|
HOME * Syllabus * Bibliography * Image Galleries * Handouts * Readings |
THE GERMAN REVOLUTION OF 1918
The following documents illustrate the strategic decisions made by the leadership of the SPD at the end of the First World War, the initial programs of the most important parties in the Weimar Republic, and the most controversial provisions of the Weimar constitution. Most of these selections have been translated from Gerhard A. Ritter and Susanne Miller (eds), Die deutsche Revolution 1918-1919: Dokumente, 2nd rev. edn (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe Verlag, 1975). The following selections are included:
3. Rosa Luxemburg, “What Does the Spartacus League Want?” (November 1918). 4. The Position of the “Democratic Party” (DDP). 5. The Position of the Center Party. 6. The Position of the “German People’s Party” (DVP). 7. The Position of the “German Nationalist People’s Party” (DNVP). 8. Key Provisions of the Weimar Constitution, adopted on 11 August 1919.
______________________________
1. THE ABDICATION OF THE KAISER AT THE END OF THE WAR:
a)
Memorandum on the Kaiser's Abdication, published in July 1919 by the
Conservative Party leader Count Westarp in conjunction with all the
advisers present at Spa (Miller/Ritter, pp. 68-72): The Kaiser was determined not to give in to the rapidly spreading
revolutionary movement, clearly perceiving that his abdication would
lead to the disintegration of the nation and army. On the morning of November 8 he declared his intention to restore
domestic order at the head of the army.
General Groener [the army's quartermaster-general, or chief of
staff] received the order to prepare the operation. That evening a discussion took place among Field Marshal von
Hindenburg [the army's commander], Colonel General von Plessen, and
Lieutenant General Groener. The
situation had developed as follows: News had arrived that the workers' and soldiers' councils
had seized power in the big cities, on the northern coast, in the West
and the South. The major railroad
junctions were controlled by the revolutionaries, as well as the whole
river Rhine and the huge stockpiles of munitions and supplies that had
been moved behind it in view of the imminent armistice.
The front army's ammunition and supplies would last for only
a few days, and resupply from the rear had already been interrupted
several times, for instance in Cologne and Munich.
The occupation troops within Germany had almost all defected
to the Revolution, and troop units dispatched from the front, designated
by their commanders as completely reliable, had immediately succumbed
to the evil influences at home. ... In view of these conditions, General Groener pronounced the
plan of marching against the homeland to be completely hopeless. ...With a heavy heart, Field Marshal von Hindenburg
agreed that Groener's decision was based on the most careful assessment
of the situation. Success could
not be expected under present conditions; every responsible adviser
must expect a complete collapse as the result of such an undertaking. Colonel General von Plessen maintained, on the other hand, that it was impossible for the Kaiser and army to bow to a handful of revolutionaries. The Fatherland would never understand that the same army that had won the admiration of the world through four years was now incapable of overcoming a band of dishonorable sailors. ... On the morning of the 9th of November the Kaiser received
his military briefing... At
the beginning of the briefing the Field Marshal [Hindenburg] submitted
his resignation because he could not bear to advise his war lord to
abandon a decision that made him rejoice, but that, careful reflection
showed, could not possibly be implemented.
The Kaiser reserved judgment.
General Groener then discussed the situation and declared that
an offensive by the field army against the homeland could not be undertaken.
The Field Marshal agreed. During and after the briefing, Colonel General von Plessen
and General Count Schulenburg took the opposite view [i.e., urged military
action]. His Majesty initially
leaned toward the Plessen-Schulenburg view but finally decided that
the thought of conquering the homeland must be abandoned.
The Kaiser wanted to spare the fatherland a civil war and wanted
to spare the army new battles after its many heroic sufferings and losses. But His Majesty did declare that he would march
peacefully homeward at the head of his troops after the armistice had
been concluded. General Groener
did not think that this plan could be carried out either because the
whole revolution had turned directly against the person of the Kaiser.
... The question of abdication had not been raised during this
briefing on the military situation.
But near the end of the briefing came the first demand to abdicate
from the Reich Chancellory in Berlin [sent by Prince Max].
This demand repeated itself ever more urgently, so that the briefing
had to be interrupted. ... At about 1:00 o'clock Colonel Heye also appeared in order to report to His Majesty the results of a discussion with 39 divisional and regimental commanders... who had been summoned to the Supreme Headquarters at Spa to report on morale in the army. Heye had posed the following questions:
1. Are the troops loyal to the Kaiser? Will it be possible for the Kaiser to reconquer the homeland at their head? 2. What do the troops think of Bolshevism? Will they bear arms against the Bolsheviks in the homeland?
