East German Dissidents and the Revolution of 1989 : Social Movement in a Leninist Regime

Since he has chosen its side, he is bound up with this fragile republic, its prosperity is his, but also its ruin. Stefan Heym ## Social Movements In Leninist Regimes Sidney Tarrow (1991) deplored the failure of Western social movement scholars to predict the revolutions that swept Eastern Europe in 1989. 1 On the one hand, this should not come as a surprise. Revolutions are by definition surprise events that take on the appearance of necessity only after the fact. Tocqueville's (1955:1) famous words on the French revolution, "so inevitable yet so completely unforeseen," well apply to the revolutions two centuries later. On the other hand, the neglect of social movement scholars to study movements in Leninist regimes is a serious one. 2 This may reflect that recent social movement theories are in serious ways incapable of understanding the changes in Eastern Europe. Now it becomes clear that recent theoretical paradigms such as resource mobilization or political process presuppose the existence of liberal-democratic rules and institutions, without explicitly saying so. The pragmatic giveand-take between rational actors, as depicted by resource mobilization theories (see McCarthy and Zald, 1977), models political conflict on the logic of economic exchangesevidently reflecting the competitive and open style of conflict in the West for which there is no parallel in the East. Mobilization in Leninist regimes is the exclusive privilege of the political elite, impossibly an attribute of independent social groups. The same reservation applies to the notion of political opportunity, which is central to various political process approaches (see Tarrow, 1989). The notion of political opportunity presupposes a basic symmetry between, and legitimacy of, elites and conflict groups that align and realign themselves in shifting coalitions. This cannot be the case in Leninist regimes, where politics in the sense of legitimate interest conflict is abolished, or at least repressed. Also the Western notion of new social movements is inappropriate to explicate the nature of social movements in Eastern Europe. Alain Touraine (1983), in particular, suggested In contrast to the dissident movements of Eastern Europe, the East German movement remained committed to the 'revisionist' reform of the communist regime. This book tries to explain why. It is argued that the peculiarities of German history and culture prevented the possibility of a 'national' opposition to communism. As a result, East German dissidents had to remain in a paradoxical way 'loyal' to the old regime. In contrast to the dissident movements of Eastern Europe, the East German movement remained committed to the revisionist reform of the communist regime. This book argues that the peculiarities of German history and culture prevented the possibility of a "national" opposition to communism. As a result, East German dissidents had to remain in a paradoxical way loyal to the old regime Front Matter....Pages i-xiv Social Movements in Leninist Regimes....Pages 1-29 Regime and Opposition in East Germany....Pages 30-70 Détente and the Peace Movement....Pages 71-99 The Incomplete Turn to Human Rights Dissidence....Pages 100-132 A German Revolution....Pages 133-182 Why Was There No “Dissidence” in East Germany?....Pages 183-215 Back Matter....Pages 216-277