FDJ academic year

The FDJ academic year (also FDJ apprenticeship year , FDJ training circle and FDJ school year ) was a regular, compulsory political education measure for members of the Free German Youth (FDJ) in the GDR . The main forms were the “Young Socialist Circle”, the exams for the badge for good knowledge and the “Under the Blue Flag” pioneer circle for 7th grade students  .

The FDJ academic year was thematically and organizationally separated from the regular and thematic general assemblies of the basic organizations of the FDJ.

prehistory

The three Western powers and the Soviet Union divided Germany and Austria into zones of occupation in 1945.

Starting position 1945: denazification

→ Main articles : Denazification  and re- education

After the end of the Second World War on 8./9. May 1945 there were about two and a half million young people between the ages of 14 and 25 living in the Soviet occupation zone (SBZ) . Every fifth schoolchild had lost their father in the war, the father of every tenth schoolchild was still a prisoner of war . With the smashing of the Third Reich , the Hitler Youth (HJ), the Bund Deutscher Mädel (BDM), the Deutsche Jungvolk (DJ) and the Jungmädelbund also disappeared . They left a large void in the living environment of the young people, almost all of whom were integrated into these organizations. The disaffected and often disoriented youngsters had to ensure their own daily survival and that of their families. In this situation, a continuation of the traditions of youth associations from the time of the Weimar Republic through new political associations seemed hardly conceivable.

With the collapse of the National Socialist (NS) rule structures in the cities and municipalities, even before the end of the war, anti-fascist committees, leagues, committees and movements spontaneously emerged in many places, which began denazification and reorganized public order as best they could. As in the Western Zones, the Soviet Military Administration in Germany (SMAD) allowed the formation of anti-fascist parties in the Soviet Zone in 1945 on the basis of democracy and civil liberties.

The newly founded parties saw the problem of the youth abused and spiritually uprooted by the NS. While the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) in its founding appeal only addressed German youth in general without any concrete goals, the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) saw the need to educate them to become “free and critical people ... in a democratic, socialist spirit . ”The Christian Democratic Union of Germany (GDR) (CDU) demanded the introduction to the“ knowledge of true moral values ​​”. The Liberal Democratic Party of Germany (LDP) also initially remained general and wanted young people to be educated to be people who, through their moral education, professional skills and ... open-minded attitude, are capable of serving the fatherland and humanity "..

At its 1st functionaries' conference in June 1945, the KPD took the initiative and proposed the creation of youth committees that would be run by anti-fascist youths in local administrations. She renounced the KPD's own youth organization and advocated “a unified free youth movement” because she did not want to offer the other parties an excuse to demand their own youth organizations, which would run counter to the desired unified youth movement.

From the youth committees to the FDJ

The emblem of the FDJ

→ Main article : Free German Youth

At the end of July 1945, the SMAD approved youth committees at the mayorships of large and medium-sized cities and banned any other youth organizations, associations and communities. In a statement on August 1, 1945, the SMAD called on the youth in the committees

• the crimes of National Socialism are cleared up;
• is educated for friendship among peoples, especially friendship with the Soviet Union ;
• is introduced to the cultural assets of the German people and other peoples and
• for understanding of reconstruction and reparation is gained.

The KPD pushed for the formation of a central youth committee, in which representatives of the other parties and the church youth were included, with which its non-partisanship should be demonstrated. Despite its dominance, the KPD was unable to ensure that the local youth committees were consistently filled with their own cadres. The work there turned out to be very different. In East and West there was skepticism and rejection of the politics of the past and the present, as well as distrust of political ideologies and ideas.

At the zone conference of the youth committees of the Soviet occupation zone in Berlin in December 1945, the Neukölln youth committee put a resolution up for discussion, in which, for the first time under point 2, the creation of a unified youth movement without a distinction between denominations and ideologies throughout Germany, the Free German Youth, was called for. Ultimately, after controversial discussions, this demand was not yet reflected in the resolution passed by the conference. Thereupon the KPD forced increasing demands from the local youth committees for a uniform youth organization. This campaign passed the church representatives in the Central Youth Committee to the KPD and ultimately led to the approval of the SMAD (subject to Moscow's approval ) and the SPD at the end of January 1946 . On February 6, 1946, Walter Ulbricht u. a. returned from Moscow with the approval of the establishment of the FDJ.

In view of the concessions that the KPD had to make and the SMAD's declaration not to allow any further youth organizations in the Soviet Zone for the foreseeable future, all those present in the Central Youth Committee signed the founding resolution for an FDJ. The representatives of the other parties and churches saw this as the only chance at the time not to leave the officially possible youth work to the KPD alone. The SMAD published the requested license on March 7, 1946, the official founding day of the FDJ. In the western sectors of Berlin, the FDJ was not licensed until October 11, 1947, together with the social democratic " Falcons ", other youth organizations followed.