One officer answered Yes to the first question; 15 left their
answers more or less unclear; 23 said No. ...Regarding the second question,
8 officers denied that their troops would fight Bolshevism; 12 considered
a long rest period necessary, with extensive education and retraining,
before the troops would obey such orders; and 19 were uncertain of whether
their troops would ever fight against Bolshevism. Colonel Heye therefore reported to the Kaiser:
"The troops are still loyal to Your Majesty, but they are exhausted
and apathetic, desiring only peace and quiet. They will not march against the homeland, even
with Your Majesty at their head. They
will also not march against Bolshevism. They want nothing but a speedy armistice; every hour is important." [The Kaiser telegraphed Berlin that afternoon that he was abdicating as German Kaiser but not as King of Prussia. He was shocked to learn that Prince Max had just announced his abdication from both thrones, and that evening he ordered his personal train to steam into exile in Holland.]
b) From the Memoirs of Prince Max of Baden (Ritter/Miller, pp. 72-76):
I knew that I had assumed a weighty responsibility when I
issued the following press release [at noon on November 9]: "The
Kaiser and King has decided to renounce the throne. The Reich Chancellor will only remain in office until the abdication
of the Kaiser, the renunciation of the throne by the Crown Prince of
Prussia and the Reich, and the creation of a regency have been carried
out. He will propose to the
regent to name the delegate Ebert [Friedrich Ebert, chairman of the
SPD] as Reich Chancellor and to present a bill [to the old Reichstag]
for holding general elections to a constituent assembly that will decide
on the future state form of the German nation..." At
almost the same time a deputation from the Social Democratic Party was
announced, led by Ebert.… Mr.
Ebert began: "In
order to preserve peace and order, our party comrades have instructed
us to declare to the Reich Chancellor that we consider it necessary,
in order to avoid bloodshed, that the power of government be transferred
to men who possess the complete confidence of the people.
We therefore consider it necessary that the office of Reich Chancellor
and the military command in the provinces be occupied by supporters
of our party. ..." I
then asked Ebert if the party leaders were willing and able to prevent
the movement from becoming violent, and if they could guarantee that
order would be maintained if [the army] did not open fire.
Mr. Scheidemann answered: "All
regiments and garrisons in Greater Berlin have gone over to us. We have just come from the Reichstag, where
delegates of all the regiments assure us of this." I declared to Mr. Ebert: "I have already proposed to
the Kaiser to submit a bill to the Reichstag for holding elections to
a German constitutional convention.
This assembly would then decide, how Germany will be governed
in the future." Ebert: "We can support the idea of a constituent assembly."
... I then withdrew with the cabinet ministers in order to decide
on the final answer that Mr. Ebert should receive. When I announced my decision to transfer the
office of Reich Chancellor to Ebert, nobody objected. ...Ebert and the other members of the delegation were than
summoned. I asked if he was
ready to assume the post of Reich Chancellor. Ebert answered: "It is a difficult office, but I will
accept it." The foreign secretary then directed at him the question: "Are
you prepared to conduct the government within the constitution?"
Ebert said Yes. Solf
[the foreign secretary] then asked a second time "Also within the
monarchical constitution?" Ebert's answer was: "Yesterday I would undoubtedly have
said Yes; today I must first discuss this question with my friends." Then I declared: "Now we must settle the question of
the regency." Ebert answered:
"It is too late." Behind
him a chorus of party comrades repeated "Too late, too late." ...At the door I turned around one more time: "Mister Ebert, I commend the German Reich
to your care!" He answered: "I have given two sons for this Reich."
c)
Initial government proclamations by Friedrich Ebert, 9 November 1918
(Ritter/Miller, pp. 79-81): TO OFFICIALS AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES: The new government has taken charge of affairs in order to
spare the German people civil war and hunger, while implementing its
legitimate demands for self-determination.
This task can only be carried out if all authorities and officials
in town and country stretch out a helping hand. I know that it will be difficult for many to work with the
new men who have assumed leadership of the Reich, but I appeal to their
love for our people. A failure
of organization at this critical juncture would expose Germany to anarchy
and the most frightful suffering. Let everyone therefore fearlessly remain at his post until relieved, in order to help the fatherland through continued selfless labor.
TO
THE NATION: Comrades! The liberation of the people has been achieved today. The Kaiser has abdicated; his eldest son has
renounced the throne. The Social
Democratic Party has taken over the government...
The new government will organize elections to a constituent assembly,
in which all citizens over 20 years of age, of both sexes, will participate
with completely equal rights. It
[the provisional government] will then return its powers to the representatives
of the people. Until then it
will conclude an armistice, carry on peace talks, secure nourishment
for the people, and devise the quickest way to return our comrades in
arms to their families and to productive labor. ... Human life is sacred. Property
is to be protected from arbitrary interference. Whoever dishonors this glorious movement by
base crimes is an enemy of the people and must be treated as such. But whoever cooperates honestly with our work
can say of himself that he was one of those who achieved the salvation
of the people in the greatest moment of world history. We stand before immense tasks. Working men and women in town and country, men in uniform and the worker's blouse, you must all help! 2. THE SPD ALLIES WITH THE OFFICER CORPS AND BIG BUSINESS:
The moderate leaders of the SPD were so anxious to defeat the radical Left that they forged alliances with the two groups that had been their worst enemies before 1914, the officer corps of the Imperial Army and the leaders of heavy industry. In the first selection below, General Wilhelm Groener explains the nature of his understanding with Friedrich Ebert. The second is the formal agreement negotiated between a delegation of industrialists led by Hugo Stinnes and trade unionists led by Carl Legien, which soon received the force of law when it was reissued as an emergency decree by Ebert's provisional government. The terms of this historic compromise between the classes were completed in July 1919, when the constituent assembly meeting in Weimar adopted a constitution that established parliamentary democracy but protected private property and guaranteed the tenure rights of Imperial civil servants, judges, and university professors.
