Download - German Historical Institute London

Book Reviews
Heinz Bohrer suggested that it was the ‘anti-nationalism’ of the left
wing that, paradoxically, prevented a confrontation with one’s own
history.
According to Müller’s analysis, the New Right ultimately failed
because it was unable to bring the intellectual concepts of its founders,
such as Carl Schmitt, up to date. It was incapable of making an
innovative contribution to the national question, and remained fixated
on its main opponent, the ’68 movement. �or a long time the right
wing gained political legitimation from presenting itself as the advocate
of German unification in contrast to the left wing, which had
made concessions to ‘the Communists’. After unification the Right
was, ironically, confronted with the fact that there was nothing left
for it to do. In spite of the apparent ‘victory over Communism’ the
New Right, gaining ground for a short period after unification, has
not succeeded in constituting a common neo-Conservative foundation
myth. The left spectrum reacted with restraint and scepticism to
unification, the coming down of the Berlin Wall, and the end of ‘actually
existing socialism’, which meant the loss of a central utopian
idea. The discussion starting now within the leftist camp on what, in
fact, it means ‘to be left’ has, according to Müller, left to a vacuum
which for a short time has given the Right a chance to present itself
as an alternative. Simultaneously, left-wingers drew parallels with
the Adenauer era. They feared that enthusiasm for the D-Mark in
East and West Germany would lead to the renaissance of a pettybourgeois
economic miracle mentality which would throw the question
of the past off the agenda. �inally, they feared that the political
and intellectual heritage of the former GDR could cause a relapse into
anti-democratic positions.
Whether German unification was related to an idea of nationality
as an ethnic community of fate, whether attempts were made to aestheticize
the nation in the romantic tradition, whether the concept of
the ‘nation of culture’ was revitalized, or whether ‘constitutional
patriotism’ was favoured, Müller argues that discourses around
national identity all had two features in common. �irstly, the protagonists
fell into sharply separated dichotomies and secondly, they
strongly personalized the debate. One reason for the severity with
which the respective parties faced each other is identified by Müller
as the ‘culture of suspicion’ which originated in the experiences of
the ‘sceptical generation’ and was later generalized by the ’68 gener-
108