Dramaturgie im zeitgenössischen Tanz ist ? positiv gemeint ? ein heißes Eisen. Idealerweise sind Dramaturginnen und Dramaturgen während der Erarbeitung eines Stücks die besten Freunde der Choreografen. more
When the SPD-Green coalition won the election in 1998, it was the first
time in the history of the Federal Republic of Germany that the word
democracy had a real meaning. The sovereign, the electorate, had voted
out one head of government and put another in his place. This was the
arrival of the Federal Republic in democratic reality. The change of
government brought with it a wave of optimism. In those days people
talked enthusiastically about cutting red tape and fighting for
"innovation and justice". It wasn't that the Republic should be renewed
from ground up, but as the slogan said: "not everything will be
different but a lot will be better".
But when it came down to
it, neither the public, nor - it soon emerged - the government, knew
what changes to carry out. The new coalition was unable to cut through
the Kohl government's tangled red tape and in fact, it probably made
things worse. The hopes that an upturn in the economy would solve the
problems of unemployment, state debt and the collapse of the social
system were short lived. The brief flash of economic boom in 1999/2000
prompted Chancellor Schröder to predict he would soon bring
unemployment below the three million mark. Then Schröder's second
government got to work on the red tape.
The upshot was that the
Federal Republic changed more radically than ever before. The entry of
the former GDR was an entry into the old Federal Republic. And
initially it changed nothing. When, at the beginning of the nineties,
Johannes Gross coined the term "Berlin Republic", no such thing
existed. The term remained a purely feuilletonist expression, used in
an ironic or utopian sense according to whim.
Today we know
that Bonn was not Weimar, and that Berlin is not Bonn. There is a
creeping nostalgia among members of the old Federal Republic for the
ever more distant world whose slogan was "Let's move with the economy!"
which meant that not only was money being made in Germany but work
places were being created. "Wealth for everyone" was the slogan of
Ludwig Erhard, the CDU Chancellor of the Federal Republic from 1963 to
1966. But this was more than a hollow publicity stunt; it was a lived
reality. The Federal Republic was a success story. Decade after decade
the majority of the population grew richer every year.
This
had a profound influence on the Germans and German virtues. The Social
Democrats of the fifties and sixties went on holiday in Yugoslavia to
mull over the possibilities of workers' self management in the warm
waters of the Adriatic. A few years later saw the birth of the Tuscany
fraction. These were people who consciously stopped supporting German
culture in favour of a flirt with the dolcefarniente. And naturally it
all had to take place on a high level. An old farmhouse as a holiday
home, but certainly not as a workplace. One earned – not that one would
dare to describe it at such these days – one's money with ever
increasing ease as the wages steadily climbed in Germany, and then
frittered it away in a land of milk and honey of one's choosing.
It
is essential to remember these times. The world in which Schröder and
Fischer and the inhabitants of the Federal Republic aged between 45 and
70 grew up was one of progress. There was no question of accepting
anything else. Of course there was the odd recession, but the economy
bounced back all the more energetically as a result. That each time
fewer people had jobs to return to was registered, but the resulting
costs were hesitatingly but regularly paid. The economic institutes –
those of the unions among them – have been saying for decades that the
ever increasing unemployment has nothing to do with the strength of the
economy. It is a process which accompanies a fundamental change in our
society. The process of industrialisation is itself changing. The new
industries rely on significantly less human resources than coal and
steel did for so long.
If the Federal Republic had focussed on
future industries, it might have benefited the country economically,
but we would have had a higher unemployment rate than today. We may
never again employ so many workers as the industrial society did.
Technological development means that production and manufacturing can
make do with fewer and fewer people. The service sector is a good
creator of jobs, but not in the numbers or the places where they were
cut by industry. None of this is new. Weighty books recorded the
debates in the fifties and sixties. But it is now that they are really
relevant. The state and the social security systems are no longer in
the position to compensate for everything the industries no longer
produce. When last year "Humankapital" was nominated as the "worst new
word of the year", it became clear what a clueless bunch our language
critics are.
I Incorporated
Two years beforehand the critics had nominated "Ich-AG" (I
incorporated) as the "Non-Word of the Year". This was, they
said, a condemnation of the "linguistic reduction of the individual to
the level of the stock market", whatever that is supposed to mean. The
term Ich-AG however does say a lot about the radically new face of the
Federal Republic.
That a Social Democratic government can come
up with the "Ich-AG" and imagine it a vital component in the fight
against unemployment, marks a historic break in the history of the
Federal Republic. The state and the social net can no longer catch the
unemployed, and instead they leave their fate to the market. This
radical shift of perspective was not forced upon the Germans by
experienced businessmen, but by a Chancellor with no business
experience, and a top-paid manager who also never had to prove himself
as an entrepreneur on the market (Peter Hartz – whose reform concept
eventually led to the SPD/Green defeat).
