and political change.

In 1848 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels published the ‘Communist

Manifesto’ as the programme of the secret ‘Bund der Kommunisten’

(Communist League). (4) In the ‘Manifesto’ they expressed the expecta-

tion that the proletariat, which had become aware of itself, would

overthrow bourgeois-capitalist society, so abolishing all class contra-

dictions. The period of ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ was meant to be

only transitional – in contrast to Lenin’s concept later on – as a dictator-

ship ‘of the immense majority, in the interest of the immense majority’.

After the dissolution of the class society ‘the free development of each

is the condition for the free development of all’. The programme resulted

in the appeal: ‘Working Men of All Countries, Unite!’

Initially, the programme of the Communist League had almost no

practical or political effect. It was only after the new editions in the 1870s

that the Communist Manifesto became one of the most important

writings of Social Democracy.

In the course of the Industrial Revolution, urbanisation, popu-

lation growth and pauperisation intensifi ed the accumulated

political and social confl icts of the fi rst half of the 19th century

resulting in demands for radical social and political change. The

‘Communist Manifesto’ published by Karl Marx and Friedrich

Engels in 1848 combined acute analysis and criticism of

bourgeois-capitalist society with an appeal for the revolutionary

resistance of the proletariat.

1. In the newly-created factories the workers are subject to strict discipline at work

and a rigorous time schedule. Health and safety at work do not exist at that time.

2. Youngsters and children have to work for the family’s livelihood. For a long time, child labour was commonplace.

‘Working Men of All Countries, Unite!’

A fi rst answer to the Industrial Revolution – The Communist Manifesto of 1848

3. In the 19th century workers lived in small, smelly and overcrowded fl ats.

4. Karl Marx (1818–1883) and Friedrich Engels (1820–1895), authors of the ‘Communist Manifesto’.

BROTHERHOBROTHERHBROBROTHERHBROTHERHBROBROTHER

The French February Revolution which in 1848 led to the overthrow of

the ‘bourgeois king’ Louis Philippe also triggered a revolutionary move-

ment in the states of the German Confederation. It demanded a consti-

tution and freedom of the press as well as elections to a pan-German

parliament. In some of the small German states these demands were

met without resistance or at least promised. In 1848 the situation in

Prussia culminated in bloody street battles, mainly in Berlin where King

Friedrich Wilhelm IV. had to make concessions. (1)

For the German working class the year 1848 marked an epoch: it was

the dawn of the organised German workers’ movement. In September

of that year the ‘Arbeiterverbrüderung’ (Workers’ Brotherhood) was

founded during the General German Workers’ Congress in Berlin (2),

which was, with its approximately 20,000 members the fi rst mass or-

ganisation of German workers. The main issues of the statutes (4)

drafted by Stephan Born (3), chairman of the ‘Workers’ Brotherhood’,

were freedom of association, the formation of trade unions, the intro-

duction of funds for sickness and funeral expenses, care for those un-

able to work, reduction of working hours and the abolishment of school

fees, as well as the creation of a parliamentary and democratic state on

the basis of universal and equal, though indirect suffrage.

Against the emerging counter-revolution the organisation’s leadership

also envisaged armed resistance. (5) The failure of revolts in Saxonia,

Baden and Rhine-Hesse forced the ‘Brotherhood’ during the reactionary

period (6) to restrict its activities to the propagation of producer and

consumer by means of state loans.

In the course of the revolutions that

shook monarchical rule in Europe in 1848

the fi rst public German workers’ organi-

sation was formed: the ‘Arbeiterverbrü-

derung’ (Workers’ Brotherhood). The main

topics in the statutes drafted by Stephan

Born, its chairman, were the introduction

of socio-political improvements and the

creation of a parliamentary and democratic

state based on general (indirect) suffrage.

At the beginning of the 1850s, the ‘period

of reaction’, the Workers’ Brotherhood

was banned.

2. Front page of ‘Das Volk’ (The People) of 26 August 1848.

‘We shall take our matters into our own hands’The statute of the ‘Arbeiterverbrüderung’ of 1848

1. Lithograph: Street battles in Berlin, 1848.3. Lithograph: Stephan Born (1824–1898).

5. Lithograph: Struggle in Baden to implement a revolutionary constitution.

6. Caricature: Counter-revolution

in Europe: the revolutionaries are suppressed by revitalized reactionary forces,

and either expelled from Germany or killed.

4. Front page of ‘Die Verbrüderung’ (The Brotherhood) dated 13 October 1848 and extract from the Statutes.

UUNIVERSAL SUUUNIVERSAL SNIVERSALUNIVERSAL SUNIV AR UUNIVERSAL SAR

At the beginning of 1863 the bourgeois democrat Ferdinand Lassalle (1)

was asked by a Leipzig workers’ committee to make proposals for a

future labour movement. Lassalle complied with this request with the

‘Open Letter to the Central Committee to summon a General Congress

of German Workers’ (2): In his programmatic writing Lassalle called on

the working class to establish an ‘independent political party’ and, in

place of the reactionary Prussian three-class voting system, to make

‘universal, equal and direct suffrage the watchword and banner of the

party’. This demand only applied to men.

In economic terms, Lassalle considered the workers to be subject to the

‘iron law of wages’, namely that, in the long run, wages would not rise

above the poverty line. The social situation could be improved only if the

‘workers themselves became the entrepreneurs’ – with the help of pro-

ducer cooperatives and support through loans given from the state,

which in turn would have to be democratised.

When on 23 May 1863 the Allgemeine Deutsche Arbeiter-Verein ( General

German Workers Association) (4) was founded in the Leipzig ‘Colosseum’

(3), the then 38-year old Ferdinand Lassalle was elected president. Under

his strict leadership the ADAV (5, 6) won more than 4,000 members and

developed into the fi rst German labour party. After his death in autumn

1864 fi erce disputes erupted in the ADAV.

In his ‘Open Letter’ to a Leipzig workers’ committee at the begin-

ning of 1863, the bourgeois democrat Ferdinand Lasalle called for

an ‘independent political party’ of the working class and declared

the ‘general, equal and direct (male) voting system the watch-

word and banner of the party’. With this appeal he defi ned the

programme of the Allgemeine Deutsche Arbeiter-Verein (General

German Workers’ Association), which had been founded on

23 May 1863 and developed into the fi rst German labour party.

The central socio-political demand of the association, on

which Lassalle imposed strict discipline, was the foundation

of pro ductive associations with the support (state loans) of the

state, which in turn would have to be democratised.

Early programmatic analysis of the situation in the 1860sLassalle’s ‘Open Letter’ of 1863 – The Allgemeine Deutsche Arbeiter-Verein (ADAV)

1. Ferdinand Lassalle (1825–1864).

4. The ADAV executive members in bourgeois posture, 1863 (Lassalle fi rst from right).

2. Front page ‘Open Letter’.

3. The Leipzig ‘Colosseum’, where the ADAV was founded.

5. Federal song of the ADAV, one of the best known songs of the working class.

6. The traditional fl ag of German Social Democracy, donated on the occasion of the

10th anniversary of the ADAV.

In June 1863, shortly after the founding of the ADAV, workers’ asso-

ciations ‘of various political backgrounds’ joined forces in Frankfurt am

Main to form the ‘Vereinstag deutscher Arbeitervereine’ (VDAV, Federa-

tion of German workers’ associations). One of the participants in the

founding congress was August Bebel (1), who since 1865 headed the

Leipzig Arbeiter-Bildungsverein (Workers Education Association), be-

coming president in 1867. (2) This body was organised more democra-

tically than the ADAV. Initially they cooperated with liberally minded

representatives of the bourgeoisie.

To begin with, the VDAV strongly dissociate itself from the demands of

the ADAV, but in the following years relations became closer and closer.

The VDAV argued for the formation of producers cooperatives from

1865 and stood up for universal and equal suffrage and secret ballots

(for men). In 1868 the VDAV accepted the statutes of the First Interna-

tional, the International Workingmen’s Association (IWA) (3). These had

been written by Karl Marx

ATEMANCIPAC ATEMANCIPATMANCIPAATEMANCIPATANCIPA

In June 1863, shortly after the founding of

the ADAV, workers’ associations ‘of vario-

us political backgrounds’ joined forces in

Frankfurt am Main to form the ‘Vereinstag

deutscher Arbeitervereine’ (Federation of

German workers’ associations). Unlike the

ADAV, it had a loose organisational struc-

ture. Initially they cooperated with liberally

minded representatives of the bourgeoisie.

The VDAV argued for the formation of

productive associations and the general,

equal and secret right to vote (for men) from

1865. In 1868 the VDAV accepted the

statutes of the First International, the Inter-

national Workingmen’s Association (IWA).

Early programmatic analysis of the situation in the 1860sVereinstag deutscher Arbeitervereine (VDAV)

1. August Bebel (1840–1913), around 1860.

2. Minutes of the fi rst board meeting chaired by August Bebel, 31 October 1867, and the standing orders

of the Vereinstags Deutscher Arbeitervereine.

3. Lithograph: Participants of the IWA meeting in Basel 1869.

In August 1869 the Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei (SDAP, Social

Democratic Labour Party) was founded in Eisenach. August Bebel had

drafted the fi rst programme. (1) The new party that was set up in

Eisenach (2) was based mainly on the statutes of the First International

written by Karl Marx. The central aim was ‘the protection, the eleva-

tion and the complete emancipation of the working classes’.

The Eisenach Programme (3) also focusses on the battle against unjust

political and social conditions and drew the following conclusion: ‘The

social issue is inextricably linked with the political situation; its solu tion

is conditional upon it and is possible only in a democratic nation.’

The SDAP differed from the ADAV primarily in terms of inner-party

democracy, the unconditional support of the trade union movement

and its attitude towards the national unity of Germany.

After founding the party, the 6th Congress of the Federation of German

Workers’ Associations (VDAV), which was also taking place in Eisenach

decided to dissolve itself and to join the SDAP. (4)

C DEMOCRATICOCRATICDEMOCRATIDEMOM RADEMOCRATICDEMO RA

In August 1869 the Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei (SDAP,

Social Democratic Labour Party) was founded in Eisenach. August

Bebel had drafted the fi rst programme. The new party that was

established in Eisenach was based mainly on the statutes of the

First International written by Karl Marx. Its central aim was ‘the

protection, the elevation and the complete emancipation of the

working classes’. The SDAP differed from the ADAV primarily in

terms of inner-party democracy, the unconditional support of

the trade union movement and the attitude towards German

national unity.

‘New times have dawned’

The Eisenach Programme of the Social Democratic Labour Party of 1869

1. Appeal launched at the founding congress in Eisenach ‘To the German Social Democrats’ in the ‘Demokratisches Wochenblatt’ (Democratic Weekly) of 17 July 1869.

