Complexity of the system conflict between FRG and GDR

The German-German division is often presented as a clear systemic opposite between socialism and market economy. But on closer inspection, multi-layered parallels are revealed, which make the system conflict more a myth than a razor-sharp dividing line. Based on structural characteristics such as state share, elite formation, density of regulation, role of privateCompanies, economic practice, social reality and international convergences, it is evident that the differences were often less clear than political rhetoric would make us think.

Closed elite systems and their social impact

Closed elite structures developed both in the Federal Republic and in the German Democratic Republic. In both German states, there were stable networks of leaders in politics, administration, business and other central areas that were hardly accessible or transparent to large parts of the population. This elite bundling led to theDecisions were often made outside of public control, which spread a sense of distance and lack of transparency between the state apparatus and society. The everyday perception of many people was characterized by the impression that important decisions were made in elite circles, regardless of the system ideals.

State share and government management of the economy

Another connecting element was in the high state share of the economy. In the GDR, state control was evident with comprehensive nationalization, central planning and the dominance of combines and economies. But the Federal Republic also relied on a strong role of the state, for example through participation in key industries, extensive subsidy systems,Structural funding and a lot of public companies. Both systems were characterized by the fact that central control functions were not only the responsibility of the market, but to a large extent by state actors. In practice, the formal demarcation of the plan and market economy was overlaid by a dense network of public interventions.

Density of regulation and the restriction of entrepreneurial freedom

Closely linked to the state share, a high regulatory density was in both systems. In East and West, extensive regulations, norms and approval procedures shaped economic and social life. These rules limited the scope of action of private actors and led to comparable bureaucratization in both companies. While the GDR through central plansAnd state regulations controlled, the Federal Republic regulated many areas through laws, regulations and subsidy guidelines. The difference was less in the existence of rules than in their design and enforcement.

The role of private companies and mixed forms of the economy

Despite the strong state character, numerous private companies existed in both German states. In the Federal Republic they were a natural part of the economic order, but there were also private craft businesses, individual agricultural companies and small service providers in the GDR. These mixed forms show that economic reality is rarely strictly ideologicalwas. Rather, it was shown that pragmatic solutions and the need for local supply solutions in both systems enabled private entrepreneurial activity. The rigid system boundaries were repeatedly permeable in everyday economics.

Economic practice and social reality

The practical economic management showed that government control did not necessarily lead to efficiency. In both German states, bureaucratic hurdles, distribution problems and inertia arose. On the other hand, state interventions ensured a certain stability, for example in employment and basic care. These parallels put the supposedContrast and ensured that the system conflict was often not very noticeable in people’s everyday lives. Expectations of social security, order and supply developed in East and West quite comparable and were part of the social self-image.

International convergences and mythical exaggeration of the system opposite

In an international comparison, too, many developed states have similar mixtures of state control, strong elites and private companies. The border between the planned and market economy was never as impermeable as political narratives conveyed. The conflict between FRG and GDR became increasingly a myth that, although real differencesembodied, but in the practical design of social life was overlaid by diverse similarities. The structural convergence of state share, elite formation and economic practice outlasted the political system boundary and still shapes German society to this day.

The system conflict as a shared heritage

The consideration of the structural similarities between the FRG and the GDR shows that although the historical contrast played an important role in the self-description of both societies, it was imbued with real similarities in many areas. The dominance of closed elites, the high government control, the presence of private companies and the comparable socialReality put the system conflict into perspective and made it a divided, still effective heritage of German history.