Zeithistorische Studien
Die „Zeithistorischen Studien“ erscheinen seit 1993 als Schriftenreihe des Leibniz-Zentrums für Zeithistorische Forschung im Böhlau Verlag. Sie dienen der Dokumentation der wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten des Hauses und umfassen inzwischen 62 Bände zur Geschichte der SBZ/DDR, des geteilten Deutschlands und Osteuropas nach 1945.
ISSN 2748-4661 | e-ISSN 2748-467X
Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (3)
Language
- English (3) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
44
The first half of nineteen-seventies Europe was marked by visible signs of detente in the area of international relations and the resolutions from the final round of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) in Helsinki. It drew an important dividing line in the history of the twentieth century Europe, especially for the inhabitants of the eastern half of the continent. They had ever hopefully been looking for improvements to their situation since the end of the Second World War and the division of Europe, which was an indirect result of the war and was symbolically expressed in Winston Churchill’s famous words: 'From Stettin on the Baltic to Trieste on the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the continent. Behind that line, lie all the capitals of the ancient states of central and eastern Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest and Sofia ...'.
44
At the beginning of the twenty-first century the problem of European frontiers ceased to exist. This is because they are no longer determined by a sense of European identity, but rather by a consensus reached in Brussels. The European borderlands disappeared generations ago and were substituted by peripheries of the capitalist world-economy. It may be said that both concepts are of only academic interest. However, I am not convinced.
31
The first thesis the paper argues is that a certain collective identity emerged at the shop floor („we“, the workers as opposed to „them“, party leaders, intelligentsia, peasants, the self-employed) that was built - and declared - increasingly in opposition to the official ideology and the communist party.5 Important factors in this process were the growing economic difficulties, the party’s apparent inability to solve them and the increasing materialism people experienced in the everyday life - including party member- and leadership. From the mid-70s onwards, the workers could perceive the worsening economic situation of the country by the decrease of the real wages and the need to do overwork or take extra jobs (first in the agriculture and then in the so-called vgmk-s) to keep the former standards of living. The continuously increasing prices made the impact of the „global market“ real regardless of the stance of the Central Committee. The sharpening criticism of the system is formulated, however, not from the viewpoint of the individual but that of the worker, which suggests the existence of a collective identity. One may call it a paradox of the Communist ideology that the system, after all, was successful to develop working-class collective identities but these were built in opposition to the Communist regime and not for it. The paper will attempt to show how these „oppositionist“ identities were formulated and in what ways they are indicative of the alienation of the workers from the workers’ state.