2. ‘Hotel zum Mohren’ in Eisenach where the Eisenach party programme

was adopted. 3. The Eisenach Programme. Like other party programmes at the end of the 19th century it is brief and concise.

4. Participants of the 2nd congress of the SDAP in Dresden, 1871.

11.

After the Franco-German War (1870/71) and the foundation of the

German Empire (1871) (1) the emerging economic crisis led to increasing

class confl icts and intensifi ed police repression of the ADAV and the

SDAP. This common experience, at last, helped them to see that unifi -

cation of the parties was inevitable.

Wilhelm Liebknecht formulated the main parts of the programme for

the unifi ed party (2) – a mixture of ‘old’ democratic demands and

Marxian and Lassallean concepts. To that extent the text thoroughly

corresponded to the thougths and feelings of party members. August

Bebel however, was particulary indignant about the draft – as were Karl

Marx and Friedrich Engels in London – but he considered that the aim

of unifi cation superseded any programmatic differences. (3)

The Sozialistische Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands (SAPD; German Socialist

Labour Party) (4) set up in Gotha in May 1875 wanted to create ‘the free

nation and the socialist society by all legal means’.

As the fi rst German party it demanded the vote for all citizens – that is,

for women, too – of all classes.

Despite lacking theoretical cohesion the Gotha Programme was the

platform for the unifi cation of Social Democracy. At its foundation in

1875 the SAPD had approximately 25,000 members. (5) The fi rst offi cial

party publicationissued from1876, was ‘Vorwärts’ (Forward).

UNIFICATUNIFIC INIFICATUN A IUNIFICATA

The ending of the differences at nation-

state level with the founding of the German

Empire (1871) and the common experience

of repression during the ensuing economic

crisis led to the unifi cation of the previously

hostile labour parties. The programme,

written by Wilhelm Liebknecht, offered a

mixture of ‘old’ democratic demands and

several Marxian and Lassalleean concepts

and terms. It corresponded to the party

members’ thoughts and feelings. August

Bebel, however, was particulary indignant

about the draft – as were Karl Marx and

Friedrich Engels in London – but he con-

sidered that the aim of unifi cation super-

seded any programmatic differences. The

Sozialistische Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands

(SAPD, German Socialist Labour Party)

founded in May 1875 in Gotha wanted to

create ‘the free nation and the socialist

society by all legal means’. As the fi rst

German party it demanded the vote for all

citizens – that is, also for women – of all

social categories.

‘The liberation of labour must be achieved by the working class itself’The unifi cation of Social Democracy –The Gotha Programme of 1875

1. Wood engraving: Foundation of the German Empire in Versailles, 1871.

3. Drawing: August Bebel at the Gotha party convention.

4. SAPD membership card.

5. Memorial page on the occasion of the Gotha

party convention, in the oval fi eld the ‘progenitors’ Marx und Lassalle.

2. Wilhelm Liebknecht (1826–1900) and the

Gotha Programme of 1875.

Despite a twelve-year ban by Bismarck’s (1) ‘Anti-Socialist Laws’ (1878–

1890), which a lot of Social Democrats experienced as ‘class struggle’

from above, Social Democracy began to thrive (2). It adopted the name

‘Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands’ (SPD. Social Democratic

Party of Germany) and in 1891 accepted a new party programme in

Erfurt (3), which had a major infl uence on most of the socialist party

programmes in Europe.

With the Erfurt Programme Marxism became the offi cial party theory

of German Social Democracy. Having survived the persecution under

the circumstances of the ‘Anti-Socialists Laws’, the party believed in the

upcoming ruin of the bourgeois-capitalist social order ‘as a law of nature’

and the expected the implementation of a socialist society in the future.

The program (4) is a combination of Karl Kautskys marxist analysis and

forecast of a future development towards socialism and Eduard

Bernsteins social reformist demands concerning the present social

system. With these claims the SPD started to work under the prevailing

circumstances. The combination of revolutionary aims and practical

social reform in this moment not regarded as a contradiction in itself.

(5) The intrinsic confl ict fi nally escalated in the so-called revisionism

dispute.

OLIBERATIOLIBERATIOBBERA OLIBERATIOBERA

‘Fight … exploitation and oppression of every kind!’The Erfurt Programme of 1891

1. Caricature of Bismarck and his

policy.

3. The Kaisersaal, the venue of the Erfurt party convention.

4. Karl Kautsky (1854–1938), Eduard Bernstein (1850–1932), and the Erfurt Programme of 1891.

5. Embroidery (from shortly after the beginning of the 20th century) with portraits of Lassalle, Bebel and Marx.

2. ‘Der Sozialdemokrat’ (red edition)

documents the success of Social Democracy in the elections to the Reichstag in 1890

despite twelve years of repression.

After a twelve-year ban imposed by

Bismarck’s ‘Anti-Socialist Laws’ (1878–1890)

the SAPD took the name ‘Sozialdemokra-

tische Partei Deutschlands’ (SPD, Social

Democratic Party of Germany) and in 1891

adopted a new programme in Erfurt. The

programme is a combination of Karl

Kautskys marxist analysis and forecast of a

future development towards socialism and

Eduard Bernsteins social reformist demands

regarding the existing social system. The

combination of revolutionary aims and

practical social reform was at that time not

regarded as contradictory.

Since 1896 Eduard Bernstein (1) turned against central statements of

Marxist theory which was to be ‘revised’. In his opinion social deve -

lopment moved along other lines than those depicted in the Erfurt

Programme. For Bernstein class barriers were not a ‘natural law’, the

proletariat was not necessarily doomed to sink deeper and deeper into

poverty and the bourgeois-capitalist society would not break down at

all events. The revisionists’ criticism was aimed at the marxist party centre

around Bebel and Kautsky as well as of the party left-wing representatives

around Rosa Luxemburg (2). They did not share their opinion that a

single measure, i.e. the nationalisation of all productive means would

automatically lead to their common aim: freedom.

From the revisionists point of view the transition to Socialism should

rather take place through the democratisation of the political system

and the regulation the economy. At the latest since 1901 for Bernstein

socialism was not longer scientifi cally – as for Marx – but ethically

founded and from this point of view could only be the result of active

fi ght of the working-class for justice and their specifi c social interests.

Bernstein laid special emphasis on a thorough education of the working

class to gain self-responsibility in a socialist economy. For him self-

responsibility meant ‘on one side a social principle and on the other

personal freedom’.

August Bebel and the majority of the party strictly had rejected the

position of the revisionists. Their dispute escalated up to the SPD party

convention in 1903 in Dresden where a huge majority rejected the

‘ revisionist attempts’ though not preventing these ideas from gaining

fi rmer hold. The confl ict between Marxist party theory and a social

reforming policy continued to smoulder. Bebel (3) defence of the Erfurt

platform and Marxism is the result of his strong will to keep the party

together. On the other hand he endangered the fi rst attempts within

the SPD to develop into a left-wing party advocating reforms within the

existing social order.

CLASH OF THCLASH O ELASH OF THOACLASH OF THECLASH OF THASH O

Revolutionary class struggle or a policy of continuous reform The revisionism dispute 1896–1903

1. Eduard Bernstein (around 1890).

2. Rosa Luxemburg (1871–1919) and

August Bebel in Amsterdam in 1904.

3. Caricature: August Bebel, subtitle:

‘The rough August’.

At the turn of the century, Eduard Bernstein attempted to bring

about a ‘revision’ of central statements of Marxist theory. For him,

class barriers were not necessarily a ‘law of nature’ nor was the

constant pauperisation of the proletariat inevitable. A breakdown

of bourgeois-capitalist society was not necessarily the logical

consequence. In Bernsteins opinion, socialism did not have

scientifi c – as for Marx – but ethical foundations. August Bebel

and the centre of the party, as well as the left wing around Rosa

Luxemburg and thus the majority of party members, rejected the

‘revisionist attempts’ at the Dresden SPD party convention in 1903.

The confl ict between Marxist party theory and a social reform policy

continued to smoulder nevertheless.

The fi rst short-lived trade unions emerged as early as 1848. Their Fortunes

improved signifi cantly in the 1860s. At fi rst, they had accepted the Social

Democratic Party´s claim to leadership, but in the course of their organi-

sational expansion and in the wake of a number of social achievements

obtained mainly by the trade union, they took on a new self-confi dence.

This led to increasing frictions between the Free Trade Unions and the

SPD. These confl icts erupted with the dispute about the political mass

strike instigated by the left-wingers around Rosa Luxemburg in order to

overcome the party’s hesitancy.

In 1904 the International Socialist Congress in Amsterdam (1) had

propagated the political mass strike as the ultimate weapon of the labour

movement. The trade unions, which would have had to bear the brunt

of such a strategy, rejected it because they feared for the extension of

their organisations and their political position.

The SPD decided at its Jena party convention in 1905, however, that the

political mass strike was an option in crucial confl ict situations. The

controversy about the mass strike question threatened to shatter, on

the one hand, the much praised unity of the party itself, and on the

other, the unity between the party and trade unions. From these

substantive questions a question of principle emerged: the relationship

between the party and the trade unions.

In informal talks at the Mannheim party convention in 1906 (2) the

confl ict was settled by an ‘agreement’ (3). This agreement (4) adopted

at the Mannheim party convention included the codifi cation of equal

rights for trade unions and the party. At the same time, mutual consul-

tations in the case of a possible general strike were stipulated.

RMASS STRRMASS STMASS STRRMASS STR

The Free Trade Unions founded from the 1860s at fi rst accepted

the political leadership of the SPD. Their overall success and

particularly their social achievements gave the trade unions new

self-confi dence at the end of the 19th century. This caused con-

fl icts between the leadership of the trade unions and the party.

These confl icts broke out with the argument about the political

mass strike propagated by left-wingers to overcome the party’s

hesitancy. Whereas the trade unions argued against a political

mass strike, it was accepted as the ultimate weapon by the SPD.

At the Mannheim SPD party convention in 1906 this dispute was

settled by the codifi cation of equal rights for the SPD and the

trade unions.

The relationship between party and trade unionsFrom the mass strike debate to the ‘Mannheim Agreement’ of 1906

4. Resolution on the ‘political mass strike’,

also known as the ‘Mannheim Agreement’.

1. International Socialist Conference in Amsterdam in 1904 which adopted the political mass strike as the ultimate weapon of the labour movement.