Source:
Gerhard A. Ritter and Susanne Miller (eds.), Die deutsche Revolution
1918-1919. Dokumente, 2nd rev. ed. (Hamburg: Hoffmann
und Campe, 1975), pp. 98-99, 233-39 [translation: WLP]. _______________________________
a)
From the Memoirs of General Wilhelm Groener: Now [when the Kaiser abdicated] the essential task of the
army command was to bring home the remnant of the army, promptly and
in good order, but above all inwardly healthy, and to enable the officer
corps to find its place in the new order as the backbone of national
defense. The moral and spiritual forces accumulated
through the centuries by the Prussian-German officer corps had to be
preserved for the armed forces of the future.
The fall of the monarchy deprived the officers of the foundation
for their existence, left them disorganized and disoriented. They had to be shown a goal that was worth pursuing and that restored
their inner confidence. They
had to be reminded of their obligation, not just to a particular constitutional
form, but to Germany itself. Hindenburg's
decision to remain at his post and to assume command of the whole army
and the Kaiser's approval of this decision made this transition possible. But the officer corps could only work with a government that
was willing to take up the struggle against radicalism and Bolshevism.
Ebert was prepared to do this, but he was just barely able to
keep hold of the rudder and was in imminent danger of being overrun
by the Independents and the Liebknecht group.
What could be more logical than to offer the support of the army
and the officer corps to Ebert, whom I knew to be the most decent and
reliable person among his party comrades and the most statesmanlike? . . . In the evening [of 10 November 1918] I called the Reich
Chancellor [from army headquarters in Cassel] and informed him that
the army placed itself at the disposal of his government, but that the
Field Marshal [Hindenburg] and the officer corps expected that the government
would support them in maintaining order and discipline in the army. The officer corps was ready for action against
Bolshevism and demanded that the government take up this struggle. Ebert agreed to my proposal for an alliance. From then on we discussed the necessary measures
each evening on the secret phone line from the Reich Chancellory to
the army command. The alliance
proved successful. . . . We [the officers of the general staff] hoped to gain through these activities a portion of the power in the new state for the army and the officer corps; if we succeeded, then the best and strongest element of old Prussiandom would be saved for the new Germany. For the moment of course we had to make concessions, because
developments in the army and on the home front had gone so far that
the army command could not hope to issue sweeping orders; we could only
hope to dam the revolutionary torrent and make it harmless.
b) The Stinnes-Legien Agreement of 15 November 1918:
The
major employers' associations agree on the following points with the
trade unions: 1. The trade unions will be recognized as the proper representatives
of the work force. 2. There can be no restriction on the freedom of workers,
both male and female, to unionize. 3. The employers and employers' associations will terminate
all support, direct and indirect, for company unions (the non-striking
unions). 4. All workers returning from military service have the right
to immediate reinstatement in the job they had before the war. The employers' associations and trade unions
will cooperate in obtaining the raw materials and work orders needed
to fulfill this pledge. 5. Joint supervision and control of the labor exchanges. 6. Working conditions for all male and female workers will
be regulated in each trade through a collective agreement with the workers'
unions. Negotiations over this
are to begin immediately and be concluded promptly. 7. Every factory with a labor force of at least 50 will elect
a workers' committee to represent the labor force and cooperate with
the factory owner to see that conditions in the factory accord with
the collective labor contract. 8. Collective labor contracts should create arbitration boards
made up of an equal number of representatives of employers and workers. 9. The maximum length of the work day is set at 8 hours.
No reduction in earnings may result from this reduction in work
hours. 10. A central committee made up of equal numbers of representatives
of employers and workers from each trade will implement this agreement.
It will also adopt further measures that may prove necessary
for supervising demobilization, maintaining economic life, and guaranteeing
the living standard of workers, especially those wounded in the war. 11. This central committee will also decide fundamental questions
concerning the collective regulation of wage levels and working conditions,
and will arbitrate labor disputes that affect several trades at once.
. . . [The industrialists later asserted that Legien had promised them orally that retention of the 8-hour day would depend on ratification of an international agreement binding on Germany's chief industrial competitors as well, but the trade unionists denied this. The business lobby secured the repeal of the 8-hour day during the inflation crisis of 1923.] 3. Rosa Luxemburg, "What Does the Spartacus League Want?" (pamphlet of November 1918).