Member training courses - precursor to the academic year

The newly founded FDJ waived an exclusive right in the first statutes. Ideological goals were not formulated officially. The concessions necessary for the founding later had opposite effects for the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (SED), which emerged in April 1946 from the union of the KPD and SPD . The non-communist youth in the committees pursued their own views and goals and more or less openly opposed the hegemony efforts of the SED. The young communists complained to their party leadership that z. B. the parish youth in the FDJ would form “a state within a state”. They also criticized the "low political level" of the FDJ. The call to the entire youth party of the SED to work more closely in the FDJ initially met with little response. In Saxony alone the FDJ had 70,000 members, but only 10–20 percent of the young comrades had joined the FDJ. In opposition to this, the party leadership drew a "vision of tens of thousands of young SED members who, regularly trained by the party, would win their peers within the FDJ for the goals of the SED ..." The youth association should act as an "educational organization", although not politics should make up the entire character.

As early as May 1946, the FDJ leadership was working on a guideline for training that did not only deal with the training of functionaries and their potential successors. The risk of the local FDJ basic organizations flattening out should be countered with "anti-fascist education and training work". "In addition to discussing youth and day-to-day issues in the home evenings, the FDJ top recommended holding lectures about every 14 days on special training evenings followed by discussions on general educational and political issues." In the winter of 1946/47 these were:

1. What is democracy
2. Youth and nation
3. The FDJ - the most progressive organization of German youth
4. Enemies of progress - enemies of youth
5. Friendship of youth - friendship of peoples
6. The Soviet Union

The training evenings should be designed in a way that is suitable for young people.

By 1949, training for functionaries reached 90% of all youth functionaries, and membership training for 71% of all FDJ members.

Introduction and ideological orientation of the FDJ academic year

From 1947 at the latest, the political tensions among the victorious powers were evident. The amalgamation of the western zones to form the bizone and later the trizone and the formation of a bloc of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe were in stark contrast to the unified democratic development of Germany that was supposedly aimed at up to that point. The Cold War had finally broken out. This was accompanied by ideological disputes within the FDJ over a corresponding reorientation of the content.

In the summer of 1947, the Soviet Union called on the SED to “show more fighting spirit, ideological unity and a clearer commitment to the Soviet Union”. The FDJ first sought official contact with the Soviet Communist Youth Association Komsomol , which was established as a model for the FDJ. However, these efforts met with a deep-seated anti-Sovietism in most of the young people, which stemmed from the Nazi propaganda of anti-Bolshevism and their own experiences with the Soviet occupiers. The Free German Youth was confronted with many young people who had no “fixed socialist class standpoint”.

“The constant equation of SED policy with the terms progress and democracy made it possible for Erich Honecker to emphasize the consensus between SED and FDJ in his welcoming address (to the Second Party Congress of the SED in September 1947 - the author) on behalf of the youth association without seeming to violate the non-partisan standpoint (the FDJ - the author). ”In truth, the opposite was increasingly emerging. After all, after its April meeting in 1948, the SED party executive spoke for the first time in a public statement “of the importance of the FDJ as an ally in the party's struggle.” In it, “it was openly complained that the leading role of the party in all youth work ... was insufficient be expressed. "

The "creators" of Marxism-Leninism: Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin (demonstration on May 1, 1953, East Berlin)

In the fight for the heads, the FDJ finally asked its members in 1948 to study Marxism-Leninism , then Stalinist . In 1948 the Christian co-founders of the FDJ, the Protestant pastor Oswald Hanisch and the Catholic cathedral vicar Robert Lange, left the FDJ. The FDJ radicalized its polemics against the West. At the 1st FDJ functionaries' conference in 1950, the youth association finally declared itself to be leading the SED.

The Central Council of the FDJ decided at its 6th meeting in July 1950 to introduce a uniform FDJ school year. The FDJ academic year was held for the first time in 1951 . Organizationally, it should ensure the involvement of all FDJ members and, in terms of content, the achievement of the desired educational and propaganda goals through continuous mediation and annual success monitoring.

At the same time, the FDJ saw the need to “assign a special value to the role of the propagandist who is firmly rooted in Marxism-Leninism and who, as a convinced and enthusiastic person, has and appears to be clear about our current political issues. It was inevitable to first of all pay special attention to the political reliability and training of the propagandists, for which propagandist courses, which served to impart knowledge, were held ... "

aims

Due to the organizational anchoring of the FDJ academic year in the daily FDJ work and the initially moral, later more compulsory obligation to participate, almost all FDJ members were included. This corresponded to the goal of reaching the widest possible range of youth.

In terms of content, the speeches and writings of Stalin were still the focus of the introduction. The subject later was the study and discussion of the basic questions of Marxism-Leninism in close connection with the politics of the SED . The participants should draw conclusions for their own political behavior. Current issues were also addressed. These have been particularly problematic for course instructors since Gorbachev's perestroika from 1986.

In order to achieve the goals, specific topics were dealt with and examined every year. The teaching programs were previously approved by the Central Council of the FDJ. Here are a few individual examples:

organization

The FDJ academic year was usually a monthly two-hour training event. Outside of the state school lessons from the eighth grade in the GDR, it served the expanded political-ideological and philosophical education and orientation of its members.