2. Plenary of the Mannheim party convention in 1906.

3. August Bebel (x) and trade union leader Carl Legien (1861–1920) (xx), who drafted the agreement at the Mannheim party convention.

xxx

With the outbreak of the First World War, which developed into the

‘primal catastrophe’ of the 20th century, the SPD was forced to take a

decision. Believing that the German Reich was engaged in a defensive

war that had been forced upon it, the Social Democratic parliamentary

party in the Reichstag (1) voted in favour of the war loans demanded by

the imperial government in August 1914 (2). In coordination with the

Free Trade Unions they abstained from all active measures to enforce

their political and social objectives. Besides that, they hoped for a swift

end to war (3) and – closely connected with that – for political

reforms.

A minority within the parliamentary party and in the party itself did

not subscribe to this ‘party truce’ and expressed their opinions with

in creasing forthrightness in the ensuing months. Their precise aims were

the termination of the truce and an immediate peace agreement. (4)

Finally, in April 1917 the Unabhängige Sozialdemokratische Partei

Deutschlands (USPD, Independent Social Democratic Party of Germany)

(5) was founded and soon joined by the ‘Spartakus group’ around Rosa

Luxemburg (6) und Karl Liebknecht (7) – the split of German Social

Democracy was sealed. Close to the end of the war there were many

demonstrations, including hunger-protests revolts and strikes. The USPD

mobilised its followers mainly through criticism of the SPD’s ‘party

truce’ policy.

SPLITSPLIT

Erroneously believing that the German

Reich was facing a defensive war, the

Social Democratic parliamentary party in

the Reichstag voted in favour of the war

loans called for by the imperial govern-

ment in August 1914. The war escalated

into the ‘primal catastrophe’ of the 20th

century. In coordination with the Free

Trade Unions the SPD refrained from taking

active measures to enforce their political

and so cial objectives. The opposition which

soon developed within the party demand-

ed an immediate end to the ‘party truce’

and the war in general. In April 1917 the

Un abhän gige Sozialdemokratische Partei

Deutsch lands (USPD, Independent Social

Democratic Party of Germany) was found-

ed and soon joined by the ‘Spartakus

group’ around Rosa Luxemburg and Karl

Liebknecht – the split of German Social

De mocracy was sealed.

‘Party truce’ or fundamental opposition?

The split of Social Democracy during the First World War (1914–1918)

6. Rosa Luxemburg 1912.

1. The Social Democratic parliamentary party in the Reichstag at the beginning of 1914: Philipp Scheidemann (x) and Friedrich Ebert (xx), amongst others.

xxx

2. Mobilization in 1914: enthusiastically to war.

3. The reality of war: the Battle of Verdun 1916.

5. USPD delegation at the peace conference in Stockholm in 1917: Karl Kautsky (x), Eduard Bernstein (xx) and Hugo Haase (1863–1919) (xxx), amongst others.

7. Karl Liebknecht (1871–1919) at an anti-war rally.

4. Demonstrating women at the end of 1917.

xxx

xxx

After the German November Revolution and the proclamation of the republic the two social democratic parties set up a revolutionary transi -tional government, the Rat der Volksbeauftragten (Council of People’s Deputies), under the leadership of Friedrich Ebert, on 10 November 1918 (1). At the end of 1918 the USPD members (2) resigned from the Council; the Independent Social Democratic Party withdrew to assume the role of fundamental opposition.

In terms of its programme, the USPD underwent a clear radicalisation in 1919 – it focused on abolition of the bourgeois parliament and the intro-duction of a Soviet system.

Despite membership growth and considerable electoral successes the USPD collapsed in October 1920. In a dispute about accession to the recently founded Communist International the majority of the members decided in favour of joining the Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands (KPD, Com-munist Party of Germany), which had been established at the end of 1918.

The problems facing Social Democracy during and after the revolution were enormous: orderly reintegration of soldiers into civilian life, ensuring food supplies and keeping Germany unifi ed.

The SPD turned out to be completely unprepared, both theoretically and practically, for the upcoming tasks of the political and social revolution. In the absence of suitable personnel within the party, the SPD was forced to rely on the pre-revolutionary functional elite in the public administration, the judiciary and the army.

On the other hand, the SPD saw the fulfi lment of basic programmatic demands, for example, a parliamentary republic, the equal right to vote for men and women, an eight-hour working day and legal recognition of trade unions. (3) The SPD was oriented towards parliamentary democracy and in this sense far ahead of the time. The Social Democrats sharply rejected the idea of a Soviet republic in accordence with the Russian model. The National Assembly convening in Weimar adopted a parliamentary-democratic constitution and elected SPD chairman Friedrich Ebert as President of the German Republic. (4)

The revolution ultimately deepened the split in the labour movement. The SPD, the USPD (until its dissolution) and the KPD were fi ghting one another, so mutually restricting their political possibilities. Only the SPD supported the Weimar Republic and hence became a target of the KPD (5).

REVOLUTOLUREVOLUTIVOLURREVOLUTIREVO

Revolution and foundation of the republic

Intensifi cation of the split of the workers’ movement (1918/19)

1. Postcard: Proclamation of the German Republic with the members of the fi rst Council of the People’s Deputies: Friedrich Ebert (1871–1925), Otto Landsberg (1869–1957), Philipp Scheidemann (1865–1939) of the SPD, Emil Barth (1879–1941), Wilhelm Dittmann (1874–1954) and Hugo Haase (1863–1919) of the USPD.

5. ‘January uprising’ of the KPD in 1919.

In the course of the German November revolution the two social

democratic parties formed a revolutionary transitional govern-

ment on 10 November 1918, the Rat der Volksbeauftragten

( Council of the People’s Deputies). Essential programmatic

demands of the SPD – for example, foundation of a republic, equal

right to vote for men and women, an eight-hour working day –

had become reality in Germany’s new parliamentary system. In

order to tackle the problems arising after the end of the war and

in the absence of suitable personnel within the party the Social

Democrats counted on the cooperation with the ‘old’ functional

elites. The USPD, in contrast, demanded the implementation of a

‘soviet’ system instead of a ‘bourgeois parliament’. The USPD-

representatives resigned from the government. In the dispute

about accession to the recently founded Communist Interna -

tional the majority of the USPD members decided to join the

Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands (KPD, Communist Party of

Germany) which fought against the democratic republic.

3. SPD poster depicting the

achievements of the revolution.

4. Election of Friedrich Ebert as

president of the German Republic on 11 February 1919 in Weimar.

2. German government announcement

concerning the withdrawal of the

USPD from the Council of People’s

Deputies.

In 1920 the SPD decided to draw up a new programme which was to

point the way for party policy in the young republic. A fi rst draft worked

out under the leadership of Adolf Braun provoked fi erce criticism

however. Substantial parts of the revised form of the programme, which

was presented to the Görlitz 1921 party convention (1) for adoption,

were written by Eduard Bernstein (2, 3). Its contents differed con-

siderably from the Erfurt Platform.

At the Görlitz party convention (4) The SPD presented itself as a people’s

party in which all ‘physical and intellectual workers’ were to be united

for the ‘joined struggle for democracy and socialism’. The class struggle

‘for the liberation of the proletariat’ was no longer simply a ‘historical

necessity’ but at the same time a ‘moral demand’.

The platform also refl ects the specifi c living conditions of post-war

society. To that extent the SPD regarded ‘the democratic republic as the

form of state irrevocably established by historical development and any

attack upon it as an attempt against the people’s vital rights’ (5).

PEOPLE’S PAOPLE’S APEOPLE’S PPEOPLE’S P’ PAPEOPLE’S PAPEOPLE’S P’

On the way towards to a people’s party

The Görlitz Programme of the SPD, 1921

At the party convention in Görlitz in 1921

the SPD adopted a new programme which

was to point the way for party policy in the

young republic. In the main parts, written

by Eduard Bernstein, the platform pre sent-

ed the SPD as a people’s party in which all

‘physical and intellectual workers’ were to

be united for the ‘joined struggle for

democracy and socialism’. The class struggle

‘for the liberation of the proletariat’ was no

longer simply a ‘historical necessity’ but at

the same time a ‘moral demand’. The SPD

regarded ‘the democratic republic as the

form of state irrevocably established by

historical development and any attack upon

it as an attempt against the people’s vital

rights.’

5. Front page of the Görlitz Programme.

2. Eduard Bernstein, around 1925.

1. Front page of ‘Wahrer Jacob’, a social democratic satirical fortnightly, on the occasion of the Görlitz

party convention.

3. Programme commission of the Görlitz party convention.

4. The building and the plenary of the Görlitz party convention.

The early 1920s saw a rapprochement between the SPD and the rump

USPD. This fi nally led to the merger at the Nuremberg party convention

in 1922. (1) In the manifesto of the party convention the Unifi ed Social

Democratic Party called for ‘the protection and consolidation of the

German Republic’. Furthermore, it decided to work out a new programme.

Karl Kautsky (2) und Rudolf Hilferding (3) were in overall charge of this

task.

As regards contents, the draft made more pointed reference to the

positions on class struggle enshrined in the Erfurt Programme, not least

as a heritage from USPD and as a reaction to Communist competition.

The Heidelberg Programme of 1925 (4), however, was – in accordance

with Social Democratic tradition – a fi rm commitment to freedom and

democracy. On behalf of the programme commission, Hilferding thus

emphasised the inseparable link between Socialism, freedom and

democracy. In this respect, the programme reads as follows: ‘The de-

mocratic republic is the most favourable basis for the liberation struggle

of the working class and hence for the realisation and implementation

of Socialism. That is why the Social Democratic Party defends the re public

and advocates its further development’

In addition, the Heidelberg Programme also promoted principles for a

peace policy: the SPD ‘demands the peaceful solution of international

confl icts and their settlement before mandatory courts of arbitration.’

As the fi rst party in Germany the SPD, with its Heidelberg Programme,

stood up ‘for European economic unity which has become imperative

for economic reasons, for the formation of the United States of Europe

to achieve solidarity of interests of peoples on all continents ‘.

The Heidelberg Programme refl ects a central dilemma of the SPD in the

Weimar Republic: on the one hand, to act as a Republican party based

on the constitution, and on the other, to remain a proletarian class

party – that is, a desire to be both a ruling and an opposition party.

EUROPEEUROPROPEEUROP

For Socialism and freedom – the European perspectiveThe Heidelberg Programme of 1925

After the merger of the rump USPD and

the SPD at the Nuremberg party conven-

tion in 1922, Karl Kautsky and Rudolf

Hilferding drafted a new party platform.

Although some elements of the Erfurt

Programme’s Marxist orientation had been

included, the main focus was on the com-

mitment to the democratic republic as the

‘the most favourable basis for the libera -

tion struggle of the working class and hence

for the realisation and implementation of

Socialism’. Furthermore the SPD, as the fi rst

German party, advocated the formation of

the United States of Europe. As a conse-

quence, programmatic differences within

the SPD soon became apparent. The Hei-

delberg Programme refl ects a central dilem-

ma of the SPD in the Weimar Republic: on

the one hand, to act as a Republican party

based on the constitution, and on the other,

to remain a proletarian class party – that is,

a desire to be both a ruling and an oppo-

sition party.

a

si

1. Rally on the occasion of the

merger of SPD and USPD in 1922 and

commemorative stamp.

