Alarming growth of far right in "new' Germany pegged to social crisis

Scan page 21

SOCIALIST ACTION FEBRUARY 1992 2' Veo-Nazis demonstrating The economic catastrophe inflicted by capitalist restoration on the population of former East Germany and the power of the reunited Germany have fanned fears of a revival of Nazism. On Nov. 9, over 100,000 people marched in cities around Germany to protest right-wing pogroms against immigrant workers.

The following article on this problem is translated from the November issue of Avanti, the magazine of Fourth Internationalists in the former East German territories.

"The seed that the teachers of our coun try have sown has sprung to life," commented Margot Honecker [wife of the deposed East German Stalinist boss] in June 1989.

She knew better. Even then, six percent of East German youth identified themselves as on the radical right. In fact, for a long time the Stasi [East German secret police] employed a team of skinheads.

This problem was hardly the teachers' fault. It was the result rather of the way things were in society as a whole, which undermined the teachers' credibility.

Since the beginning of April, when Jorge Gomandai was killed in Dresden, scarcely a night has passed in the new "democratic and peace-loving" Germany without arson attacks or physical assaults. On June 1, 2000 neo-Nazis marched in Dresden, and again on Aug. 17 in Bayreuth—with generous police protection.

This street terror took on a new quality with the outrage in the East German town of Hoyerswerda [where skinhead gangs attacked a hostel for foreign workers repeatedly over a two-week period, with the evident support of the local population].

German politicians and their acolytes— policemen, journalists, and "experts" —were obliged, in order to defend their country's good name abroad, to express their consternation. Even then, however, we were warned not to overreact.

In the meantime, the fact is that refugees, foreigners, and migrants cannot find accommodation anywhere in Germany, and none of them can feel safe from intimidation and attack on the streets. Previously, these things happened often, but now they are the rule.

Reactionary, far-right, and openly fascist have been the vanguard of the attack views are being widely expressed or at least tolerated. In Hoyerswerda, people cheered the terror only because nobody stood up to it. They are less daring in the West, but the good citizens of Essen invited skinheads to attack a refugee hostel, so that they could make their neighborhood "foreigner free."

In Bremen, the far right recently got eight percent of the vote. In this case, the votes came not from the petty bourgeoisie but from workers and unemployed-that is, from precisely those social groups with whom we hope to change society.

An ideological void There is still a difference between the East, where an anti-fascist tradition remains strong, and the West. "Only" 21 percent of Easterners, as opposed to 38 percent of westerners, have expressed "understanding" for far-right tendencies.

It is said that in East Germany there are only 1500 young far-right cadres, and this number has not changed since the fall of the Wall. This may be true, but they have some 15,000 open sympathizers, while another 50,000 consider themselves "inclined" toward them—whatever that may mean.

Thus, it is merely an organizational problem to increase the number of active thugs tenfold. In West Germany, there are at least twice as many. A militant fascist mass movement has become a possibility.

In East Germany, Stalinism has left an ideological void, while in the West, bourgeois democratic ideas are losing ground, except among the intelligentsia. Only the media disseminates such ideas in the working class, and they are at odds with people's daily experience.

The established social organizations have lost almost all real links with the unemployed, welfare recipients, and above all with working-class youth. Scarcely anyone is to be found in the youth organizations of the political parties, except careerist yuppies. The trade-union youth structures exist mainly on paper, and are the lackeys of the enterprise-council [Betriebsrat] and union bureaucrats.

The sick, the old, or simply the illadapted have no chance. Whoever cannot toe the line in the factory is out. People have no possibilities for influencing things, whether in the party, the union, or the community. People are powerless; those above give the orders, those below obey.

When classes or social layers see no altemative, when progressive ideas are no longer promoted, and no countervailing experiences are provided by unions, parties, or civic movements, then reactionary thinking grows. It becomes rooted in society as a consequence of the fact that socialist ideas-or even merely radical democratic ideas—are no longer a living force.

The far-right parties The two years since the fall of the Wall have been turbulent for the far-right groups. Unexpectedly, here was a united Germany, and they had contributed nothing to bringing about its existence. They descended into their usual squabbling.