Despite
rampant fear of "Bolshevism", only one small faction in Germany
at the end of the war really deserved the label, the Spartacus League
founded in 1917 by the most radical leaders of the prewar SPD, Karl
Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. In
April 1917 a much larger group had repudiated the SPD's support for
the German war effort, forming an "Independent Social Democratic
Party" to press for immediate peace talks, but many of its leaders
now supported Ebert's plan for elections to a constituent assembly.
Only the Spartacus League championed Lenin's program of "All
power to the soviets!" When the Kaiser abdicated, the SPD organized
about 600,000 members and the Independent Socialists 300,000, while
the Spartacus League embraced only about 10,000 active revolutionaries. But most observers expected the popularity
of the Spartacus League to grow rapidly among the war-weary masses.
Source: Rosa Luxemburg, Politische
Schriften, ed. Ossip K. Flechtheim (Frankfurt/M: Athenäum Verlag,
1987), pp. 383-92 [translation by William Patch].
___________________________
On the 9th of November the
German proletariat cast down the shameful yoke. The Hohenzollerns were driven off; workers' and soldiers' councils
were elected.
But the Hohenzollerns were
never more than the executors of the imperialist bourgeoisie and aristocracy.
Bourgeois class rule is the real culprit for the world war in
Germany as in France, in Russia as in England, in Europe as in America.
The capitalists in all countries are the real inciters of mass
murder. . . .
The world war confronts
society with the alternative: either the continuation of capitalism,
new wars, and imminent collapse into chaos and anarchy, or the abolition
of capitalist exploitation.
. . . The essence of socialist
society consists of the process whereby the great laboring mass ceases
to be the governed, and instead assumes direction of all political and
economic life in free self-determination.
From the highest leadership
of the state down to the smallest commune, the proletarian mass must
therefore replace the inherited organs of bourgeois class rule, parliaments,
municipal councils, and federal government, with its own class organs,
the workers' and soldiers' councils; it must occupy all posts, supervise
all functions, satisfy all communal needs according to its own class
interests and according to the task of creating socialism.
Only constant and lively interaction between the popular masses
and their organs, the workers' and soldiers' councils, can fill the
state with a socialist spirit.
The economic transformation
too can only occur on the active initiative of the proletarian masses.
A simple decree from the highest revolutionary authorities concerning
socialization [of industry] is an empty word.
Only the deeds of the working class can make this word become
flesh. The workers can take
control over production and eventually actual direction of industry
only through ceaseless struggle with capital, toe to toe in every factory,
only through immediate pressure from the masses, through strikes and
the creation of elected factory councils. . . . It is madness to believe
that the capitalists would tamely accept the socialist verdict of any
parliament or constituent assembly, that they would calmly renounce
their property, their profit, and their right of exploitation. All ruling classes have fought for their privileges
with the greatest energy. The
Roman patricians, the medieval feudal lords, the English cavaliers,
the American slave-owners, the Wallachian boyars, and the silk merchants
of Lyons--all have shed rivers of blood, all have employed murder and
arson, instigated civil war and high treason in order to defend their
privileges and power.
The Imperialist capitalist
class, as the last breed of exploiters, surpasses all of its predecessors
in brutality, unveiled cynicism, and malevolence. It will defend its sacred profit and right
of exploitation tooth and nail, with the same methods of cold-blooded
wickedness that it has employed in the whole history of colonialism
and in the recent world war. It
will mobilize heaven and earth against the proletariat.
It will mobilize the peasantry against the cities and the backward
groups of workers against the socialist vanguard; it will foment conspiracies
among officers, seek to paralyze every socialist initiative through
a thousand forms of passive resistance, incite twenty Vendées to rise
against the revolution; it will summon the foreign enemy, the murderous
troops of Clemenceau, Lloyd George and Wilson, as saviors--it will prefer
to transform the country into a pile of ruins rather than to renounce
wage slavery voluntarily.
All this resistance must
be broken with reckless energy and an iron fist. The violence of the bourgeois counter-revolution must be confronted
by the violence of the proletariat.
. . .
In order to enable the proletariat
to fulfill these tasks, the Spartacus League demands:
I. IMMEDIATE MEASURES TO DEFEND
THE REVOLUTION:
1. Disarmament of the entire police, of all officers
and non-proletarian soldiers; disarmament of all members of the ruling
classes. 2. Seizure of all stockpiles of arms and ammunition
as well as all arms factories by the workers' and soldiers' councils. 3. Arming of the entire adult male proletarian
population as a workers' militia. Formation
of a Red Guard from the proletariat as the active arm of the militia
for constant protection of the revolution. . . . . . . 7. Formation of a revolutionary tribunal to pronounce
judgment on the main culprits for the war, on both Hohenzollerns [i.e.,
the Kaiser and the Crown Prince], Ludendorff, Hindenburg, Tirpitz and
their accomplices. 8. Immediate confiscation of all food supplies
to guarantee the people's nourishment.