2. Karl Kautsky.

3. Rudolf Hilferding (1877–1941).

4. Front page of the documents for the Heidelberg party convention.

An alternative to the Communist theory of ‘state monopolist capi-

talism’ was the concept of ‘organised capitalism’ developed by Rudolf

Hilferding. It was based on the assumption that the development of

the capitalist economy would itself give rise to tendencies towards

planning and the democratisation of enterprise decision-making which

would have to be taken up and promoted by state action. This ana lysis,

which met with the approval of the delegates after a key-note speech

by Rudolf Hilferding on ‘the tasks of Social Democracy in the Republic’

(1) in 1927 at the Kiel SPD party convention, (2), gave rise to the

programme of ‘economic democracy’. Measures of planning and

democratic control played a more important role in it than the demand

for socialisation. Fritz Naphtali (3) presented a detailed description of

the programme for economic democracy which was adopted by the

Free Trade Unions at their 1928 congress in Hamburg (4). The demand

for an ‘economic democracy’ became the connecting element.

PARTICIPATC ATPARTICIPATPARTICIPAATPARTICIPATPARTICIPA

Analysis of recent developments and programmatic consequences‘Organised capitalism’ and ‘economic democracy’

An ambitious alternative to the Communist

theory of a ‘state monopolist capitalism’

was the concept of an ‘organised capita-

lism’ developed by Rudolf Hilferding. This

approach was adopted by the Kiel party

convention in 1927. The economy, hitherto

operated and organised by entrepreneurs,

was to be transformed into a planned eco-

nomy organised by the state. This concept

had far-reaching consequences for future

political and economic discussions in which

the original central aim of nationalization

increasingly receded before demands for

planning, control and ‘economic democ-

racy’ – a legitimisation for a reform policy.

The demand for an ‘economic democracy’

became the link between the party and the

Free Trade Unions.

1. Delegates at the Kiel party convention, among others Rudolf Hilferding (x), 1927.

2. Front page ‘The tasks of Social Democracy’ with the section ‘From free competition to an organised economy’.

3. Fritz Naphtali (1888–1961) summarised the vision of

an ‘economic democracy’.

4. Poster for the Congress of

the Free Trade Unions in 1928.

x

The Great Depression, mass unemployment (1, 2) and social misery,

combined with dramatic political radicalisation, limited the SPD’s room

for manoeuvre. The last coalition cabinet under Social Democrat Hermann

Müller (3) – the last parliamentary government of the Weimar Republic

– collapsed in March 1930 as a consequence of trade union and intra-

party resistance to the bourgeois coalition parties’ demands, in order to

reduce labour costs, to bring down unemployment insurance contri-

butions, making it possible to bring down benefi ts in turn.

Even the policy of tolerating the Brüning government (4) led to a fi erce

argument. The SPD hoped to prevent ‘something worse’, that is, disso-

lution of the Reichstag, the parliament, new elections and ultimately the

strengthening of the National Socialists and the Communists. The trade-

union programmes for job creation and the restructuring of the eco nomy

were not taken up by the SPD. By accepting Brüning’s defl ationary policy

it assumed a share of the responsibility for his policy of wage reductions

and cuts in social welfare. In 1931, this led, among other things, to the

secession of parts of the left in the SPD and to the foundation of the

Sozialistische Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands (SAP, Socialist Workers’ Party

of Germany). To the SPD’s parliamentary attitude they opposed the aim

of mobilising the masses to overthrow capitalism.

At the same time, the Social Democratic Party – as the only remaining

republican party based on the constitution – became increasingly entangled

in the fi ght against National Socialism, which grew stronger and

stronger. (5) In a propaganda campaign the SPD battled against the

Nazis with all its might (‘Hitler means war’), but was unable to prevent

Nazi dictatorship.

AADILEMMADILEMMADILEMM

During the Great Depression – defeat at the hands of National Socialism Political and programmatic dilemma, 1930–1933

The Great Depression, mass unemployment

and social misery, together with dramatic

political radicalisation limited SPD’s room

for manoeuvre. In the government of the

grand coalition, the last parliamentary

government of the Weimar Republic, the

SPD was not able to implement its social

policies against opposition from the bour-

geois coalition partner. After the dissolu-

tion of the coalition in March 1930 the

SPD ‘tolerated’ the de fl ationary policy of

Heinrich Brüning hoping to prevent ‘some-

thing worse’, namely a strengthening of the

KPD and the NSDAP (the Nazi party). The

fact that the SPD thus assumed a share of

the responsibility for Brüning’s policy of

wage reduction and social welfare cuts led

to the secession of left-wingers and the

foundation of the Sozialistische Arbeiter-

partei Deutschlands (SAP, Socialist Workers’

Party of Germany). The trade-union pro-

grammes for job creation and restructuring

the economy were not taken up by the SPD.

Both the Free Trade Unions and the party

were smashed by the National Socialists in

1933.

1. ‘I’ll do any kind of work’ – Unemployed worker during the Great Depression in the 1930s.

2. ‘Ridiculous all this fuss about work! We’re doing perfectly well

without it’ – Caricature on unemployment,

early 1930s.

3. The cabinet of Hermann Müller (1876–1931), SPD (x).

5. SPD poster for the Reichstag in 1932; rally of the Eiserne Front (Iron Front;

the three arrows are the symbol of

the Iron Front).

4. Chancellor Heinrich Brüning (1885–1970), Zentrum (German Centre Party).

fo

p

P

g

th

B

w

1

x

Directly on seizing power in the fi rst half of 1933 the National Socialists

smashed workers’ organisations. Many Social Democrats and trade-

unionists were then subjected to brutal persecution (1). Thousands of

members of the labour movement were arrested or had to fl ee abroad.

Despite these harsh repressions, many were determined to resist.

The Sopade, the SPD Executive Committee in exile, was initially estab-

lished in Prague to organise political agitation and resistance against the

Nazi regime from there. In January 1934, the Sopade adopted the ‘ Prague

Manifesto’ (2). In this programme the Sopade conceded omissions and

mistakes on the part of the divided workers’ movement and committed

itself to the revolutionary fi ght against National Socialism – explicitly on

a Marxist basis.

But since the pre-conditions upon which the Manifesto was based,

namely that the Nazi regime would soon be destabilised by economic

crises and growing resistance, did not become reality, it soon lost its

importance.

The common experience of the democratic and pluralistic culture in the

UK and Scandinavia (3) led the hitherto split Social Democratic or-

ganisations exiled in Britain and Sweden to remember their liberal

democratic traditions, which were to be developed further in a radically

democratic and socialist direction. They joined forces at the beginning

of the 1940s and worked out plans for the time ‘after Hitler’. Their

common aim was to ‘establish a free socialist labour movement after

the crushing Hitler’s dictatorship’ – as an alternative to the Stalinist

degeneracy of socialism. At the centre of post-war-planning was the

creation of a democratic Germany in a federation of European states

with common foreign, defence and economic policies. (4)

RESISTANSISRESISTANRESISTANRESISTAN

Exile and resistance to National Socialism

From the ‘Prague Manifesto’ to plans for a democratic post-war order, 1933–1945

In face of the brutal persecution launched right after their seizure

of power by the National Socialists thousands of members of

the labour movement had to fl ee abroad. The Sopade, the SPD

Executive Committee in exile, initially organised social democratic

resistance against the Nazi regime from Prague. In its ‘Prague

Manifesto’ (January 1934) it conceded omissions and mistakes on

the part of the divided workers’ movement and committed itself

to the revolutionary fi ght against National Socialism – explicitly

on a Marxist basis. The common experience of the democratic

culture in the western countries of exile and the continuing con-

fl icts with the Communists were to shape the party in the long

term. In exile, Social Democrats and members of left-wing-groups

met to draft plans for the ‘the time after Hitler’. They all agreed

on the same aim: to create a democratic Germany in a federation

of European states.

4. Front page ‘On the policy of German Socialists’ – a crucial text for designing the ‘time after Hitler’.

44.

1. Political prisoners in the cellar of the ‘Columbiahaus’ prison operated by the Gestapo, 1933. – The former Prime Minister of Oldenburg Bernhard Kuhnt (1876–1946) is

humiliated by the SA and is dragged through the streets of Chemnitz.

2. The SPD Executive Committee in exile in Prague: Otto Wels (1873–1939) in the middle, Erich Ollenhauer (1901–1963) on the left – and the ‘Prague Manifesto’ of 25 Januar 1934.

3. Willy Brandt (1913–1992) and the draft of the resolution ‘The peace aims of the democratic Socialists’ in Stockholm in 1943.

Even before the end of the war the fi rst few meetings to re-establish

the SPD took place in the already liberated areas of Germany. Kurt

Schumacher (1, 2) was the pre-eminent personality of post-war Social

Democracy. During Nazi dictatorship he had been detained in concen-

tration camps for more than a decade. It was Schumacher’s aim not

just to ‘rebuild’, but to construct a new SPD and a new Germany,

Germany as a whole. His ‘Political Guidelines of the SPD’ – a fi rst

programmatic defi nition of the party’s position – were adopted by the

fi rst post-war party convention of the SPD, which took place in Ham-

burg in 1946. Schumacher’s credo was: ‘There is no Socialism without

democracy, without the freedom of cognition and the freedom to

criticise’. Schumacher accepted Marxism as only one method – besides

ethical, philosophical and religious foundations – for identifying and

dealing with the problems of capitalist society. He demanded the

inclusion of the middle class, but basically stuck to the idea of a party

of the working class.

Against Schumacher’s will the discussion about a programme was

revived. Willy Brandt (3) said in 1949: ‘Democratic Socialism is a set of

ideas about the reorganisation of social relations, but is not a system

of ideas closed up in itself ... However, these fundamental convictions

which will continue to develop further are based on a common philo-

sophy. They rest on the commitment to freedom and humanism, the

state based on the rule of law and social justice.’

Inspired by the Declaration of Principles of the Socialist International

in 1951 (4) the SPD worked out an action programme which was

adopted by the party at its Dortmund convention in 1952. Central

points of this programme were: espousal for German unity in freedom,

equality of women in all spheres of life and democratisation of the

economy through implementation of workers’ codetermination

rights.