Hindukush
However radically the
invention of the "Ich-AG" breaks with people and society's image of the social market economy, however far it distances itself from the idea
that managers are a rare species, it has never had so little practical
meaning. Far more, it is an ideological lubricant for the de-social
democratisation of society. Another such violent break with the Bonn
Republic, with the Federal Republic that the citizens of the GDR were
so keen to join, is apparent in a remark by Peter Struck, the minister
for defence, who commented that Germany's security was being defended in
Afghanistan. National defence is no longer relevant. The military
powers of the Federal Republic of Germany have other concerns. This is
a total break with their tradition. Back in the old days, national
defence was primarily the job of the USA. The German army had the
pleasure of supporting them. Occasionally plans of our defenders leaked
out, and it became clear that in the event of an attack from the East,
the Americans were planning to leave half of the territory of the
Federal Republic to the attackers and then blast them there later, for
example with tactical atomic weapons. Nothing spurred on the peace
movement of the eighties as much as these considerations of our
American defenders.
Today the Federal Republic obviously no
longer needs defending. All parties agree that we are surrounded only
by friends. If this is true it is reason to celebrate, but of course
there is no reason to assume that things will stay that way. The federal government is pushing for the army to restructure
completely to prepare for new dangers. These are terrorism and the
states in collapse. You might well ask whether armies, tanks and
bombers are the best weapons in the fight against terrorism. In fact
the German army will be stationed mainly in conflict areas. In other
words, in locations where countries are involved in civil-war type
fighting or in the territory of individual warlords. In other words,
all over the world.
The Federal Republic sees itself as a global
gendarme, the organ of a world public that, let's face it, is not yet
in existence. Regardless of whether or not you agree with this
estimation of the role of the Federal Republic, this new image is
nevertheless a product of recent years. Politicians love to throw in
terrorism for justification, but it is obvious that there was no lack
of attempts to push the Federal Republic into this role well before
September 11, 2001. Terrorism has had almost a calming influence in
this case.
Unlike in the past 40 years, the Federal Republic has
a fighting army again. In other words, men and women whose chief skills
are killing other people as efficiently as possible. They are not
trained to defend their country and fellow citizens, but to shoot and
bomb whoever they are ordered to shoot and bomb in other countries they
have no interest in. In some cases, such as Kosovo, Darfur or even
Afghanistan, there may be good or even very good reasons for these
interventions – but our security is certainly not one of them.
We
need not just new types of weapons for such missions; we also need
a new type of soldier. The "citizen in uniform" – the principle idea
behind the soldiers of the Bonn Republic – was one who defended
his land and fellow citizens. The soldier who patrols a valley in
Afghanistan today, a pipeline near Baku tomorrow and a street in
Mogadishu the day after, cannot be a citizen in uniform. If he wants to
do his thing well, although it's obviously not really his thing, he
will become a mercenary. This is nothing dishonourable. The mercenary
is the oldest figure in the art of war. The Berlin Republic has yet to
create such a being. But we are witnessing his long drawn-out birth. He
will leave his mark on this republic. It will become de-civilised. This
is not as astonishing as it sounds. After all, Germany had never been
as civilised as it was – albeit not through its own resolve – after the
Second World War.
State Security
The state is
retreating. Not only from the infrastructure and unemployment
insurance, but also from the railways and phone companies. More and
more sectors are being privatised. Since 1991, for example, the number
of private hospitals in Germany has doubled. The organisation
regrouping the seven municipal clinics in Hamburg has a turnover of 800
million euros per year. At the beginning of 2005 it was sold to
Asklepios, a private firm.
In recent years everyone has been
talking freedom when there's something to be earned. But exactly where
freedom traditionally has its place – in the relationship of citizens
to their state – it is often sacrificed to an outright authoritarian
state security concept. A future history of civil rights in the Federal
Republic will view recent years – increasingly in the wake of September
11, 2001 – as the time of continual curtailment of civil rights. And terrorism is the rationale. That threat is certainly not to be taken
lightly. But its significance in Europe today is nonetheless
considerably smaller than in the "leaden years" of the 1970s, when
small armed groups not only planned, but also carried out weekly
attacks in almost all countries of Western Europe.
