The Renewal of the Social Organism
GA 24
20. Wanted: Insight!
[ 1 ] A complex of ideas such as that of the threefold social order is often accused of having no “practical recommendations” on this or that specific issue. [ 2 ] “Now there is the collapse of the currency! What does the proponent of the threefold order suggest as a remedy?” The only reply he can give is, “The whole recent course of world economy has been one that meant competition between the different nations, and thus it led to the depreciation of money in one particular case. Improvement can begin only when, instead of instituting specific measures with a view to remedying this or that, the whole course of economic life is transformed by means of the threefold system. Specific measures may of course improve particular aspects for a while; but so long as the character of economic methods remains essentially the same, isolated ‘improvements’ can do no good. In fact, an ‘improvement’ in one quarter is bound to make matters worse in another.”
[ 3 ] The only really practical means to rebuild what has been destroyed is the threefold social order itself. For example, if people would make comprehensive changes consistent with the threefold order within a part of the economy suffering under depreciation, the actual course of events would remedy the evil. Only someone who is for one reason or another afraid of practical work in the sense of the threefold social order could ask the question mentioned above. Such a person wants the proponents of the threefold idea to tell him how to cure particular symptoms without applying the three-fold cure to the disease itself.
[ 4 ] In this point lies the variance between the representatives of the threefold idea and all those who fancy it possible to retain the old form of social life with its unified state, and to succeed in building up a new structure within it. The whole idea of the threefold social organism rests on a perception that the old social orientation of the unified state is what has brought the world into its present catastrophic situation; and that one must therefore decide to rebuild from the ground up in keeping with the threefold idea.
[ 5 ] Until the courage for such a thoroughgoing measure is aroused in a sufficiently large number of people, our diseased social life will never be restored to health. Without this thoroughgoing change, the only thing that can possibly take place is a hoarding of economic and political power by the victorious nations and the oppression of the vanquished. The victors can, for a while, continue with the old system; the evils that result from it at home can be balanced through their domination of the vanquished. However, the vanquished are at this very moment in a plight that necessitates the instant, thoroughgoing action proposed here. It would, of course, be better if the victors, too, acquired insight. The conditions they are bringing about at home must, as time goes on, lead to a recognition of the intolerable situation in the vanquished country—and thus to new catastrophes. The vanquished, however, cannot afford to wait, for each delay makes their life situation more and more impossible.
[ 6 ] The threefold idea is certainly one that runs counter to the habits of thought and feeling of those who favor a unified national state. To admit to themselves candidly that the evils they now see around them are the result of this idea is, for many today, like being asked to stand with no ground beneath their feet. The ground these people want to stand on is the unified state. They want to take it as given, and build upon it institutions they hope will lead to an improved state of affairs. However, what is necessary is to create new ground; for this, the courage is lacking.
[ 7 ] The main thing that is necessary in order for the three-fold idea to take effect is to see that as many people as possible realize nothing but a radical change can do any good. Far too many people have already allowed the narrowest range of life to shape their judgment in public affairs. This is especially true of the very people who are active in the large industrial concerns. They credit themselves with an all-embracing faculty of judgment in large affairs; actually, they are capable only of what their own narrow range of life has taught them.
[ 8 ] What must be done is to promote a clear understanding (of which there is so little today) of the circumstances of public life. The more people there are who know how the forces of public life have operated until now, and how they have inevitably led to the present catastrophe, the fewer will be the obstacles to the threefold social order. Everything that can help to spread such clear perceptions prepares the soil on which the threefold idea can take practical effect.
[ 9 ] Accordingly, one must not expect much to come of discussions with members of one or another party; for in the end, as long as they choose to remain within their party, they will still tend to interpret every thought put forward by supporters of the threefold idea according to the party's convenience. Once one has recognized the value of this impulse, one should make it understood far and wide. One can do nothing with people who do not want the threefold social organism, but only with those who are filled with the idea. Only with these people is it possible to discuss the details of public affairs. One really ought to see that one simply cannot speak with Mr. Erzberger about public affairs as long as Mr. Erzberger is Mr. Erzberger!
[ 10 ] I write this because I see that, in this respect, not all those who have embarked upon the threefold idea are sailing on the right tack. The threefold social order is an idea one must serve unreservedly if one wants to serve it at all. It affords a basis for mutual discussions with each and every one; but the idea must lose nothing of its radicality in discussion. People will take this course of action once they perceive the real causes of the downfall. Such a perception will give the needed courage for thoroughgoing measures. For the prevailing helplessness is, after all, simply the consequence of a lack of insight.