Owing to the lack of a fundamental intellectual analysis of the situa-

tion and insuffi cient precision a new version of the programme was

worked out under the supervision of Willi Eichler that was subsequent-

ly adopted by the Berlin party convention in 1954 (5). It called for a

‘society of social justice, freedom and world peace’. In addition, it

contained the future-oriented statement that the SPD had developed

from a working class party ‘into a people’s party’.

PEOPLE’S PAOPLE’S APEOPLE’S PPEOPLE’S P’ PAPEOPLE’S PAPEOPLE’S P’

Commitment to the aims of freedom and social justiceFrom the fi rst policy guidelines to the Dortmund/Berlin action programme of the SPD 1945–1952/54

The ‘Political Guidelines of the SPD’ –

drafted by Kurt Schumacher – were path-

breaking for the post-war party; they were

adopted by the Hamburg party convention

in 1946. Schumacher’s credo was: ‘There is

no socialism without democracy, without

the freedom of cognition and the freedom

to criticise’. Schumacher accepted Marxism

only as one method – alongside ethical,

philosophical and religious foundations –

for analysing and addressing the problems

of capitalist society. In 1952 the SPD passed

the Dortmund Action Programme. The

central points of this programme were:

espousal for German unity in freedom,

equality of women in all spheres of life,

democratisation of the economy through

implementation of workers’ co-determi na-

tion rights. The revised version, the Berlin

Action Programme of 1954, underlined

that the SPD had developed from a

working class party into ‘a people’s party’.

4. Poster of the 1951 International Socialist

Conference in Frankfurt am Main where the

Socialist International was founded.

1. Kurt Schumacher (1895–1952) at a SPD rally in Hamm, 1946.

2. Members of the SPD party-executive in 1946: (left-right) Egon Franke (1913–1995), Kurt Schumacher, Erich Ollenhauer, Alfred Nau (1906–1983) and Fritz Heine (1904–2002).

3. Willy Brandt at a SPD convention in Berlin, 1948.

5. The SPD executive at the Dortmund party convention in 1952 and Front page ‘Action programme’.

In June 1945, the Soviet military administration permitted the formation

of anti-Fascist parties in its zone of occupation. Thereupon the Kommu-

nistische Partei Deutschlands (KPD, Communist Party of Germany) was

re-founded; Social Democracy constituted itself in the Soviet occupation

zone (SOZ) with the Zentralausschuss (central committee). Whereas the

SPD in the Western occupation zones, led by Schumacher, refused any

cooperation or merger with the communists, the Zentralausschuss chaired

by Otto Grotewohl was prepared to cooperate closely with the KPD in

the belief that, with 619,000 members in the SOZ and Berlin, the SPD

would act from a position of strength. Starting in September 1945,

however, the KPD mounted a ‘merger campaign’. ‘Merger resolutions’

of SPD subgroups of the SOZ were frequently passed only by deception

or under massive pressure from the Soviet occupying forces. Where

possible, people voiced their rejection. (1)

With the forced amalgamation of the SPD and the KPD, and the founda-

tion of the Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands (SED, Socialist

Unity Party of Germany) in April 1946 (2), the SPD was dissolved in the

Soviet-occupied part of Germany. Berlin’s division into four zones enabled

Social Democracy to continue to operate in the Eastern sector of Berlin.

After the building of the Wall in 1961, however, the SPD in East Berlin

was dissolved.

Shortly after the forced amalgamation purges in the party and in so ciety

as a whole were launched, aimed mainly at former Social Democrats.

They were persecuted for advocating social democratic policy – ‘Sozial-

demokratismus (‘Social democratism’) – ‘dismissed’ from their positions

and arrested (3). Later, the SED developed into a Marxist-Leninist party,

a ‘party of the new type’. The burgeoning hopes after Stalin’s death in

1953 (4) of an end of Communist rule were disappointed. The workers´

demonstrations in East Germany on 17 June 1953, caused by the step-

ping up of industrial quotas (‘more work for less pay’), soon turned into

an uprising, accompanied by calls for freedom and German unity. It was

brutally put down with the help of Soviet tanks.

GBONDAGOBONDABONDBONDAGBONDA

From liberation to new bondage

Forced amalgamation and a ‘party of a new type’, 1945 –1953

With the forced amalgamation of the SPD and the KPD and the

foundation of the Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands (SED,

German Socialist Unity Party) in April 1946 the SPD was dissolved

in the Soviet Occupation Zone (except for East Berlin). The SED

later developed into a Marxist-Leninist party, a ‘party of a new

type’. A dictatorship was installed which could be propped up

only by the military presence of the Red Army, as the violent sup-

pression of the uprising in the DDR (GDR, German Democratic

Republic) on 17 June 1953 dramatically showed.

4. Uprising in the GDR on the 17 June 1953, here: Berlin and Halle.

1. Ballot against the amalgamation in West Berlin and resolution of the SPD district group Prenzlauer Berg against ‘amalgamation’, 1946.

2. Wilhelm Pieck (1876–1960), Otto Grotewohl (1894–1964) and Walter Ulbricht (1893–1973) at the amalgamation party convention of the SPD and the KPD in Berlin’s Admiralspalast, 22 April 1946.

3. Bautzen prison where many political opponents were incarcerated and tortured.

After severe defeats at the hands of the Christlich Demokratische Union

(CDU, Christian Democratic Union) under Konrad Adenauer in the

elections to the German Parliament (the Bundestag) in 1953 and 1957,

the call for a programmatic renewal within the SPD became louder and

louder. It wanted and was compelled to adapt to post-war reality. In this

sense, the SPD wished to abandon its previous role as perpetual oppo-

sition, leave behind the role of societal and political outsider and convey

a positive image to the voters. After several years of preparatory work

in the programme commission under the chairmanship of Willi Eichler

and the economist Heinrich Deist (1), an extraordinary party convention,

held up from 13 to 15 November 1959 in Bad Godesberg, discussed

and adopted the new party programme. What was most noteworthy in

the Godesberg Programme (2–5) was the offi cial and conclusive

abandonment of Marxism as party doctrine and the renunciation of a

socialist ‘ultimate aim’ – both essential elements of the party’s tradition

since the ‘Anti-Socialist Laws’ of 1878. The Programme committed itself

to the core values of Democratic Socialism:

• freedom from exploitation and dependency, freedom to actively

contribute to politics and society;

• justice as a fundamental condition of eqaul freedom for all;

• solidarity in the sense of the awareness that the community bears

responsibility for all its members.

Humanism, classical philosophy and Christian ethics were cited as the

sources of Democratic – that ist, liberal – Socialism, understood as the

perpetual pursuit of freedom and justice.

The most disputed passages of the programme were the statements on

economic policy: the SPD now committed itself to a social market

economy, self-government and decentralisation with the active partici-

pation of workers and consumers.

Henceforth the SPD regarded itself as a ‘left-wing people’s party oriented

towards continuous reform’ within the parliamentary-democratic

framework of the Grundgesetz (Basic Law) of the Federal Republic of

Germany.

LUCORE VACORE VALORE VCORE VA UCORE VALRE VA

The transformation of the SPD into a modern people’s partyThe Godesberg Programme of 1959

During the 1950s it increasingly became accepted within the SPD

that the party had to adapt to the post-war reality if they wanted

to be taken serious as a major political force. After several years of

preparatory work by a programme commission under the leader-

ship of Willi Eichler and Heinrich Deist an extraordinary party

convention in Bad Godesberg, 13–15 November 1959, adopted

a new platform. In this programme Marxism was abandoned as

the main foundation of social democratic policy, as was the idea

of a socialist ‘ultimate aim’. Democratic socialism was now de-

fi ned as the perpetual pursuit of freedom and justice. The Social

Democrats considered themselves as a ‘left-wing people’s party

oriented towards continuous reform’ within the parliamentary-

democratic framework of the Grundgesetz (Basic Law) of the

Federal Republic of Germany.

5. Front page of the Godesberg Platform.

3. Erich Ollenhauer delivers a speech at the Godesberg party convention, 1959.

1. Herbert Wehner (1906–1990), Willi Eichler (1896–1971), Heinrich Deist (1902–1964) and Fritz Erler (1913–1967), 1958.

2. SPD poster „Keep up with the times“, 1959.

4. Open ballot on the Godesberg Platform; among

others, Holger Börner (x) (1931–2006).

x

With its programmatic and political reorientation at Godesberg the

SPD managed to appeal to new social strata and was accepted as a

modern reform-oriented party (1). At the beginning of the 1960s the

Social Democrats developed concepts for the modernisation of nearly

all areas of society – from energy policy, through road construction

and urban development, to education, especially university education.

Keynesian economic policy was regarded as a means of mitigation and

ultimately avoiding economic crises and thus of safeguarding sustained

economic progress, guaranteeing social security. Codetermination and

democratisation became keywords of Social Democratic programme

declarations. Thus the foundations for the party’s success in the 1960s

and 1970s were laid.

In the course of only a few years the SPD, with its leadership team

around Willy Brandt managed to assume governmental responsibility

at federal level (2). Furthermore, the population became more and

more dissatisfi ed with the retrograde policy of the CDU/CSU. When,

in 1966, the Christian-Liberal coalition under Ludwig Erhard foundered

on its increasing domestic and foreign policy problems, the SPD de-

cided to enter into a grand coalition with the CDU/CSU. This decision

led to a fi erce internal dispute (3). The majority of the party followed

Brandt’s line, however, who was convinced that Social Democracy

could not withdraw from government participation at federal level.

Further developments confi rmed that his views had been absolutely

correct. In West German society a climate favourable to a Social

Democratic reform policy was created (4). In the 1969 federal elections

the SPD got 42.7 percent of the votes and was able to present Willy

Brandt as the Federal Chancellor in a coalition with the Freie Demo-

kratische Partei (FDP; Free Democratic Party) for the fi rst time (5).

AMODERNISAODERNISAMODERNIODMODERNISAR AMODERNISOD AR

‘The opportunity for a new German policy must not be lost’ The SPD in government since 1966

After the programmatic and political re-

orientation of the Godesberg platform the

SPD appealed to new social strata and was

accepted as a modern reform-oriented

party. At the beginning of the 1960s the

social democrats developed ideas on the

modernisation of nearly all social spheres.

Participation in government as the ‘junior

partner’ in the grand coalition consisting

of CDU/CSU and SPD (1966–1969) and

forming the government with the Freie

Demokratische Partei (FDP, Free Democratic

Party) under Federal Chancellor Willy Brandt

in 1969 underlined the fact that, at the

end of the 1960s, the SPD was up-to-date

in terms of programme and policy.

