Greens?
THE GREENS HAVe adopted the most left wing positions of any major political party in the ¡ederal Republic of Germany (FRG) on range of issues. Our programme now calls for the lifting of restrictions on abortion - 2 difficult decision for a party founded on the principle of protecting life. We operate a policy of placing women in at least 50 per cent of all our leading posts. We have campaigned for a 35-hour working week more Democratic Party (SPD). And we continue to fight for our policies opposing nuclear weapons, NATO and nuclear energy.
The existence of the Greens with their 'adical positions challenges a number of tra litionally held socialist ideas such as the progressive nature of technological and industrial growth. Can we still have industrial growth when industry destroys the environment? How are the earth's resources to be rationally and equitably used? This is a very difficult debate between the Greens and the ecology movement on the one hand and the trade unions — who see industrial expansion as the way to boost employment
With positions to the left of social democracy on all the key political questions the Greens have come to act as a left wing pressure group on the sPD to debate issues such as the withdrawal of cruise and Pershing missiles, the risks of nuclear power after Chernobyl and the need for an open attitude towards the peace movement.
The Greens are obviously the product of the process of radicalisation going on in the FRo for the last 15 years. For several reasons this has not taken the form of a radicalisation through the mass party of the working class, the sPD, as it has, for instance, in Britain through the Labour Party.
The first factor explaining the rise of the Greens was the level of working struggle up to the beginning of the 1980s which was much lower than in Britain and other countries but which has obviously changed very much since 1980. The political scene was one of partnership between the trade union bureaucracy and the employers. There were some workplace struggles but not, in general, mass working class action. So the trade unions represented a very conservative force and the bureaucracy was very insensitive to the issues raised by those mass movements that did exist like the women's movement and the peace movement.
Added to all this was the great hostility ot labour movement leaders to the ecology movement and a strong sense of identity with the Arlantic Alliance. Thus a whole political generation grew up distanced from the labour movement because the radical issues it was concerned about found no echo there. From 1966 the sPD entered government coalitions with other parties and, apart from a brief period in the early 1970s under Willy Brandt, there was no period when the
A socialist view from the inside The Greens have given the West German peace movement a voice in parliament and raised important new questions for the left.
Now they face crucial decisions about what stance to take towards the Social Democratic Party and the trade unions. STEFFI ENGERT discusses the Greens' origins, conflicts, and prospects for SPD was seen to be allied in any way to the
Neither had the revolutionary lett, which until the mid-1970s was predominantly Maoist, been able to relate to these movements. Even if it had remained in better shape with a more subtle political analysis of the mass movements, it is doubtful if the far left could have changed very much, except perhaps by being closer to the Greens when
A further factor was the extent to which the whole idea of socialism had become discredited inside the Federal Republic because of the existence of East Germany and the negative impression of 'socialism' which the GDR gives. GDR socialism, for most people in West Germany that kind of 'socialism' is very real while ours is just a collection of nice ideas. It is against this background that the mass movements in the FRo crystallised
It would be wrong to assume that the Greens will simply evolve to the left and ecome a large lett wing socialist party 'hey are in fact a coalition of a number o very different, otten contlicting, currents. What keeps them together and forces them to compromise with one another is the fact that they are a parliamentary party. If the Greens no longer held seats in parliament there would be a real danger of the party falling apart.
When the party was born there were even very right wing tendencies within it. These still exist. For instance, we have a current which argues that the Greens should make a governmental alliance with either the SPD or the Christian Democrats (CDU) whichever enables them to elaborate a governmental policy in favour of ecology. So this current would be prepared to be in government with the German Tories if they thought they could get concessions on ecology.
The big division in the Greens, however, is between the people who argue for a governmental alliance with the spD (and who
have actually formed a coalition with the SPD in the state of Essen) and the 'fundamentalists' and 'eco-socialists'. Those in favour of an SPD coalition believe that the Greens must be a consistent party of reform. The only way to achieve that, they insist, is by being a party allied with the reformism of the sPD -in government. The 'fundamentalists' and the 'eco-socialists', who have big difterences among themselves, are agreed on one thing: the Greens must by a party of opposition, even ot opposition opposed to the capitalist system. The eco-socialists in particular do not equate the SPD and the CDU. They stress hat the CDU government ot Kohl must go but they are not prepared to make a coalition with the sPD. If there was a 'hung parliament' they would be in favour of adopting exposure tactics. That means they would give critical support in parliament to a minority SPD government while putting demands on such a government in order to expose it.
The decision on what to do about the SPD at a governmental level raises the question of what stance the Greens should take towards the SPD. This discussion, together with the party's reassessment of its relationship with the trade unions, has now reached a crucial
The mutual hostility between the Green party and the trade unions is gradually changing because the Greens have recognised that the unions constitute another 'mass movement' like all the others. So we supported the 1984 battle for a 35-hour week, seeing it as the progressive demand of
The left inside the Greens favours a more strategic link-up with the left of the trade unions who are breaking with the old-style notion of 'social partnership' held by the spp
bureaucracy. After the 35-hour week strike there was another conflict with the bosses over the question of lock-outs, in which the social security paid to people affected by lay-offs was reduced The Greens' trade union commission started to campaign jointly with militant trade unionists against this attack on social secur-
More cooperation generally is now developing between these workers and some sections of the Greens. And as trade unionists start to ask who best represents politically the demands they are fighting for, some are casting at least half an eye towards the Greens. There is a real possibility, theretore, that we will start to attract some militant
A great deal depends on the Greens' future attitude towards the trade unions and the sPD and on what kind of initiatives we take for continued mass mobilisations. Will we go on as a junior partner of the spD for which there is no space in the long run: Or will we go forward as a radical retormist party with a strong, revolutionary, left
INTERNATIONAL No 7 November December 1986
THE YOUNGEST of five children in a fairly well-to-do and cultured middle-class Jewish family, Rosa