Abstract
When in October 1983 over half a million West Germans assembled in the Bonn Hofgarten to be addressed by such renowned public figures as Willy Brandt, Petra Kelly and Heinrich Boll, the spectacular nature of this event was such that the West German peace movement, for the first time the recipient of wide-scale international attention, was seen to have established itself as a significant new force within German politics. In fact, the German peace movement of the 1980s has historical roots which go back not just to the early years of the Federal Republic but to the last decade of the previous century. Even before then the German philosophy of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, notably Kant (Zum ewigen Frieden — On Perpetual Peace), Herder (Briefe zur Beförderung der Humanität — Letters Concerning the Furtherance of Humanism, and Jean Paul (Kriegserklärung gegen den Krieg — Declaration of War Against War), had demonstrated a persistent fascination with the idea of peace. That it was at the end of the nineteenth century when this philosophical interest first assumed organisational form is undoubtedly related to the emergence at that time of a German imperialism which, fuelled by the reactionary and militarist traditions of the Prussian Junker class, pursued from the outset a foreign policy based on aggression and aiming at aggrandisement.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
K. Jaspers, Wohin treibt die Bundesrepublik? (Munich, 1966) p. 91.
Protocol of the Berlin (Potsdam) Conference, 1 August 1945, reprinted in Documents on Germany 1944–1961, Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate (New York, 1968) p. 32.
Protocol of the Proceedings of the Yalta Conference, 11 February 1945, ibid., p. 8.
Protocol of the Berlin (Potsdam) Conference, 1 August 1945, ibid., p. 31.
See G. Wettig, Entmilitarisierung und Wiederaufrüstung in Deutschland 1943–1955 (Munich, 1967) p. 209.
A. Baring, Aussenpolitik in Adenauers Kanzlerdemokratie (Munich/ Vienna, 1969) p. 1.
See, for example, the notorious interview with Adenauer in The Cleveland Plain Dealer (3 December 1949) in which he deemed it ‘not only right but necessary’ for a European army to be formed with German contingents in it; cf. also G. Wettig, Entmilibarisierung und Wiederaufrüstung in Deutschland 1945–1955, pp. 244–6.
See an interview in Süddeutsche Zeitung, 1 January 1960 and a television interview on 5 May 1965, quoted in F. Krause, Antimilitaristische Opposition in der BRD 1949–55 (Frankfurt, 1972) p. 51.
K. Adenauer, Erinnerungen 1945–1953 (Stuttgart/Hamburg, 1965) p. 387.
See the discussion of these polls in K. A. Otto, ‘Der Widerstand gegen die Wiederbewaffnung der Bundesrepublik. Motivstruktur und politischorganisatorische Ansätze’, in Unsere Bundeswehr?, ed. R. Steinweg (Frankfurt, 1981) pp. 60–70.
B. Hochstein, Die Ideologie des Überlebens (Frankfurt/New York, 1985).
Es geht um die Freiheit (Hanover (Neuer Vorwärts-Verlag) n.d. ( 1951 )), pp. 3/4.
Niemöller’s letter was published in Frankfurter Presse, 6 October 1950.
Cf. Dokumentation der Zeit. Informations-Archiv, ed. Deutsches Institut für Zeitgeschichte (Berlin, 1952) No. 19 and H. E. Jahn, Für und gegen den Wehrbeitrag (Cologne, 1957) p. 264.
The Nauheim Circle, in the post-war years the best-known advocate of a politically neutral Germany, was founded by Professor Ulrich Noack on 25 May 1948 and its membership, comprising politicians, scientists and intellectuals, embraced various shades of party-political opinion. (Noack himself was a member of the CSU, from which he was expelled in July 1951.)
Since changes to the Grundgesetz require a two-thirds majority in the Bundestag, the result of the 1953 election was of particular importance, for it enabled the government to pass those constitutional amendments, such as that allowing for military service, which facilitated rearmament.
F. Erler, Soll Deutschland rüsten? — Die SPD zum Wehrbeitrag (n.d.) p. 49.
Schumacher’s speech is reproduced in 20 Jahre Bundesrepublik Deutschland in Dokumenten, ed. M. Hereth (Munich, 1969) pp. 81–5.
Protokoll der Verhandlungen des Parteitages der SPD vom 20. bis 24. Juli 1954 in Berlin (Bonn, n.d. (1954)) p. 141.