The strongest of these groups was the Republicans ("Republikaner"). In the summer 1989 European elections, they won 2 million votes (7.1 percent). But the mutiny of the openly fascist wing, around the Bavarian regional deputy Neubauer, crippled this party for almost a year before the big chief, Schönhuber, could get rid of it. Membership sank to below 15,000.

Since last summer, however, the party has consolidated itself, and now claims a membership of 25,000. It is no longer able to organize mass events as it once could. On the electoral scene, it remains by far the most important of such groups, and in the past year has been able to reinforce its position. In the East, its organization is weak, and it has scored no spectacular successes.

The NPD and D.VU [the two other principal far-right formations] have become stronger in the past two years, but have made no qualitative breakthrough. Together they have no more than 30,000 members. Rather than overcoming the splintering, the attempted unification of far-right forces through the "German Slate," has in fact created an additional organization with an uncertain fate.

The problem for all these groups is that their membership is chiefly drawn from bourgeois forces concerned about getting representation. They want to express something politically, but are ill-adapted to long-term organizational work, and their willingness to make financial sacrifices is not unlimited..

These groups have no independent social base. They are more like electoral blocs than parties. They can draw support from the widespread fascistic outlook, feeding off reactionary thinking and anti-foreignism.

Under favorable conditions, they might get 10 percent of the votes in an election. But their electoral base is still timid and inactive. Mostly, it votes for the established parties, chiefly the Christian Democrats. These parties, with the aid of the tabloid press, have whipped up terror with their anti-refugee hysteria, and have thus strengthened the reactionary groundswell.

Nonetheless, the far-right parties have politically stabilized themselves, consolidating their base and electoral support. This is already a significant change since the mid-1980s. They are present in the public mind as a political alternative, and can achieve electoral successes—an example being Bremen.

Fascist and skinhead attacks The openly fascist groups are incomparably more dangerous. Unlike the established far-right parties, they rest on an activist cadre that operates among working-class youth rather than from outside.

They have more than 3000 members, and their activity is based primarily on the skinheads. Official estimates say there are only 3000 of them in Germany, but in fact there are at least 7000, even if not all are fascist in thought and action.

They are very undisciplined, and it is difficult to get them in lasting and firm structures. However, this has already changed to some extent in East Germany. Up to 150 skinheads have been involved in concerted assaults in many towns.

Often they act for a whole day in a coordinated manner, attacking specific targets, walking around with incendiary devices. Actions involving 20 to 30 people are commonplace. This can no longer be described as spontaneous.

It is clear that many attacks are carried out as copycat actions by sympathizers and small groups. But this does not explain the systematic nature of the terror nor the choice of targets-dwellings of asylum seekers and foreigners—or why all the actions follow the same pattern. It seems that among the skinheads there are activist cores who whip up their associates, organize them for action, and establish a level of discipline.

The idea may be to create an organization through action. To do this, they can rely on the broadly sympathetic environment. If such a plan were to succeed, then we would find ourselves living and working in quite different conditions.

For the first time since the end of the Nazi period, there exists a militant fascist movement. Their actions are carried out in such a way that people will inevitably be killed or injured.

How to stop the terror?

The response to this terror will take the form, above all, of demonstrations and other such actions. This may restrict and perhaps reduce the mass influence of the right. But it cannot halt the construction of the militant fascist gangs.

The real problem is that the far right is appealing to, and building among, the working-class youth-when the left and the social movements have lost more or less all their influence in this layer.

The fascist danger cannot only be met with protests. Furthermore, the use of legislation banning organizations, the favored antidote of reformists and ex-Stalinists, is useless. The fascists are the emergency reserves of the bourgeois state, and will be protected by it.

What is required is building a broad, permanent coalition movement. It needs to be based on local initiatives and coordinating committees that can organize actions and mobilizations, as well as construct self-defense structures and do propaganda work.

This movement must in the first place oppose the anti-foreigner hysteria and address the roots of unemployment and homelessness.

It must center its work on the most deprived neighborhoods, work in the factories, and seek an alliance with the immigrants. Campaigns should be organized starting out with a march against anti-foreignism.

It is not only a question of directly confronting the terrorist groups. Thinking also needs to be changed.