Division Beyond The Wall
Globally, the 1960s established an immense trend of shifting relationships on multiple scales; state to state, nation to nation, and individual to their respective state. East and West Germany were separated by the Wall, and each had their own form of a relatively well-functioning economy and society. Yet as physical separation and visitor restrictions increased, relative contact and influence between East and West Germany continued on at its relative and unwavering level. The rise of the student and youth movement in the late 1960s spurred intense activism on both sides, and appeared to hold promises of collaboration, alliance, and assistance. However, as more Western activists travelled to the East to discuss such, their stark differences in purpose, experience, and identity became increasingly apparent. Roughly twenty years of separation had created intense rifts between East and West Germans in terms of goals, ideals, and basic identity. The debate, discussion, and activism that followed throughout the 1960s brought said tensions to the surface to be seen and acknowledged by German society clearly for the first time since their post WWII separation.
East Germany, marked by socialism and conflicting goals, holds a complex history of nuanced identity for its citizens. In 1959, the SED announced its ‘Seven Year Plan,’ which “sought not just to continue existing growth but to exceed West German productivity and per capita consumption levels by 85 percent before the end of 1961. Such goals were unrealistic to say the least” (Pugh 119). Similarly, East Germans consistently regarded their own identity in reference to their Western counterparts, most often in terms of work ethic, lifestyle, and efficiency. The GDR emphasized loyalty, socialism, and self sufficiency, whilst simultaneously critiquing Western ‘imperialism’ (Von Goltz 540). Yet however different the average life and mindset of an East and West German had become by the 1960s, “longstanding-ties” insured a lasting connection in terms of commodity goods, fashion trends, and music. Stasi agents reported that young East Berliners “engaged in speculative transactions of studded jeans, parkas [Amikutten], and shoes that are being supplied by contacts from West Berlin...Cigarettes, records, and Western printed goods are being imported via the same channels and traded among the youths” (Von Goltz 543). Young German activists from both sides turned to the arts, most specifically music, as a method of expressing and supporting discontent with their current state. In West Germany, a band called, “Ton Steine Scherben” became a token for young, left-wing workers and students to express their discontent and critique of the West German government. Performing with “a rough proletarian vernacular, alternately sung, spoken, and shouted, the refrain "Macht kaputt was euch kaputt macht" was expressive of the new level of combativeness” (Brown 9). Across divided Germany, the 1960s brought about a rise of counterculture that established the pattern of the art world being closely intertwined with political opinion and statement (Brown).
Yet as Socialist East and Liberalist West activists sought to physically connect (and did so with much success), a far larger sense of difference rather than connection between the two became apparent and frankly unavoidable. The individual identity formed from a life in the GDR implied imposed conformism, internal contradiction, lack of resources, and the necessity of self-sufficiency. Due to scarce resources, rationalization was turned to once again as a method of maximizing benefit, output, and efficiency (Pugh 120). East German society was intended to function as a mass proletariat, and therefore nearly all aspects of life were modeled after such; the workplace, the housing sector, and relationships. However, the scarce resources and opportunities of the average East German proletariat were starkly contradicted by that of their leaders, with massive homes and lavish lifestyles. Any attempt SED leaders made to establish a sense of socialist unity and community within Eastern Germany was met with little success, as Heimat film demonstrated that, “the SED could build houses, but it could not build homes, at least not directly. The party could only create the conditions within GDR society that would foster in individuals a sense of belonging and community, although these films also suggested that the state had failed at that task as well” (Pugh 149). The East German struggled internally, as pride in being an East German and the values that came with it clashed with the broken promises and oppressive rule of their SED leaders.
The aforementioned “double consciousness” unique to the East German experience was not clearly understood by their respective counterparts in the West. Many Western activists came over to the East with politically-charged and Soviet-driven rhetoric that did not land well with Easterners. SDS members brought over by Rudi Dustchke were, “even worse at building bridges to Eastern activists, because, unlike Dutschke who had grown up in the East, they knew little about life in the GDR” (Von Goltz 555). Easterners saw the Westerners visiting as phonies, as they said they understood, wanted to help, and collaborate, but actually had no idea what Eastern life was like and how to relate. With the onset of the 1970s, the divide between East and West only worsened, as Easterners viewed Western attempts to develop the anti-authoritarian movement as backward and nonsensical. Easterners that arrived in Western exile soon after the end of the Prague Spring found the West to “have lost much of their original spontaneity and libertarian impulse” they were given the impression of (Von Goltz 558). Although similar in terms of taste in music and fashion, Easterners found that their ‘leftist’ Western counterparts were by no means similar or leftist at all in the context of the Eastern youth movement and activism.
The onset of the student and youth movement of the late 1960s and well into the 1970s revealed to many on both sides of the Wall that their prior perception of their Eastern or Western counterparts was generally inaccurate. Regardless of continued contact, shared goods, and cultural commonalities, decades of separation after WWII’s end had left Germany split as two vastly different states. Two separate youth groups of the same generation were raised to have extremely different ideas about what it meant to be a proletariat, an activist, and a German individual. Deeply-rooted divides concerning the basic components of identity demonstrated to many Germans that the Wall was not the driving cause and reason for their differences, but rather just a mode of separation.
Sources:
Brown, Timothy S. "Music as a Weapon?" Ton Steine Scherben" and the Politics of Rock in Cold War Berlin." German Studies Review (2009)
Pugh, Emily. Architecture, Politics, and Identity in Divided Berlin, University of Pittsburgh Press, (2014)
Von der Goltz, Anna. “Attraction and Aversion in Germany’s ‘1968’: Encountering the Western Revolt in East Berlin”. Journal of Contemporary History, 50 (3): 2015