Einsicht tut not
[ 1 ] Einem Ideenzusammenhang wie dem von der Dreigliederung des sozialen Organismus wird oft als Einwand entgegengeworfen: er könne nieht für diese oder jene Einzelheit mit «praktischen Vorschlägen» auftreten. Man sagt etwa:
[ 2 ] Da ist die Zerrüttung der Valuta. Was hat der Anhänger der Dreigliederung als Mittel zu ihrer Verbesserung anzugeben? Dieser muß erwidern: Der Gang der wirtschaftlichen Weltverhältnisse ist in der neueren Zeit ein solcher gewesen, der durch den Konkurrenzkampf der Staaten zur Entwertung des Geldes im einzelnen geführt hat. Eine Verbesserung kann nur eintreten, wenn nicht einzelne Maßnahmen für dieses oder jenes als Heilmittel angesehen werden, sondern wenn dieser Gang des Wirtschaftslebens in seinem ganzen Wesen durch die Dreigliederung zu etwas anderem gemacht wird. Einzelne Maßnahmen können ja manches im einzelnen vorübergehend bessern; wenn aber das Wesen des Wirtschaftens dasselbe bleibt, so kann eine einzelne Verbesserung nichts helfen; sie muß sogar eine Verschlechterung auf einem anderen Gebiete zur Folge haben.
[ 3 ] Das wirklich praktische Mittel zu einem Neuaufbau des Zerstörten ist eben die Dreigliederung selbst. Wollte man gerade in einem Gebiet, in dem zum Beispiel das Wirtschaftsleben durch die Entwertung der Valuta seufzt, umfassende Einrichtungen im Sinne der Dreigliederung schaffen, so müßte sich durch den Gang der Ereignisse das Übel bessern. Der gekennzeichnete Einwand kommt daher, daß derjenige, der ihn macht, aus irgendwelchen Gründen vor einer praktischen Arbeit im Sinne der Dreigliederung zurückschreckt und verlangt, die Träger dieser Dreigliederungsidee sollen ihm Mittel zu einer Gesundung dieser oder jener Verhältnisse angeben, ohne diese Verhältnisse selbst im Sinne ihrer Idee zu gestalten.
[ 4 ] In diesem Punkte besteht eben ein wesenhafter Gegensatz zwischen dem Träger der Dreigliederungsidee und allen denen, die da glauben, man könne das alte einheitsstaatliche soziale Leben beibehalten und innerhalb desselben zu einem Neuaufbau kommen. Die Idee von der Dreigliederung ruht eben gerade auf der Einsicht, daß diese einheitsstaatliche Orientierung die katastrophale Weltlage herbeigeführt hat; und daß man sich deshalb entschließen muß, sie aus denjenigen Verhältnissen heraus neu aufzubauen, die sich aus der Dreigliederung ergeben.
[ 5 ] Ehe nicht dieser Mut zu einem Durchgreifenden bei einer genügend großen Anzahl von Menschen erwacht, kann eine Heilung des kranken sozialen Lebens nicht kommen. Das einzige, das ohne dieses Durchgreifende möglich ist, kann nur sein das An-sich-reißen der wirtschaftlichen und politischen Macht durch die siegenden Staaten und die Unterdrückung der Besiegten. Die Sieger können vorläufig das alte System beibehalten, denn die Schäden, die sich bei ihnen aus demselben ergeben, können für sie ausgeglichen werden durch die Vorteile, die sich durch die Beherrschung der Besiegten herausstellen. Die Besiegten aber sind gegenwärtig in einer Lage, die augenblickliches Handeln im Sinne des hier gemeinten Durchgreifenden notwendig macht. Auch für die Sieger wäre naturgemäß Einsicht das Bessere. Denn der Zustand, den sie bei sich hervorrufen, muß im Laufe der Zeit zur Wahrnehmung der unerträglichen Lage bei dem Besiegten und damit zu neuen Katastrophen führen. Die Besiegten aber können nicht warten, denn jede Versäumnis vergrößert das Unmögliche ihrer Lebensverhältnisse.
[ 6 ] Die Dreigliederungsidee ist allerdings eine solche, die den Denk- und Empfindungsgewohnheiten aller derer zuwiderläuft, die ihre Seelenverfassung in Anpassung an die einheitsstaatliche Orientierung gebildet haben. Sich rückhaltlos zu sagen, die zutage tretenden Übel sind die Folge dieser Orientierung, ist gegenwärtig für viele Menschen so, als ob man von ihnen verlangen wollte, sie sollten ohne Boden unter den Füßen stehen. Der Boden, auf dem sie stehen wollen, ist der Einheitsstaat. Ihn möchten sie hinnehmen, und auf dem Grund desselben Einrichtungen treffen, von denen sie sich eine Besserung der Zustände erhoffen. Worauf es aber ankommt, das ist, einen neuen Boden zu gewinnen. Dazu fehlt es am Mut.