5. Willy Brandt after the election victory, 28 September 1969.

m

P

p

o

fo

D

P

in

e

1. SPD election newspaper, 1963, and poster, 1961.

2. Shadow cabinet of the SPD, fi rst row from left: Carlo Schmid (1896–1979), Käte Strobel (1907–1996), Karl Schiller (1911–1994), Willy Brandt, Fritz Erler, Alex Möller (1903–1985); second row from left: Herbert Wehner, Ernst Schellenberg (1907–1984), Helmut Schmidt (geb. 1918), Gustav Heinemann (1899–1976), Waldemar von Knoeringen (1906–1971).

3. Protests against the policy of the grand coalition, here the – so called – Notstandsgesetze (emer-gency acts), before the SPD party convention in Nuremberg, 1968; Herbert Wehner in the fore-ground.

4. SPD poster ‘We are creating a modern Germany’, 1969.

In 1970 the SPD party convention in Saarbrücken (1) tasked a com-

mission with working out a long-term socio-political programme, the

so-called Orientierungsrahmen ’85 (orientation framework ’85). In

this way the SPD wanted to use the opportunity to ‘put a Social

Democratic stamp on this decade’, as Helmut Schmidt put it. Under

his chairmanship a fi rst draft of the ‘long-term programme’ was

presented in 1972 (2), which, in a revised version, was then adopted

by the Mannheim party convention in 1975 as an ‘economic and

political orientation framework for 1975 – 1985’ (3). Brandt referred

to the orientation framework as the ‘interface between day-to-day

politics and party platform’.

In connection with its work on the ‘orientation framework’ the SPD

resumed discussions on a party platform that had stopped after the

adoption of the Godesberg Programme (1959). Infl uenced by con-

temporary ideas about planning and feasibility, the ‘orientation frame-

work’ dealt with the modernisation of the economy as the basis of

long-term safeguarding of jobs, humanisation of work, reform of the

health care system, and equal rights for men and women. The crucial

points are:

• criticism of the conventional notion of effi ciency;

• emphasis on international economic interdependence;

• highlighting of the interaction between qualifi ed economic growth

and a successful reform policy;

• affi rming the state’s responsibility for coping with all societal and

economic problems.

The importance of the ‘OR ’85’ (Orientation framework) as an inte-

grating factor for the SPD should not be underestimated.

The ‘OR ’85’ was not able to provide ‘political orientation’ to the extent

expected, however: the problems that arose in the wake of the world-

wide economic crisis in the second half of the 1970s called into question

all the presuppositions of the long-term programme. (4)

PERSPECTSPEC IPERSPECTPERSP IPERSPECT

Offering political orientation

Programmatic developments in the 1970s

Strongly infl uenced by contemporary ideas

about planning and feasibility, the SPD

drafted a long-term programme at the

beginning of the 1970s that was adopted

by the Mannheim party convention in 1975

as an ‘economic and political orientation

framework for the years 1975–1985’. It

was, among other things, dedicated to

the modernisation of the economy as the

basis of safeguarding jobs in the long term,

the humanisation of the world of work,

reform of the health care system and equal

rights for men and women. The problems

that arose in the wake of the global eco-

nomic crisis in the mid-1970s called into

question all the presuppositions of the

long-term programme.

1. Helmut Schmidt, Willy Brandt, Alfred Nau and others during the SPD party convention in Saarbrücken, 1970.

2. Press conference on the fi nal report of the fi rst commission on the long-term programme (Helmut

Schmidt at the microphone, Hans Apel, on the left) and front page of the ‘Resolution on the orientation

framework ‘85’, 1973.

4. Caricature on the long-term programme, 1973.

3. Mannheim party convention in 1975 and front page of the ‘Economic and political orientation framework for the years 1975–1985’.

In 1984 the SPD decided to work out a new programme in response

to major social developments, such as technological change, the

enviromental challenges (1) that people were becoming increasingly

aware of and the new emancipation and protest movements. Under

chairman Willy Brandt a draft programme was presented, named

after the venue of the commission the ‘Irsee Programme’ (1984) (2).

The comprehensive draft

• redefi ned the Social Democratic understanding of progress;

• emphasised a ‘socially and enviromentally responsible industrial

society’,

• demanded the modifi cation of social structures towards a type of

preventive social policy and help for self-help;

• claimed ‘genuinely equal rights for men and women’ (3).

In 1986 the Nuremberg party convention accepted the draft as a

basis for further discussion within and outside the party. After Willy

Brandt stepped down as party chairman in June 1987 a second

programme commission was established and tasked with the revision,

streamlining and implementation of the ‘Irsee draft’. After intense

deliberations it was able to present a fi nal draft in March 1989. In

close cooperation with the programme commission the working group

‘Fortschritt ’90’ (progress’90) (4) under the chairmanship of Oskar

Lafontaine, Anke Fuchs and Hans-Ulrich Klose developed a government

programme for the general elections (elections to the Bundestag) in

1990 (5). In this programme the SPD declared its commitment to the

reconciliation of the economy and the enviroment.

ESPROGR SPROGREPROGR SPROGRE

‘Tackling new tasks in a new way’From the Irsee draft to the Berlin Platform, 1984–1989

The technological change and ecological challenges that came to

greater prominence in the 1970s and 1980s induced the SPD to

update its fundamental party platform. Under chairman Willy

Brandt a draft – named the ‘Irsee Programme’ after the venue of

the commission – redefi ned the SPD’s concept of progress and

focused on a ‘socially and ecologically responsible industrial

society’, modifi cation of the social security system in the direction

of a preventive social policy and assistance for self-help, and also

demanded the ‘real equality of men and women’.

5. Poster ‘The new path’, 1989.

5.5

1. Smog became the symbol of environmental pollution.

2. Irsee meeting: (from left) Horst Ehmke, Karl Heinz Klär and Willy Brandt as well as Peter von Oertzen, Horst Ehmke, Erhard Eppler and Egon Bahr; Brandt’s handwritten draft of ‘Irsee’.

3. The National Executive Director of the SPD, Anke Fuchs, and delegates in informal talks at the

Münster party convention, 1988. The party convention adopted a resolution (quota resolution) promoting equality of women

and men within the SPD: according to ‘Münster’ at least 40% of the social democratic members of parliament and party offi cials had to be women.

4. Presentation of the government programme ‘Fortschritt ’90’ (Progress’90), second from left Johannes Rau, Hans-Jochen Vogel at the microphone.

Because of the events coming thick and fast in the German Democratic

Republic (GDR) – on 9 November the Wall came down (1) – the

programme party convention of the SPD did not convene, as originally

planned, in Bremen but in Berlin on 18 December 1989 (2, 3). As a

logical consequence the democratic revolution in the GDR and Eastern

Europe was the main focus.

After intense discussions the draft programme was adopted with only

one vote against. With its ‘Berlin Programme’ (4) the SPD confi rmed

its claim to be the ‘party of freedom, social justice and solidarity, equal

rights for women and men, environmental renewal of industrial so ciety

and peace’.

A central point was to emphasise a change in the notion of progress,

which was no longer to be oriented only quantitatively towards eco-

nomic growth, but also qualitatively, towards environmental renewal

as the principle of economic action and improvement of the quality of

life. For the party, progress could be achieved only within a global

framework. The SPD did not submit to the alleged inherent constraints

of technological development, but emphasised the need to shape

politics deliberately by including broad strata of society. The ‘pan-

European house’ and solidarity with the peoples in the Third World

were strongly accentuated. Peace was understood not only as the

absence of war, but as comprising the cooperation of all peoples in

the fi elds of the environment and the economy, culture and human

rights.

A new culture of coexistence was to be promoted and work was no

longer to be limited to gainful employment, but was also to cover work

within the familiy, housework and personal contributions. Reduction

of the working day to six hours should leave enough time for volun-

tary work and cultural participation for both men and women. Equal

rights were for the fi rst time to go beyond the legal equality imple-

mented in 1919 by the Social Democrats, including the right to vote

which they had demanded in as early as 1875.

SOLIDARISOLIDARS ISOLIDAR

‘Through social justice to a society in solidarity’The Berlin Programme of 1989

Faced by the dramatic developments in the German Democratic

Republic (GDR) the SPD’s programme party convention did

not convene, as originally planned, in Bremen but in Berlin on

18 December 1989. Against the background of the collapse of

the SED regime and of the entire ‘Eastern Bloc’ the SPD confi rmed

its claim to be the ‘party of freedom, social justice and solidarity,

of equal rights for women and men, environmental renewal of

industrial society and peace’.

4. Front page of the Berlin Programme.

1. 9 November 1989 – the fall of the Berlin

Wall.

2. Venue of the Berlin programme party convention building, 1989.

3. Markus Meckel, co-founder of the SDP, and Willy Brandt at the Berlin programme party convention, 1989.

On 7 October 1989, the 40th anniversary of the GDR, the Sozialdemo-

kratische Partei in der DDR (SDP, Social Democratic Party in the GDR)

was founded in Schwante, challenging the SED as the self-proclaimed

party of the unifi ed labour movement and totalitarian governing party

of the GDR. In its statute it referred to the ‘traditions of Democratic

Socialism of European Socialists and Social Democrats’. It was the aim

of the still illegal party to fi ght for and achieve Social Democracy and

an ‘environmentally oriented market economy with democratic control

of economic power’. At its delegate conference in January 1990 the

party re-named itself Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (Social

Democratic Party of Germany) and committed itself to the unity of the

German nation (1). The fi rst SPD party convention in the GDR agreed a

fundamental platform in February 1990 in Leipzig (2–4) that, in its

essential features, was based on the Berlin Programme, but was

characterised primarly by the experience of suppression under SED

dictatorship. Taking as point of departure the Social Democratic basic

values of freedom, justice and solidarity, the East German SPD commit-

ted itself to a democratic, social and environmentally oriented market

economy.

In September 1990, the unity of Social Democracy was re-established

by merging the West and East German SPD at a party convention in

Berlin.

ATREUNIFICAUNIFICATREUNIFICATUREUNIFICAATREUNIFICATREUNIFICA

‘Shaping reunifi cation – social and just’

The Leipzig Programme of the SPD in the GDR, 1990

On 7 October 1989, the 40th anniversary of

the GDR, the Sozialdemokratische Partei in

der DDR (SDP, Social Democratic Party in

the GDR) was founded in Schwante. The

SDP directly attacked the claim to ultimate

leadership of the SED, the self-proclaimed

party of the unifi ed labour movement and

totalitarian governing party of the GDR. At

the fi rst delegates’ conference of the SDP

in January 1990 the party re-named itself

Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands

(SPD). One of its central aims was the re-

unifi cation of the German nation. The fi rst

party convention of the SPD in the GDR in

February 1990 in Leipzig adopted a funda-

mental platform. Based on the Berlin Pro-

gramme the SPD in the GDR affi rmed basic

values such as freedom, justice and soli dar-

ity and committed itself to a demo cratic,

social and environmentally-oriented market

economy. In September 1990, the unity of

German Social Democracy was re-estab-

lished.

