02.06.2010

Left and right views

Two prominent figures in Die Linke spoke to Tina Becker

Harri Grünberg is the national spokesperson of the Sozialistische Linke. The tendency is dominated by Marx 21, the SWP’s German section, though Harri is not a member of it

The draft is closer to Marx than anything else the party has ever produced. This is a great step forward. It provides answers for the deep crisis of capitalism and it is clear about the fact that we have only seen the tip of the iceberg. No doubt we will see a radicalisation of politics across Europe and that finds its expression in the programme. Firstly, because the draft asks the question of property relations, in the sense that there has to be more common ownership over property. Secondly, because the draft claws back the true meaning of imperialism by outlining that the great industrial states of the north are exercising an imperial claim to power, which they are also enforcing by means of war. It is crucial to be that clear in order to organise resistance against it.

It’s true, the draft makes some statements on the destructive nature of capitalism. But, on the other hand, the welfare state of the 1970s is presented almost as a viable alternative to today’s capitalism.

Well, clearly the problem of the draft is that it is a compromise between two different political viewpoints in the party, which have not yet really been debated in a strategically satisfying way. So, yes, there is a part that is very critical of capitalism and there is a part that is more orientated towards reforms. But I think even in those latter parts we do not sow the illusion that the capitalism of the 1970s, the national welfare state, can be remade using the methods of the 1970s. As Oskar Lafontaine says, if we want to achieve the re-regulation of the economy then we need international cooperation and have to conduct financial and social politics on an international level. On this basis it would be possible to practically realise some elements of Keynesianism.

The difference is that we in the Sozialistische Linke see in Keynesianism not the goal, but a method of transformation, a bridge leading to a non-capitalist, democratic society. This question has split the party somewhat along geographical lines. Our view is stronger in the west, where the dynamical development of the party is based. It is not so popular in the east. The next few months will bring these debates more to the fore. This is, of course, linked to the debate about strategy and the question of government participation. Our ‘red holding lines’ are designed to clearly state we only take part in governments that do not enforce social cuts, job losses or privatisations.

The so-called ‘government socialists’ within Die Linke will say the best way to do introduce Keynesian measures is to be in government, where sometimes we will have to make compromises?

By orientating the party towards campaigns and making it part of the social movements. By bringing this radicalisation into the party and by making it into a mass socialist party, in which the power relations within the party should be much clearer.

The Sozialistische Linke is very much based on the trade unions and therefore always strives to bring the conscience of the masses into the process. We have an understanding of our responsibility to keep the party on a left course.

Stefan Liebich, ex-leader of the Die Linke fraction in the Berlin regional government and an elected member of the national Bundestag, is national spokesperson for the Forum Demokratischer Sozialismus, the party’s ‘realistic’ wing

What do you think about the draft programme?

It is ambivalent. There are a few very good things within it, for example the idea that freedom is the basic condition for everything and that we want to concretely fight for change in this society in order to enter the road towards socialism.

On the other hand, there are ideas in there which I find very questionable. For example, I would criticise the idea that we are faced by an undifferentiated cartel of neoliberal parties. That is too black and white for me. Also, the draft includes the idea that in a world of profit there can’t be democracy. Germany is very much in the control of profit and still there is democracy.

I think capitalism is described in the worst possible colours - often, that is, of course, true. But capitalism has not always been the same everywhere on the planet. There is a huge difference between West Germany and South Africa in the 1970s, for example. I wish our draft was more differentiated in this aspect.

But capitalism in itself isn’t democratic ...

Of course, by itself capitalism wouldn’t have introduced democratic changes, it was always the people who resisted and who have achieved so much. But I think our programme has to appreciate that. We can’t negate this past and say, the fight within capitalism is somehow without sense, as some people in Die Linke do. Of course, we do want a totally different society. But we can’t wait until we have reached it. We have a responsibility in the here and now.

What does democratic socialism actually mean to you?

We want a society where freedom and socialism are equally important - we can’t weigh them up against each other. In some former ‘real, existing socialist’ countries, people were told that because they had social security, they couldn’t have real elections or freedom of the press. Equally, there are neoliberal politicians who will tell you that if you want to have freedom you can’t have social security. We want both and I believe Karl Marx was right that we can have both. We are trying to build a new society coming out of this one.

By making revolution?

This all depends on so many things, doesn’t it? It is not a question that could be answered ‘yes’ or ‘no’ in a short interview.