II. IN THE POLITICAL AND SOCIAL
SPHERE:
1. Abolition of all individual states; formation
of a unitary German socialist republic. 2. Elimination of all parliaments and municipal
councils and the assumption of their functions by workers' and soldiers'
councils. 3. Election of workers' councils all over Germany
by the entire adult working class of both sexes in town and country,
voting in their factories; as well as soldiers' councils by all troops,
excluding officers. The right
of workers and soldiers to revoke the mandate of their representatives
at any time. 4. The election of delegates from workers' and
soldiers' councils in the whole country for a Central Council of Workers'
and Soldiers' Councils, which will elect an Executive Committee as the
highest organ of both legislative and executive power. 5. Frequent meetings of the Central Council--for
now every three months at least, each time with newly elected delegates--for
constant supervision of the Executive Committee in order to guarantee
close contact between the masses of workers' and soldiers' councils
and their highest government organ.
The right of all local workers' and soldiers' councils to recall
and replace their delegates at any time if they do not act according
to the wishes of their constituents.
The Executive Committee has the right to appoint or depose all
commissars and government officials. . . .
III. IMMEDIATE ECONOMIC DEMANDS:
1. Confiscation of all dynastic property and income
for the public good. 2. Renunciation of all state and public debt as
well as all war bonds, except for small bonds below a certain denomination
that will be determined by the Central Councils of Workers' and Soldiers'
Councils. 3. Expropriation of the land of all large and
medium-sized agricultural enterprises; the formation of socialist agricultural
cooperatives with a central direction for the entire Reich. Small peasant farms remain the property of
their cultivators until they voluntarily decide to join the socialist
cooperative. 4. Expropriation of all banks, mines, steel mills,
and all large enterprises in industry and commerce by the socialist
republic. 5. Confiscation of all fortunes above a certain
level that will be determined by the Central Council. . .
IV. INTERNATIONAL TASKS:
Immediate establishment of ties with brother parties abroad, in order to
place the socialist revolution on an international basis and to guarantee
peace through international fraternization and revolutionary uprising
by the worldwide proletariat. 4. THE POSITION OF THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY (DDP).
a)
Appeal to found a “Democratic Party,” published on 16 November
1918 (Ritter/Miller, pp. 311-12):
[A group of leaders of the Progressive People’s Party and formerly
nonpartisan civil servants, academics, and liberal journalists gathered
to issue the following appeal (from Ritter/Miller, Die deutsche Revolution,
pp. 311-13). Their ranks soon
included Max Weber, Walther Rathenau, the great historian Friedrich
Meinecke, and the great Protestant theologian Ernst Troeltsch; they
chose Friedrich Naumann as their chair, but his unexpected death in
July 1919 left them without an experienced, nationally prominent leader.]
Men and women of the new Germany! After a terrible war we now experience the
confusion of a violent revolution.
A state that appeared invincible has collapsed, almost without
any resistance; the royal dynasties are eliminated, and the pillars
of the old power have toppled. That
is all hopelessly dead. Nobody
can awaken it again.
Workers and soldiers have achieved this
transformation because of the power of the solidarity of the masses. But the spirit of renewal has arisen from all
elements of the population, and everywhere it is understood that the
powers of yesterday are doomed to collapse.
Should millions of men and women creep fearfully into the corner
and passively observe developments, because they are frightened and
shocked by the spectacle of revolution?
That must not happen.
The old political parties also collapsed
on November 9. The old, piously
guarded party programs have become meaningless, and many who once counted
as leaders of our intellectual life have fallen behind the rapid historical
developments and have long become estranged from the thoughts and desires
of the generations that want to push forward vigorously. We want to unify all groups of men and women
who refuse to be passive but rather acknowledge the newly created facts
and want to exercise their right to participate.
Our association must lead to a large democratic party for
a unified Reich.
We do not today announce any program,
but only fundamental principles that must be shared by those who wish
to join us.
The first principles is that we stand
on the foundation of the republican form of government, that we will
advocate it at election time and defend it against any reactionary tendencies,
but that we must have a properly elected National Assembly to decide
on the future constitution.
The second principle is that we cannot
separate liberty from good order, the rule of law, and political equality
for all citizens, and that we must combat every form of terror, be it
Bolshevik, reactionary, or whatever; the victory of any form of terror
would mean nothing other than the most frightful suffering and the enmity
of the whole civilized world.
We know that only bold methods can help
us today, and that great sacrifices must be demanded of the propertied,
if we are to build a happy future on the basis of our current ruins. The times demand the formulation of a new economic
and social policy. They demand
that we accept the idea of socializing those branches of the economy
that have developed into monopolies, and that we subdivide state-owned
lands and limit the size of large agricultural states in order to strengthen
and multiply the number of our family farmers.
We need the heavy taxation of war profiteers, a one-time, progressive
levy on the value of property, and other major tax reforms, legal guarantees
for the rights of workers, white-collar employees, and civil servants,
a guarantee for the proper claims of war veterans and their widows and
orphans, the protection of the independent middle class, freedom for
talented people to rise, and international agreements to guarantee our
new social policy program. We reject all abstract and harmful dogmas and
believe that all social groups, workers and burghers and farmers alike,
can only rise again if German economic policy is protected against all
Bolshevik and bureaucratic experiments.