1. Front page of ‘Extrablatt’,

1990.

2. The stage of the Leipzig party convention.

3. Flyer for the Leipzig party convention.

4. SPD rally in Leipzig with Willy Brandt, 23 February 1990.

At the federal elections in September 1998 the SPD managed for the fi rst

time since 1972 to become the strongest party with 40.9 per cent of the

votes. (1) Together with Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (Alliance 90/the Green Party)

it formed the new Federal Government, with Gerhard Schröder as Federal

Chancellor. On taking offi ce, the Red-Green Federal Government was faced

by urgent tasks concerning the labour market and welfare state since the

former government of Christian Democrats and Liberals had been charac-

terized by a pronounced ‘backlog of reforms’. This rendered a political and

programmatic reorientation of Social Democratic government inevitable.

Enlisting the support of the ‘new middle class’ (Neue Mitte) of achievement-

orientated people, appeals to the personal responsibility of every individual

through an activating state, environmental change of industrial society, equal

rights for men and women and efforts to consolidate public fi nances and the

social welfare system – these were the key points of the SPD’s programmatic

declarations and, at the same time, the main policy issues pursued by the

Red-Green Federal Government. The party chairman and Minister of Finance

Oskar Lafontaine withdrew from this process in March 1999 by stepping down

from his posts.

First, the Federal Government pursued a consistent policy of consolidating

public fi nances. Because of unfavourable international economic developments

and the ensuing increase in unemployment, this policy had to be discontinu-

ed. Besides the necessary reorganisation of the Bundesanstalt für Arbeit

(Federal Employment Agency) into labour agencies, the so-called Hartz reforms

emphasised an activating labour market policy. Furthermore, economies had

to be introduced in health and pension policies.

With ‘Agenda 2010’ (2, 3) in 2003 the Social Democratic government pre-

sented a programme which was to make Germany ‘fi t for the future’ through

labour market reforms and the reorganisation of social security. ‘The reorga-

nisation of the welfare state and its renewal are indispensable. It is not a

question of sounding its death knell, but solely of preserving the substance

of the welfare state. That is why we need radical changes.’ (Federal Chancel-

lor Gerhard Schröder, 2003)

The basic guideline of this Social Democratic reform programme was the

pursuit of social justice (4). Nevertheless, the Agenda 2010 triggered demons-

trations, election defeats and resignation from the party (5). The economy

recovered, however, and unemployment fell once again.

AREORIENTAO TAREORIENTAOREORIENTATAREORIENTAREORIENTA

‘Innovation and social justice’ – ‘The courage for change’From the beginnings of the ‘Red-Green project’ to ‘Agenda 2010’, 1998–2005

Globalisation, persistent economic crisis, demographic change and

the burden on social security systems as well as the Kohl era’s

‘backlog of reforms’ were the challenges facing the SPD and the

Schröder/Fischer government. The main issues of the program-

matic declarations of the SPD and of the policy pursued by the

Red-Green federal government were: to canvass the ‘new middle-

class’, the strengthening of individual responsibility through an

activating social state, environmental transformation of the in-

dustrial society, equal rights for men and women and the

sustained consolidation of public fi nances and the welfare system.

With the ‘Agenda 2010’ the social democratic government

presented a programme which was to make the German

welfare state ‘fi t for the future’. The socio-political consolidation

measures introduced on this basis, the ‘Hartz reforms’ in partic-

ular, led to falling unemployment on the one hand, but to fi erce

internal arguments on the other. As a consequence, the SPD

experienced a marked fall in membership and suffered several

severe election defeats.

5. Demonstration against the so-called Hartz IV laws, Berlin 2006.

1. Gerhard Schröder during the federal election campaign in Berlin, August 1998.

2. SPD regional conference in Bonn, April 2003. The majority of the delegates approved the ‘process of readjustment of our social security systems ‘, that is, Agenda 2010.

3. Federal government posters concerning Agenda 2010, 2003.

4. SPD fl yer for a minimum wage,

2006.

In December 1999, the SPD party convention in Berlin (1), started to draft a

new party platform to take account of a changing society, including the

experience of German unity, the effects of European integration, the conse-

quences of economic globalisation, destruction of the environment and the

dramatic demographic changes.

At the beginning of 2007 the party executive adopted the so-called ‘Bremen

draft’ (2, 3) for a new programme, still based on the basic values of freedom,

justice and solidarity. After intense discussions within the party (4) in Septem-

ber 2007 (5) the programme commission presented a streamlined and re vised

draft for the party programme convention in October 2007. It concentrated

on eight critical areas:

• a peaceful and just world

• a social and democratic Europe

• civil society (Bürgergesellschaft) based on solidarity and a democratic

state

• equal rights for both sexes

• sustainable progress and qualitative growth

• decent jobs for all

• a preventive welfare state

• better education and a child-friendly society

On the basis of long party tradition the SPD committed itself to Democratic

Socialism as the ‘vision of a free and just society based on solidarity whose

implementation and realisation remains our constant task. The principle that

guides our action is Social Democracy.’

ARENEWAARENEWNEWAR ARENEWAR

‘Modernising Germany in justice and fairness’ On the road to a new programme – ‘Social Democracy in the 21st century’

1. SPD federal party convention in Berlin,

1999. The convention decides to resume work on a new party platform.

2. Federal Minister of Labour and Social Affairs Franz Müntefering, Chairman of the SPD parliamentary group Peter Struck, Party Chairman Kurt Beck and SPD Secretary General Hubertus Heil (from left to right) present the draft of a new party platform after a closed session in Bremen, January 2007.

3. Front page of the ‘Bremen draft’ for a new party platform.

4. Kurt Beck speaking to the programme conference North in Bremen, February 2007.

Completion of German unity, ongoing European integration,

economic globalisation, accelerated destruction of our natural

environment and dramatic demographic change – all these things

constituted challenges to which Social Democratic programmes

and policy had to give an answer. In September 2007 the pro-

gramme commission adopted a draft for a new basic programme.

This was to be presented to the Hamburg party convention as a

new platform of the ‘left-wing people’s party’, the SPD, and con-

centrated on eight critical areas – based on the fundamental values

of freedom, justice and solidarity:

• a peaceful and fair world

• a social and democratic Europe

• civil society based on solidarity and

a democratic state

• gender equality

• sustainable development and

qualitative growth

• good work for all

• a preventive social welfare state

• better education and society suitable

for children

Democratic Socialism is the SPD’s vision,

Social Democracy the principle of its

actions.

5. The new ‘Hamburg Programme’. Key points of the Programme commission.

FUTUREFUTURREFUTUR

When in October 2007 the delegates assembled in Hamburg for the SPD programme party convention under the slogan ‘Economic prosperity for all – a social Germany’ it was clear that the reforms of ‘Agenda 2010’ launched by the Schröder government had begun to take effect in the form of econo-mic growth, stabilisation of public budgets and a reduction in unemployment. But some points needed correction, according to most Social Democrats: the motion tabled by party chairman Kurt Beck to pay unemployment benefi ts type I for several more months to older employees met with the majority approval (1). It was also by a clear majority that the party convention ap proved the motion for a new party leadership (2).

The ‘Hamburg platform’ was adopted with the votes of the overwhelming majority of the delegates (3). On the basis of the fundamental values of freedom, justice and solidarity the SPD as the fi rst party in Germany gave a programmatic answer to the principal contemporary challenge: globalisation was seen as a task of political organisation in the direction of sustainable progress combining economic dynamism, social justice and environmental good sense. Sustainability was the principle of political and economic action aimed at by the SPD because it was the only chance of safeguarding the future.

The SPD presented itself as a left-wing people’s party and as a power for renewal realising the fundamental values of freedom and social justice in its plans to set up a democratic civil society (Bürgergesellschaft) based on soli-darity: equal rights for both sexes and child-friendliness, qualitative economic growth and decent jobs for all were central statements of the programme (4). The ideas on social justice are bundled in the concept of the preventive welfare state, in which priority would be given to bringing about equal opportunities in life and just participation through education and further training, gainful employment that guaranteeing one’s livelihood and measures in the fi eld of social security.

Civil society on the basis of solidarity was considered the heart of a social and democratic Europe and of a peaceful and just world. For the SPD, strengthe-ning European institutions and the UN were important means of bringing about a fair world order in which poverty and exploitation would be overcome, alongside destructive competition and armed confl icts.

With its new party platform the SPD campaigned for a solidaristic majority in Germany. On the basis of long party tradition it committed itself to De-mocratic Socialism as a ‘vision of a free and just society based on solidarity whose implementation and realisation is our constant task’.

In October 2007 the SPD adopted a new

party platform at its Hamburg party con-

vention. It presented itself as a left-wing

people’s party and as a power for renewal.

Based on the core values of freedom and

social justice it demanded not only an ‘eco-

nomic upswing for all’ but also developed

the aim of creating a civil society based on

solidarity and gender equality, which is

children-friendly and provides a system of

preventive social welfare. This state would

be characterised by the promotion of edu-

cation and further training, the establish-

ment of equal opportunities in life and a

high degree of social security. This concept

of solidarity was to become the formal prin-

ciple of European and international coope-

ration. Democratic Socialism remains the

vision of the SPD, Social Democracy the

principle of its action.

The power for renewal – for a social Germany The Hamburg Programme of 2007

1. Plenary of the Hamburg party convention.

2. The newly elected party leadership: Party Chairman Kurt Beck and his deputies Andrea Nahles, Peer Steinbrück and Frank-Walter Steinmeier.

3. Kurt Beck with the ‘Hamburg Programme’ that has just been adopted.

4. The same aim – good work for all: Kurt Beck with former Vice-Chancellor and Federal

Minister of Labour and Social Affairs Franz Müntefering.

German Social Democracy has always been prepared to acknowledge reality, without merely putting up with the prevailing circumstances. Motivated by the idea that people can shape living conditions by acting in solidarity, Social Democracy has coped with various political systems since the middle of the 19th century and has stood the test. In change and through change it has preserved its identity. Social Democracy remains

• The party of social justice The SPD – generally in accord with the trade unions – stands for the safe-

guarding of the economic interests of so-called ordinary people, defence of their human rights and human dignity. Eschewing populism it faces up to the diffi cult search for lasting and realistic solutions adequate to the complex problems of a world that is becoming more and more integrated. In former times the question of just distribution was paramount, whereas today it is equal and just opportunities. The SPD will make every effort to meet the current challenge of a new type of poverty in a social and achievement-oriented society based on solidarity.