The later youth laws of the GDR of 1960 and 1974 and the school laws of 1959 and 1965 formed (later) the basis of the close connection between school and FDJ. In addition to their own propagandists, teachers and lecturers at colleges and universities also designed the FDJ academic year and FDJ and SED functionaries. Furthermore, state leaders, officers, artists and scientists discussed current and fundamental issues of the time with young people.

Badge for Good Knowledge in silver - 4th variant 1962–1975

Badge for good knowledge in gold 5th and last variant 1976–1990

The FDJ academic year was attended by FDJ students of all levels. As a rule, the first-time participants were assigned to the first stage, which could lead to the badge for good knowledge in bronze donated by the Central Council of the FDJ in 1949 . Level 2 circles led to silver and level 3 to gold. As a rule, the successful participants of one level received further training in the next higher level. In the opinion of the SED and FDJ leadership, the higher level in each case should stand out from the previous level due to what they consider to be more demanding theoretical and current political issues.

The academic year also included expanded youth forums for current events. In addition to the actual training courses, visits to the cinema, lectures by artists, parents or other events were organized in different locations.

The imparted knowledge was subjected to an examination after one school year, which consisted of a written part (a paper on a specific topic) and an oral part, in which further knowledge of topics from the current academic year was questioned.

As a result, the participants were awarded the appropriate badge, depending on the participant level, if the examinations were successfully passed from the perspective of the examination boards.

Results

Quantitatively

From the initial publicity, party and FDJ leadership went over to an increasing obligation to participate. The aim of covering the broadest masses of young people in the Soviet occupation zone and, from 1949, the GDR, was definitely achieved, even if seminars were occasionally canceled or individual members successfully stayed away.

In the first year of 1949/50, hundreds of thousands of FDJ members attended 11,900 circles. In the FDJ academic year 1971/72, 1.3 million young people took part in 59,546 circles, in which 263,596 badges for good knowledge were acquired. In 1972/73 there were 1.4 million FDJ members in 63,974 circles. In 1984/85 around 1.7 million members of the FDJ and other young people ... took part in over 85,000 circles in the FDJ academic year and three million participants took part in 180,000 youth forums.

Qualitatively

At that time, there were no official evaluations of the achievement of political goals. Internally, the results were evaluated annually in statements of the Central Council of the FDJ. While this officially praised its own successes, there were very critical assessments internally, which were confirmed by the events of 1989. Regardless of this, many young people were actually motivated for the cause of the SED and FDJ.

After the turning point in 1989 and the reunification of Germany in 1990, there were retrospectively differentiated assessments of the FDJ academic years. Examples:

“The propaganda brochures for ideological training, for example in the FDJ academic year, remained at a striking level and did not offer any material for an intellectual examination of the ideas of Marx, Engels and Lenin. On the part of the party, the FDJ functionaries were also not trusted to be able to do this ideological persuasion. "

“The FDJ academic year remained stuck in its traditional forms, just as it was installed in schools in the 1960s. Many topics had an even stronger theoretical aftertaste. The accompanying materials with their dogmatic doctrines were hardly able to stimulate engaged discussions. It was always exciting when the discussions took on a life of their own, when suddenly topical questions were up for discussion and the group leader who was present did not break off the discussion. Skilful discussion leaders immediately converted the planned topics into current, explosive issues, allowed discussions and at the end were "surprised" to find that unfortunately the actual program was only marginally available. "

Individual evidence

1. ^ ^{A b} Gerhard Butzmann, Jonny Gottschalg, Günter Gurst, Anneliese Müller-Hegemann: Jugendlexikon az. 15th revised edition, VEB Bibliographisches Institut Leipzig 1988, ISBN 3-323-00057-9 , p. 632.
2. ↑ ^{a b c d e f g h i j k l} Ulrich Mählert : The Free German Youth 1945–1949. Verlag Ferdinand Schöningh GmbH, Paderborn 1995, ISBN 3-506-77495-6 .
3. ↑ | Eberhard Aurich: The founding myth of the FDJ and what later became of it. A self-critical examination of the history of the FDJ , accessed online September 13, 2018.
4. ↑ Jana Kausch: A society that is losing its youth is lost. The higher education policy concept of the SED using the example of the Technische Hochschule / Universität Karl-Marx-Stadt and the resulting responsibility of the FDJ between 1953 and 1989/90. (TU Chemnitz, Universitätsverlag Chemnitz 2009, ISBN 978-3-941003-03-3 ) on Qucosa online , accessed September 13, 2018
5. ↑ ^{a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o} Prof. Dr. Karl Heinz Jahnke and collective: History of the Free German Youth , New Life Publishing House, Berlin 1982, License No. 303 (305/126/82, LSV 0289)
6. ↑ David Gegich: Right-wing extremism in the GDR; Causes and continuities for the conference “Controversial Continuities” 2009
7. ↑ Erich Honecker: From my life. 6th edition. Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1981, p. 179.
8. ↑ Archive Neues Deutschland , accessed September 13, 2018.
9. ↑ ^{a b} Ulrich Mählert: FDJ 1945-1989 on lzt-thueringen.de accessed September 13, 2018