Many other reforms will be necessary….
Reforms can and may be implemented only by a legislative assembly
elected by the whole people, not through dictatorship or arbitrary rule.
To prepare for the election of a National Assembly, we call for
the union of all who agree with our fundamental principles. We appeal to Germany’s men and women to
participate in the great tasks of the future, to secure our new liberty,
and to oppose every form of reaction or terroristic policy of violence.
b)
Ernst Troeltsch, “German Democracy” (published on 29 December
1918; translation in Anton Kaes, Martin Jay, & Edward Dimendberg,
The Weimar Republic Sourcebook [Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1994], pp. 89-91):
Overnight we have become the most radical
democracy in Europe…. On
closer inspection, it did not, admittedly, happen overnight. Democracy is the natural consequence of modern population density,
combined with the education of the population necessary to nurture it,
with industrialization, mobilization, defense preparations, and politicization.
Democracy has been suppressed in Prussia since 1848 by the constitution
and the military system, but it struggled sontantly and powerfully for
supremacy against both…. It fell solely to the terrible world war to
deliver democracy to victory, which moreover introduced the danger that
the development will not stop at democracy because the “dictatorship
of the proletariat” will assume the form of the terrorist domination
by a minority.
…It is now certain that an order
capable of functioning in domestic and foreign affairs and of garnering
recognition can be regained only by way of a decisive return to both
the democratic principles of participation by and justice for all classes
and to the democratic means of constitutional formation on the basis
of honest majorities…. [We
also need] principled antimilitaristic thinking and an approach based
on the League of Nations as the sole means of maintaining our existence
and rebuilding within the biographical borders at that time….
We have to adapt ourselves to a wholly new situation, which can
ONLY be secured externally through the idea of the League of Nations
and internally through a new order renovated along democratic and social
lines, if Germany is not to become a volcano of misery, ev3er subject
to eruption, as well as a focus of civil wars and an endless slave rebellion
against despots.
…The Bismarckian creation of the
Reich has been worn down to its foundations, and, since the latter ultimately
rest on the military and bureaucratic state of old Prussia, the entire
political order since the reorganization of the German territorial state
through absolutism is undergoing dissolution or at least total transformation…. The Reich as a whole, as well as in its individual
parts, must be rebuilt with a new administration and new constitution,
the army newly organized with a social foundation….
…Democracy is not longer a pure
question of political and moral principle, nor is it any longer the
weapon of the aspiring classes who employ the moral element of the democratic
idea to the advantage of their claims on state and society. It has departed completely from the sphere of doctrine and become
a practical necessity…. Democracy
can unite broad social strata to facilitate enormous productivity, can
supply a foundation of love and affection for the common state, can
bring into greater play the dignity and personality of each citizen,
can root responsibility and initiative in individual will, and can effect
a selection of fresh talents and will: all things of the highest ethical
value and most fruitful political significance.
AT the same time it is of course threatened by the dangers of
anarchy and leveling, of petty conflicts of interest, and of the artful
spread of mediocrity that holds everything down.
Tocqueville already saw all of this in the third decade of the
previous century and expressed it in his famous book, Democracy in
America. He also drew the
logical conclusion that the triumph of democracy is inevitable because
it corresponds to modern society and that therefore its great and noble
aspects must be advanced…. We
Germans have no talent for democracy, none at all for politics, or,
what amounts to the same thing, we have not been trained for it by our
history and are unprepared. The
old Germany’s cities and villages long ago possessed republican
and democratic spirit enough; the detached parts in Switzerland and
the Netherlands developed it quite strongly.
We must be as capable of it as they, and must at all events learn
it. We WILL learn it, even at
the cost of suffering and pain and much confusion.
a)
PROCLAMATION BY THE NATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE GERMAN CENTER PARTY, 30
DECEMBER 1918 (from Ritter/Miller, Die deutsche Revolution,
pp. 306-07):
The old order in Germany has been destroyed
by a violent insurrection, and the former holders of state power have
been either eliminated or paralyzed.
A new order must be created on the basis of the existing facts;
after the fall of the monarchy, this order must not take the form of
a socialist republic but rather of a democratic republic.
The German Center Party in particular
is called to participate in this momentous and difficult task. Its old and firmly established principles will
determine the direction and nature of our new labors.
Especially in this time of frightful
storms, the German people should be filled more than ever with the spirit
of Christian truth, which must permeate both public and private life,
if we are to achieve happiness either in the community or in individual
lives.
We must establish new social laws that
will guarantee every citizen just and reliable protection for his property
and the fruits of his labor.
On the foundation of Christian principles,
we must protect civil liberties, which alone permit a decent life, free
from interference and arbitrary rule by any bureaucracy, class, or political
party.
To achieve these goals the Center Party
needs the enthusiastic support of all party members. The Center Party is a Christian people’s
party, and membership is not restricted to any one religious denomination. All citizens of the Christian faith have this
foundation for political activity in common.