• The party of freedom The SPD has incessantly defended freedom – against both the National

Socialists and the Communists – and has hat to make considerable sacri-fi ces. It understands freedom internally as freedom from oppression and misery, and externally in the sense of a free and independent nation.

• The party of international understanding Though emphasizing the freedom of its own nation the SPD has always

been outward-facing. The freedom of other peoples and nations has always been close to its heart. As early as 1925 it called for the United States of Europe in its programme in order to open up new paths after the catastro-phe of the First World War. Europe does not mean isolation but fi ghting for common social and environmental standards. In addition, the SPD emphasises its responsibility for developing states in a world that is be-coming continuously more integrated.

• The party of peace The SPD was always a party of peace, but not of fundamental pacifi sm. In

August 1914 it decided in favour of military action to defend the home country. Today it is in favour of United Nations resolutions for peace-keeping missions. However, it is well aware that lasting peace cannot be achieved anywhere by military means alone.

SOCIAL IDESOCIAL IDEASSOCIAL IDE

Social Democracy – identity in transition Results and future prospects

German Social Democracy has always been prepared to acknowl-

edge reality without merely putting up with the prevailing cir-

cumstances. Again and again it has proven its ability to accept

new challenges – for example, environmental issues. In change

and through change it has maintained its identity. Social

Democ racy remains:

• the party of social justice

• the party of freedom

• the party of international understanding

• the party of peace

LASSALLELASSALLE

‘All great political action consists

in expressing what the facts are

and it starts with it. All political

petty-mindedness consists in

concealing and glossing over

the facts.’

Ferdinand Lassalle, 1862

BEBELBEBEL

‘But you will only agree with me

that we have to draw up a

programme which is not exclusively

socialist but also democratic.

Otherwise we cannot claim the

name of Social Democrats and

think about a solution of the social

question.’

August Bebel, 1869

BERNSTEINBERNSTEIN

‘I openly admit that I have

extremely little appreciation of

and interest in what is generally

understood as the fi nal aim of

Socialism. This aim – no matter

what it means – does not mean

anything to me, the movement

is everything.’

Eduard Bernstein, 1898

KAUTSKYKAUTSKY

‘... particularly because this task of

the programme is so important it

must not be a taboo or aloof

of criticism. There is nothing

worse than a programme that

contradicts reality.’

Karl Kautsky, 1899

LUXEMBURGLUXEMBURG

‘The general, equal, direct right to vote for all adults without

distinction of the sexes is the next aim (...). But this aim is not the only

thing we have to preach (...) we (have to) present exactly that

political demand in our agitation which is the fi rst point in our

political programme: the demand for a republic.’

Rosa Luxemburg, 1910

ESCHUMACHHUMACHESCHUMASCHUMACHSCHUMACHE

‘What is indispensable for (the SPD) is only the will of its members to be Socialists, democrats and carriers of the idea of peace ...

Wether the spirit of the Communist Manifesto or the spirit of the

Sermon on the Mount, wether rationalist or any other philosophy

has shaped their thoughts, or wether it is ethical motives, there is room for everyone ... in our party.

Its spiritual unity will not be shaken by this.’

Kurt Schumacher, 1945

BRANDTBRANDT

‘... we are proud of our history and the service rendered to our people: this is the path leading from the small

ridiculed minority to a major progressive people’s party; from the

proletarian without rights to the citizen enjoying equal rights; from the vote

limited to men to the vote for all; from the authoritarian state to the citizen’s

right of participation and also of codetermination. ... It is good to be able to say that we have remained

faithful to ourselves – from resistance against bondage to actively

safeguarding freedom.’

Willy Brandt, 1978

Copyright

Fig. No. Copyright

Title Ullstein

1 AdsD2 No. 1 Daimler Werksarchiv Stuttgart2 No. 2 Archiv Sigrid und Wolfgang Jacobeit2 No. 3 Rights owner unascertainable2 No. 4,1 Karl-Marx-Haus, Trier2 No. 4,2 Karl-Marx-Haus, Trier2 No. 4,3 Source AdsD2 left Rights owner unascertainable

3 No. 1 Rights owner unascertainable3 No. 2 Source AdsD3 No. 3 Rights owner unascertainable3 No. 4,1 Source AdsD3 No. 4,2 Source AdsD3 No. 5 Rights owner unascertainable3 No. 6 Rights owner unascertainable3 left Rights owner unascertainable

4 No. 1 Rights owner unascertainable4 No. 2 Source AdsD4 No. 3 Rights owner unascertainable4 No. 4 SAPMO (Stiftung Archiv der Parteien und Massenorganisationen der DDR), Berlin4 No. 5 Source AdsD4 No. 6 AdsD4 left SAPMO, Berlin

5 No. 1 Karl-Marx-Haus, Trier5 No. 2 Source AdsD5 No. 3 Rights owner unascertainable5 left Rights owner unascertainable

6 No. 1 Source AdsD6 No. 2 Rights owner unascertainable6 No. 3 Source AdsD 6 No. 4 Rights owner unascertainable6 left Rights owner unascertainable

7 No. 1 Picture library Preußischer Kulturbesitz (bpk), Berlin 7 No. 2,1 Source AdsD 7 No. 2,2 Karl-Marx-Haus, Trier 7 No. 3 Rights owner unascertainable 7 No. 4 Source AdsD 7 No. 5 AdsD 7 left Rights owner unascertainable

8 No. 1 Rights owner unascertainable 8 No. 2, 1-4 Source AdsD 8 No. 3 SAPMO, Berlin 8 No. 4 AdsD 8 No. 5 AdsD 8 left AdsD

9 No. 1 Rights owner unascertainable 9 No. 2 Rights owner unascertainable 9 No. 3 Rights owner unascertainable 9 left Rights owner unascertainable

10 No. 1 IISG, Amsterdam (?) 10 No. 2 AdsD 10 No. 3 Rights owner unascertainable 10 left AdsD

11 No. 1 AdsD 11 No. 2 Rights owner unascertainable 11 No. 3 Rights owner unascertainable11 No. 4 Rights owner unascertainable 11 No. 5 AdsD 11 No. 6 Rights owner unascertainable 11 No. 7 Rights owner unascertainable 11 left AdsD

12 No. 1 Rights owner unascertainable 12 No. 2 Source AdsD 12 No. 3 Source AdsD 12 No. 4 AdsD 12 No. 5, 1-2 Source AdsD 12 left AdsD

13 No. 1 AdsD 13 No. 2 Source AdsD 12 No. 3 AdsD 13 No. 4,1 Rights owner unascertainable 13 No. 4,2 Rights owner unascertainable 13 No. 5 Source AdsD 13 left AdsD

14 No. 1,1 AdsD 14 No. 1,2 Source AdsD 14 No. 2 AdsD 14 No. 3 AdsD 14 No. 4 Source AdsD 14 left Source AdsD

15 No. 1 AdsD 15 No. 2, 1-2 Source AdsD 15 No. 3 Keystone 15 No. 4 Source AdsD 15 left Source AdsD

16 No. 1 Ullstein 16 No. 2 Agrimmer 16 No. 3 Rights owner unascertainable 16 No. 4 Deutsche-Presse-Photo-Zentrale, Berlin 16 No. 5, 1 AdsD 16 No. 5,2 Source AdsD 16 left Deutsche-Presse-Photo-Zentrale, Berlin

17 No. 1,1 Ullstein 17 No. 1,2 Rights owner unascertainable 17 No. 2,1 AdsD 17 No. 2,2 Source AdsD 17 No. 3,1 Arbeiderbevegelsens arkiv og bibliotek, Oslo 17 No. 3,2 Source AdsD 17 No. 4 Source AdsD 17 left Rights owner unascertainable

18 No. 1 AdsD 18 No. 2 Sunday Picture 18 No. 3 AdsD 18 No. 4 Source AdsD 18 No. 5,1 AdsD 18 No. 5,2 Source AdsD 18 left AdsD

19 No. 1,1 Rights owner unascertainable 19 No. 1,2 Source AdsD 19 No. 2 Rights owner unascertainable 19 No. 3 AdsD 19 No. 4,1 AdsD 19 No. 4,2 AdsD 19 left AdsD

20 No. 1 dpa/picture alliance 20 No. 2 Source AdsD 20 No. 3 AdsD 20 No. 4 J. H. Darchinger 20 Nr. 5 Source AdsD 20 left J. H. Darchinger

21 No. 1, 1-2 Source AdsD 21 No. 2 Darchinger 21 No. 3 dpa/picture alliance 21 No. 4 Source AdsD 21 No. 5 dpa/picture alliance 21 left J. H. Darchinger, Bonn

22 No. 1 J. H. Darchinger, Bonn 22 No. 2 dpa/picture alliance 22 No. 3,1 J. H. Darchinger, Bonn 22 No. 3,2 Source AdsD 22 No. 4,1 Source AdsD 22 No. 4,2 Rights owner unascertainable 22 left dpa/picture alliance

23 No. 1 Ullstein 23 No. 2,1 AdsD 23 No. 2,2 AdsD 23 No. 2,3 Source AdsD 23 No. 3 Rights owner unascertainable 23 No. 4 J. H. Darchinger, Bonn 23 No. 5 Source AdsD 23 left Rights owner unascertainable

24 No. 1 Landesbildstelle Berlin 24 No. 2 Rights owner unascertainable 24 No. 3 J.H. Darchinger, Bonn 24 No. 4 Source AdsD 24 left Rights owner unascertainable

25 No. 1 Source AdsD 25 No. 2 Rights owner unascertainable 25 No. 3 Source AdsD 25 No. 4 Rights owner unascertainable 25 left Rights owner unascertainable

26 No. 1 Ullstein 26 No. 2 dpa/picture alliance 26 No. 3,1 Ullstein 26 No. 3,2 Ullstein 26 No. 4 Source AdsD 26 No. 5 Ullstein 26 left Source AdsD

27 No. 1 Ullstein 27 No. 2 dpa/picture alliance 27 No. 3 Source AdsD 27 No. 4 dpa/picture alliance 27 No. 5 Source AdsD 27 left Source AdsD

28 No. 1 AdsD 28 No. 2 dpa/picture alliance 28 No. 3 dpa/picture alliance 28 No. 4 AdsD 28 left AdsD

29 Ullstein 29 left Ullstein

Lassalle AdsDBebel AdsDBernstein dpa/picture allianceKautsky AdsDLuxemburg AdsDSchumacher Saturday Evening PostBrandt Hermann J. Knippertz, Rheinbach

For some of the photographs and drawings the rights owners could not have been ascertained despite intensive research. Rights owners may contact:Historisches Forschungszentrum der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, D-53170 Bonn.

For Freedom and Social Justice

Documents

Transcript of For Freedom and Social Justice