Defining the Enemy of the State: Political Policies of West Germany

Abstract

The history of the reconstruction phases in postwar West Germany has been marked by political decisions as to what constitutes a "friend" (Freund) and an "enemy" (Feind) of the state. In these decisions, socio-economic elements have been less important than specific domestic and foreign political factors. "Enemy" is understood here as one who is said to question the political or social structure of the society; "friend" is also understood as meaning a political or social adversary, insofar as he has committed himself --either overtly or silently, momentarily or for a long time--to definite programs. In 1932 Carl Schmidt, the conservative expert on federal law, contrasted this "friend-enemy" conception to the leftist position of a class struggle oriented around economic data.1 The theory developed by Carl Schmidt must be viewed against the background of the Weimar Republic, which-perhaps through the behavior of the SPD-made it clear that the boundaries between workers' parties and bourgeois parties was not identical with the leftist position, which more clearly defined the class conflict. Liberals criticized this "friend-enemy" conception as much as they did the class struggle argument. Leftists also adopted this criticism and frequently equated definitions of the enemy of the state (Feinderkldrungen) with fascist patterns of thought. The criticism of the "friend-enemy" model is justified if the definition of the opposition is personalized and becomes exaggerated as an actual enemy in the form of absolute enmity. The enemy is then perceived as the intruder, who should be eliminated -elimination, the individual destruction of the opposition is in itself not a leftist position. The distinction between friend and enemy is, however, unavoidable in a society which is divided into classes. If that is correct, then the central concern cannot be to condemn "internal definitions of what constitutes an enemy of the state."