For the first time women too are entering
the political arena; we welcome them to the struggle for a holy cause.
May they stand beside the men and take up the cause of truth,
justice, and freedom with all their strength!
[The appeal concludes by noting that
a detailed party program still needs to be formulated.]
b)
MATTHIAS ERZBERGER WRITES THE PAPAL NUNCIO, EUGENIO PACELLI, TO EXPLAIN
THE CENTER PARTY’S COALITION WITH THE SPD, 24 FEBRUARY 1919 (Ritter/Miller, pp. 308-09):
[Erzberger was the first Center Party
leader to champion cooperation with the SPD during the First World War
and a serious campaign to create parliamentary government in the German
Empire. The first serious expression of this new coalition
was the Peace Resolution of July 1917 (also supported by the Progressives),
in which the Reichstag called upon the Imperial German government to
negotiate a compromise peace as quickly as possible. Erzberger led the German delegation which signed
the armistice of 11 November 1918, and he later served as the first
finance minister of the Weimar Coalition.
In 1921 he was assassinated by fanatical nationalists who held
him largely to blame for the “stab in the back” that had allegedly
caused Germany’s defeat. In
the following text he writes to the Pope’s personal representative
in Germany to respond to conservative Catholic noblemen and some Catholic
bishops who were outraged by any form of political cooperation with
Social Democrats.]
According to its whole tradition, the
Center is not an oppositional party, but a party of constructive labor,
which it must not withhold from the Fatherland in these difficult times. The detailed reasons [which make a coalition
with the SPD necessary] are as follows:
In foreign policy, a cabinet including
the Center is a guarantee of political stability for all enemy governments,
especially since the participation of the Center assures a majority
of over three-fourths of the delegates to the National Assembly. Our opponents cannot therefore heap any new
burdens on Germany with the argument that the current government is
not strong enough [to fulfill its commitments].
English observers in particular have told me repeatedly that
the entry of the Center [into the German government] would be of decisive
importance for the outcome of the peace negotiations.
Moreover, the Center cannot make any
effort to defend the legitimate rights of the Holy See in the coming
peace negotiations, if it is not in the government.
The domestic political reasons are as
follows: If the Center went into opposition, the foundation of the new
cabinet would be very shaky. Partisan
political struggles would intensify.
Our country would not be pacified.
The National Assembly would soon be condemned to impotence, and
the country would fall into anarchy.
By entering the government, on the other hand, the Center has
already succeeded in altering the first draft of the constitution to
remove a clause making the separation of church and state obligatory
for every German state. The
draft now submitted to the National Assembly says nothing about the
separation of church and state; it just guarantees the freedom of religious
practice. This is a powerful protection, especially for
Catholics in the Diaspora [i.e., living in predominantly Protestant
regions of Germany]. The original
draft also contained a provision on schools, which made nondenominational
schools [die konfessionslose Simultanschule, where children of
all faiths studied together] mandatory for all of Germany.
This provision has also been stricken, and the decision will
be left to each German state.
These two successes should be considered
even more important in view of the fact that political developments
will doubtless run toward the left for a while, but will then certainly
swing back toward the right, so that we have avoided a grave danger
for the Church. If the separation
[of church and state] were to be decreed, it would hardly be possible
to reverse that development. Of
course we members of the Center Party will strive to include more positive
provisions for the Church and schools in the constitution.
c) Adam Stegerwald, a Center Party politician
and leader of the Christian trade unions, reflects on the difference
between the Russian and German revolutions in a private letter [
Adam Stegerwald to Franz Schümmer, 3 November
1925, Jakob Kaiser Papers, Box 215, Bundesarchiv Koblenz ]:
The distinctive feature of the German Revolution in contrast to the French and Russian is still being ignored by most of the people who imagine themselves politicians. In the French Revolution Louis XVI and his wife were executed, and soon 60 or 70,000 heads of the Old Regime fell too. In Russia about 20 million people died between 1917 and 1922, mostly from hunger. The old ruling classes, starting with the czar, were exterminated root and branch. In Germany on the other hand, Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg, Eisner, Haase, Erzberger, and Rathenau were shot, all of them standing on the left, while the rightists could go merrily about their business. Moreover, the Weimar national assembly decided, against my advice, to anchor the lifelong tenure of all officials in the constitution. This means that today tens of thousands of teachers and judges are active in our elementary schools, prep schools, universities, and courts who are certainly not educating our youth in the spirit of the republic and democracy. Moreover, at least 75% of the owners of the means of production belong to circles standing to the right of center. In addition to all this, Germany must bear France's cynical policy of humiliation and 2.5 billion marks in reparations [annually]. This all helps the Right to tell the masses constantly that all social suffering at home results from foreign oppression. Whoever believes in such a situation that we can simply ignore the Right and exclude it from all cabinets, after what the Communists rightly call our "botched revolution", is terribly naive. Therefore I have argued consistently in the last years that the Right must be given a share of political responsibility [in a parliamentary coalition with the Center Party] before it becomes powerful enough to govern alone. Thus it will be forced to acknowledge, just as Social Democracy was forced after the Revolution, that even it cannot start to cook without first boiling water.
a) Gustav Stresemann, “The New Parties,” 26 Novemeber 1918 (Ritter/Miller, pp. 294-95):
At a time when everything has collapsed which had appeared solidly
grounded in our political orientation and state form, the old parties
have now collapsed as well. Forward!
