Follow The Leader? The SPD's Left Looks At Gerhard Schroeder ANDREA NAHLES

The SPD has a candidate for the chancellorship. Nothing more to do. The overwhelming success of the selection in Lower Saxony should nonetheless be precisely analyzed from the view of the party's left.

In particular, regarding the future of party democracy, it could be easily stated that the omnipresence of the media attacks in connection with the selection decision and the long-proven flapping of wings within the parties' has made a change of strategy necessary. So neither the member-questioning, inserted again in the statute, nor the party committees were relevant to the decision as to who would be the candidate for chancellor. There wasn't even any considerable resistance against the procedure of choosing Schröder.

'Popular vote' instead of party democracy

The cause for this is obvious: The mix of the popular vote via election of the federal parliament and their combining with an immense media resonance has not in any way aroused the impression in the public eye that this decision is not democratically legitimized. To the contrary: both the majorities for Gerhard Schröder from the voters of Lower Saxony, and of the media, determined in public opinion polls, systematically awards Schröder a quasi-referendum. The legitimation seen here derived from a procedure which built upon itself from week to week. In any case, in the public eye, party democracy (an unpopular concept anyway) could be replaced so immediately through the mass media-controlled polarization, in which Schröder was able to merge the choice of 'Schröder versus Wulff (i.e. Kohl)' with the party's internal choice of Schröder versus Lafontaine. And with success.

From the public eye thus into power (or rather 'on the scene'); the public let itself be summed up in the words of Helge Schneider ('Texas'): "everything is made very good and one thinks one was involved! "

It will be interesting to see in future whether this procedure has a stable and legitimate base. Schröder & Co. have made themselves dependent on resources which they cannot produce at any time or control at will. Their procedure is not based on the kind of grassroots support which normally gathers around a genuine political project. A steady and broad mobilization can hardly be derived from it.

The SPD Left: 'Stupid August' or campaigning force

From my view there are two possible consequences from these developments:

1: The party's left fights for the preservation of party democracy. It relies upon the strength of the party committees as a decision maker, puts forth political counterpoints and contributes the programmatic know-how with the help of the Bundestag faction, without receiving acknowledgment for it or organizational power. That has been the way it is over the last two decades with changing success, but on the whole must be considered as a permanent losing deal for the left.

This is also based in the fact that the chairman of the party - actually, seen from the view of her/his function - must have a high interest to strengthen the party and its possibilities for influence. However, all chairmen of the party up to Hans-Jochen Vogel have failed to develop any activities in this regard (apart from the failed SPD-2000 project under Engholm). Wanting to save the party democracy against the party and its chairmen, can in the long term be no promising strategy for the left.

2. The SPD's left frees itself from its 'Babylonian captivity' of consideration for the party's internal matters and does not grind itself any longer in internal committee work. Others may take over the role of stupid August, i.e., the conscience of the party. Instead the party's left stands on its own strength. The party left reorganizes itself as an independent force in the party, which of course does its job within the structures, once options present themselves. But it puts its emphasis on selected areas of policy, which are then structured and driven as campaigns in the network of our allies outside of the party itself. Along the way these campaigns are engaged in the sense of a revitalization of regional left networks. This strategy also promises that upon the backdrop of an SPD government, we will be an interesting 'conversation partner,' in this case for essential social initiatives and movements.

Development program for the SPD Left

I suggested the idea of a 'development workshop' to take place at the spring conference of the Frankfurter Circle in Berlin for the coming year. The purpose of this workshop should be centered around the second alternative specified by the following points:

1. The left must reorganize itself in the form of its own platform in the SPD and thus give a response to the literal upheaval of party democracy.

2. The left has to come up with a development plan, that along with concrete political projects, organises a new network of groups at the social base, social allies and representatives of the left in the Frankfurter Circle, the left in the party executive committee and in the Bundestag faction.

3. The left needs a theoretical centre of gravity, along which a programmatic dialogue with other groups friendly or near to us can advance. I suggest three central areas of focus: 1. The future of work (work time questions), 2. Democracy, 3. Europe.

4. The left needs its own resources, in order to enable a professional and attractive campaign for our vision of the party. Beyond that, there needs to be more attention given to the development suggestions stated here. A separate fundraising concept is therefore a substantial basis for a successful and lively reorganization.

These are medium-term strategic considerations, which hopefully we will soon be concerned with and will discuss broadly. In the short term we have only limited space to shape a left policy in the election campaign. Further, Lafontaine and Schroeder will form a 'double head' and follow the proven 'bad cop/good cop' method completely. Schröder poses himself as economical with a 'belt-tightening' charm, while the 'good cop' Lafontaine satisfies the party.

The disagreements in the party are not gone, but are skillfully no longer played out. Whether social democratic economic policy will focus on exports and making labour markets flexible, or on social-ecological growth policy and shorter hours, will ultimately be decided by the government's responsibility to the law. The current neoliberal rationale can only be pushed away if the social and political climate turns in another direction. To work for this is the task of the left.

Andrea Nahles is the federal president of Germany's Jusos (Young Socialists) and a member of the SPD executive committee. Her article was originally printed in the German journal Sozialistche Politik und Wirtschaft.