Sozialdemokratische Zeitung, July 1951, No. 1.
Neuer Vorwärts, 31 December 1954, quoted in U. Löwke, (Für den Fall, dass...’, SPD und Wehrfrage, 1945–1955 (Hanover, 1969) p. 207; Proceedings of the Deutscher Bundestag, 27.2.1955, quoted in E. Dietzfelbinger, Die westdeutsche Friedensbewegung 1948 bis 1955 (Cologne, 1984) p. 181.
See Krause, Antimilitaristische Opposition in der BRD 1949–55, p. 178.
Quoted in T. Pirker, Die SPD nach Hitler (Munich, 1965) p. 206.
See Dietzfelbinger, Die westdeutsche Friedensbewegung 1948 bis 1955, pp. 191–3.
See G. Gaus, Staatserhaltende Opposition, oder: Hat die SPD kapituliert? (Reinbek, 1966) p. 26.
Cited in Dietzfelbinger, Die westdeutsche Friedensbewegung 1948 bis 1955, p. 187.
T. Pirker, Die blinde Macht, Vol. 2 (Munich, 1960) pp. 148/9.
See E. Riechert, Die Radikale Linke (Berlin, 1969) p. 71.
Cf. J. F. Dulles, ‘Challenge and Response in United States Policy’, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 36, No. 1 (October 1957) pp. 25–43 (in particular p.31ff).
See L. Knorr, Geschichte der Friedensbewegung in der Bundesrepublik (Cologne, 1983) pp. 91/2.
See the text of a press conference, given by Adenauer on 5 April 1957, in Dokumentation zur Deutschlandfrage, Vol. 1, ed. H. von Siegler (Bonn/ Vienna/Zurich, 1961) p. 612.
Cf. Riechert, Die Radikale Linke, p. 79.
‘Kampf dem Atomtod’, in Vaterland, Muttersprache. Deutsche Schriftsteller und ihr Staat von 1945 bis heute, ed. K. Wagenbach et. al. (Berlin, 1979) pp. 144/5.
H. K. Rupp, Ausserparlamentarische Opposition in der Ära Adenauer (Cologne, 2ndedn 1980) pp. 149.
H.W. Richter,’ schweigen bedeutet Mitschuld’, in Vaterland, Muttersprache, pp. 145–7.
Rupp, Ausserparlamentarische Opposition in der Ära Adenauer, p. 191.
A comprehensive account of the Easter March movement is given in K. A. Otto, Vom Ostermarsch zur APO. Geschichte der ausserparlamenta-rischen Opposition in der Bundesrepublik 1960–70 (Frankfurt/New York, 1977).
See A. Büro, ‘Die Entwicklung der OM-Bewegung als Beispiel für die Entfaltung von Massenlernprozessen’, in Friedensanalysen, ed. Hessische Stiftung Friedens-und Konfliktforschung (Frankfurt, 1977) p. 72.
Ibfd., p. 67 and p. 64.
See J. Wienecke and F. Krause, Unser Marsch ist eine gute Sache (Frankfurt, 1982) p. 101.
See Otto, Vom Ostermarsch zur APO, pp. 140–4.
For details of that meeting see ibid., pp. 118–24.
Ibid., pp. 164–71.
Although there are no official statistics for the 1968 Easter March, Wienecke and Krause ( Unser Marsch ist eine gute Sache, p. 132) record the figure of 300 000, i.e. twice the number of those participating in the 1967 demonstrations.
Büro, ‘Die Entwicklung der OM-Bewegung als Beispiel für die Enfaltung von Massenlernprozessen’, pp. 51/2.
H. Schulte, ‘Die Friedensbewegung der fünfziger und sechziger Jahre’, in Christen für die Abrüstung. Informationsmaterial, No. 1 (1982) p. 25.
Cf. U. Jäger and M. Schmidt-Vöhring, ’Wir werden nicht Ruhe geben...’, (Tübingen, 1982) p. 27.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1988 Rob Burns and Wilfried van der Will
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Burns, R., van der Will, W. (1988). The Protest for Peace: Opposition to Remilitarisation and Nuclear Weapons (1950 to 1969). In: Protest and Democracy in West Germany. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-19521-3_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-19521-3_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-19523-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-19521-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)