[the SPD daily paper] boasts that one flag is still flying, that of
Social Democracy. But that is merely an external appearance,
for Social Democracy too has experienced the greatest transformation…. All other parties now belong to the past and
to history. The Conservative
Party [and other smaller factions] call for the formation of a German
Nationalist People’s Party. The
Center has kept its old name but added the subtitle, “Christian
People’s Party.” The bulk of the National Liberal Party has joined some leaders from
the Progressives to found the German People’s Party, and on the
other hand some prominent National Liberals have joined with the bulk
of the Progressive Party, with the addition of democratic elements from
the press…, to found a German Democratic Party.
The old party forms are dissolving.
Everyone takes a stand regarding recent events, and nobody can
tell as yet whether the current party constellation is stable, or whether
further splinterings or consolidations … will occur.
Only one thing is clear, namely that in the confusion of the
current situation, the bourgeoisie has not been able to achieve any
sort of united front that could stand up to the united front of Social
Democratic power. That is the deplorable result of all the recent
transformations of our domestic political life.
b)
Election Manifesto of the German People’s Party (DVP), 15 December
1918 (Ritter/Miller, pp. 316-19):
The more Germany suffers from the devastating consequences of the lost
war, the more emphatically will we dedicate our whole policy to the
national idea, and the more sharply do we reject all those international
tendencies that deface and obscure our distinctive national identity. The unity of the Reich is the basis for our political activity;
within that unity of the Reich we should allow free expression of the
cultural identity of each German tribe [kulturelle Stammesart],
rejecting both centralizing paternalism and particularist tendencies. We greet with approval the wish expressed by
the Germans of Austria for union with the Reich. We desire cultural ties with Germans abroad and complete protection
for their business activities in all countries. We insist on our right to colonizing activity,
and we demand guarantees of the freedom of the seas as the essential
foundation for the recovery of our economy.
We also welcome the idea of a League of Nations, on condition
that it is based on complete equality for all states.
We support the democratic, universal, equal, and secret ballot for both
sexes according to proportional representation.... Preservation and strengthening of a broad middle class [Mittelstand]
in industry, commerce, and handicrafts, with comprehensive welfare institutions
for the middle class.... Legal and material security for the position of civil servants, officers,
and teachers. Recognition of
their freedom to organize, creation of civil servants= committees. We support the strengthening and preservation of free peasants on their
own soil.... We demand complete freedom to unionize, new and socially progressive laws
on the rights of workers and employees, and energetic development of
our social policy, in particular of laws to better protect women, nursing
mothers, and children, as well as legal recognition of vocational associations
and international negotiations to coordinate social legislation.
We hold firm to the principle of private property and inheritance; we hold
firm to the leading position of the entrepreneur within his factory
and in the national economy, but with appropriate participation by workers
and employees through their elected committees.
We firmly oppose those whose economic and political goal is the
socialization of the means of production and the abolition of private
property. We are prepared to
agree to the transfer of some appropriate branches of production to
the management and ownership of public powers, if that would assure
increased production for the community at large and better living conditions
for workers.
The historic connection between church and state must not be dissolved.
Religious instruction belongs now as before in the public schools....
The revolution [Umwälzung] has brought women equality in political
life. This right must be retained
for women; we further demand the admission of women to the exercise
of public offices. All legal
hardships that still exist for women must be abolished.
We demand of the present government that it finally provide energetically
for law and order. We are prepared
to cooperate with the present form of government and to support all
constructive initiatives by the de facto government. But we demand the elimination of all interventions by unauthorized
persons in the activity of courts, government agencies, and municipal
governments, and all interference with freedom of coalition and freedom
of the press. We demand the
elimination of mismanagement and the wasting of public property and
tax revenues. We demand the elimination of all irresponsible
interference with our economic life, which threatens us with hunger,
anarchy, and the bankruptcy of the state....
We demand the speedy dismantling of the bureaucratic command economy.
We demand the transformation of the current government, which
is based solely on the facts of the revolution, into an enduring legal
order; we demand the immediate convocation of a National Assembly to
write a constitution and make laws. Without its approval, all legislation has no
legal foundation. a)
PROCLAMATION BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE GERMAN NATIONALIST PEOPLE=S
PARTY (DNVP), 22 DECEMBER 1918 (from Ritter/Miller, Die deutsche
Revolution, p. 300):
[This committee included leaders of the
old Conservative, Free Conservative, Christian Social, and German Social
(Anti-Semitic) Parties, who had just agreed to merge their organizations.]
After the trial of war and |