Following the
attacks of 9/11, almost everyone reckoned with follow-up attacks on a
similar scale. The security packages passed in those weeks and months
of horror and hysteria are still in effect. It is taken for granted
that governments have the right to keep an eye on practically
everything citizens do – as potential terrorists – while for citizens
it is increasingly difficult to keep an eye on their governments. It is
on record that Bavarian interior minister Günther Beckstein (CSU) was given
to fits of desperation because federal interior minister Otto Schily (SPD) –
who had, if I may say, a radical-democratic past – overtook him on the
right. The Berlin Republic mistrusts its citizens. Probably no
government doesn't. But when it does so with such demonstrative zeal as
ours, it hurts.
The Holocaust Memorial
"Never again
war" was a central policy guideline of the Federal Republic. It owed
less to a sudden bout of humanism than to the catastrophic defeat and
Allied control. The slogan "never again Holocaust" was not part of the
Federal Republic from day one. It was fought out in protracted public
and very private battles at the dinner tables of the nation, against a
generation that once attempted to deny the Holocaust. "Never again war"
is a thing of the past. The mandate of the Bundeswehr is to conduct
war, and it is trained and equipped to do just that.
It will be
interesting to see what significance the stone labyrinth we today still
call the "Holocaust Memorial" will take on in times to come. With it,
the Berlin Republic has a memorial that doesn't commemorate, a monument
that should remind us of something but is unsure what. On sunny days it
will be a meeting place for young people from all over the world, who
will gaily meet and play hide and seek. While playing, they won't give
a thought to the six million murdered European Jews, not to speak of who killed them. They will play tag, cops and robbers, or
whatever name that sort of game will have in ten years' time. The
Holocaust Memorial is a monument to the historicisation of the
Holocaust. If there is such a thing as a Holocaust religion, then the
Holocaust Memorial is its duplicitous side. Under the pretence of
building the Holocaust right into the fabric of the city, it in fact
hushes the whole thing up. It is nothing more than another tourist
attraction that "you have to see". Some people may find that alright.
But it has to be said, the Holocaust was never a matter of such
indifference in the Bonn Republic. It was a subject of discord. For
generations. That now seems to be over. That's also one of the lines
demarcating the Bonn and the Berlin Republics.
The real test
With
the September elections, the Berlin Republic will say goodbye to its
childhood years. The "luxury revolutionaries" of 1968 will no longer be
the ones pulling the belt tighter. At the helm of the government will
be a woman – a revolution in itself – who as a citizen of communist
East Germany learned to move in economic stagnation like a fish in
water. Curbing civil rights would not go against her own life story.
For decades, the national identity represented a progressive utopia in
her eyes. Many of us West Germans longed for a unified Europe beyond
the frontiers of the Federal Republic. European expansion has pushed
that into the distance. For ideological reasons, but even more for
economic reasons, Europe will become less important, even if the
European constitution is adopted. Angela Merkel's childhood political
dreams will not be destroyed. She can observe developments with that
alert, disinterested attentiveness she so often displays. That will not
necessarily play to her disadvantage.
The cornerstones of the
Berlin Republic – the departure from the social market economy, the
rediscovery of war, the mistrust of the state for its citizens, the
historicisation of the Holocaust – were – so cunning is history – laid
by the West German 68ers. At considerable cost. They had just begun to
discover the Federal Republic that they combated for years, decades
even. When they rebelled in 1968, Habermas and Dahrendorf, Hildegard
Hamm-Brücher and Rudolf Augstein attempted to make clear to them that
while the Federal Republic might not be the best of all possible
worlds, it was the best German republic there had ever been.
It
took until the 80s for this insight to lead the 68ers to start
rethinking the Federal Republic and their role in it. The reunification
caught them off guard. No sooner had they made their peace with the
republic than it lay down – this was only clear to a few back then –
and died. As the coalition of SDP and Greens formed a government, it
was once more the wrong moment. It was – the protagonists didn't see
this – not the time for the Brioni Chancellor and Tuscany for all. The
state was broke, the social insurance systems collapsed. The country
was fit for receivership. The Bonn Republic was finally over. With the
Berlin Republic, our country has reached normality: the rich get richer
and the poor poorer. That's the real test for our democracy.
*
A slightly longer version of this article originally appeared in German in the Berliner Zeitung on May 28, 2005.
Arno
Widmann was born in 1948 and studied philosophy in Frankfurt with
Theodor W. Adorno. A founder and editor-in-chief of the tageszeitung,
he has also worked as senior editor of the German Vogue and arts editor
of Die Zeit. Today he runs the opinion pages of the Berliner Zeitung.
He has translated Umberto Eco, Curzio Malaparte and Victor Serge into German. His literary debut came with
his 2002 novel "Sprenger".
Translation: lp, jab.