[ 7 ] Die Grundforderung für die Wirksamkeit der Dreigliederungsidee muß daher die Sorge dafür sein, daß bei möglichst vielen Menschen die Einsicht erwachse, wie nur ein Durchgreifendes gegenwärtig helfen könne. Viel zu viele Menschen haben bisher ihre Urteilsfähigkeit über öffentliche Verhältnisse nur aus den engsten Lebenskreisen heraus gebildet. Gerade diejenigen, die im Großbetriebe unseres Wirtschaftslebens drinnen stehen, sind in dieser Lage. Sie schreiben sich Urteilsmöglichkeit über umfassende Verhältnisse zu; und sie kennen nur dasjenige, was sich ihnen aus ihrem engen Lebenskreise heraus ergeben hat.
[ 8 ] Die Aufklärung über die Zusammenhänge des öffentlichen Lebens, die heute in so geringem Maße vorhanden ist, muß gefördert werden. Die Dreigliederungsidee wird um so weniger Widerstände finden, je mehr Menschen wissen werden, wie die Kräfte des öffentlichen Lebens bisher wirksam waren und wie sie zur gegenwärtigen Katastrophe führen mußten. Alles, was zur Verbreitung einer nach dieser Richtung gehenden Einsicht führen kann, bereitet den Boden für die praktische Wirksamkeit der Dreigliederungsidee vor.
[ 9 ] Man sollte sich deshalb wenig versprechen von Auseinandersetzungen mit den Angehörigen dieser oder jener Partei, die zumeist, solange sie in der Partei stehen bleiben wollen, doch jeden Gedanken eines Trägers des Dreigliederungsimpulses in ihrem Sinne umdeuten möchten. Man sollte, sobald man die Fruchtbarkeit dieses Impulses eingesehen hat, für dessen Verständnis in weitesten Kreisen sorgen. Denn nicht mit denen, welche die Dreigliederung nicht wollen, läßt sich etwas anfangen, sondern allein mit denen, die von ihr durchdrungen sind. Mit ihnen allein läßt sich auch nur über Einzelheiten des öffentlichen Lebens sprechen. Man sollte sich doch klar sein, daß mit Erzberger nicht über die Heilung des öffentlichen Lebens zu reden ist, solange Erzberger - Erzberger ist.
[ 10 ] Ich schreibe dieses nieder, weil ich sehe, daß in dieser Richtung nicht jeder, der von der Dreigliederungsidee etwas hält, im rechten Fahrwasser segelt. Die Idee von der Dreigliederung ist eben eine solche, der man ganz dienen muß, wenn man ihr überhaupt dienen will. Sie macht möglich, mit jedem sich auseinanderzusetzen; aber die Auseinandersetzung darf nichts von dem Durchgreifenden der Idee aufgeben. Man wird in diesem Sinne handeln, wenn man einsieht, welches die wirklichen Gründe des Niederganges sind. Aus dieser Einsicht muß der Mut zum Durchgreifenden kommen. Denn die herrschende Ratlosigkeit ist doch nur die Folge der mangelnden Einsicht.
Insight is needed
[ 1 ] An idea such as the threefold structure of the social organism is often countered with the objection that it cannot come up with "practical proposals" for this or that detail. It is said, for example:
[ 2 ] There is the disintegration of the value. What does the supporter of threefolding have to say as a means of improving it? He must reply: The course of world economic conditions in recent times has been such that the competitive struggle of states has led to the devaluation of money in the individual. An improvement can only occur if individual measures for this or that are not regarded as a remedy, but if this course of economic life in its entirety is transformed into something else through the threefold structure. Individual measures can indeed temporarily improve some things in detail; but if the essence of economic activity remains the same, then a single improvement can help nothing; it must even result in a deterioration in another area.
[ 3 ] The really practical means of rebuilding what has been destroyed is precisely the threefold structure itself. If, for example, in an area where economic life is suffering from the devaluation of the currency, one wanted to create comprehensive institutions in the sense of the threefold structure, the course of events would have to improve the evil. The marked objection comes from the fact that he who makes it shrinks for some reason from practical work in the sense of threefolding and demands that the bearers of this idea of threefolding should give him means for a recovery of these or those conditions, without shaping these conditions themselves in the sense of their idea.
[ 4 ] In this point there is an essential contradiction between the bearer of the threefold idea and all those who believe that the old unified social life can be maintained and a new structure can be achieved within it. The idea of the threefold structure rests precisely on the insight that this unitary state orientation has brought about the catastrophic world situation; and that one must therefore decide to rebuild it from those conditions that result from the threefold structure.
[ 5 ] Unless this courage to take radical action is awakened in a sufficiently large number of people, the sick social life cannot be healed. The only thing that is possible without this radical approach can only be the seizure of economic and political power by the victorious states and the oppression of the defeated. The victors can for the time being retain the old system, for the losses they suffer from it can be compensated for by the advantages they derive from the domination of the vanquished. The defeated, however, are currently in a situation that necessitates immediate action in the sense of what is meant here. For the victors, too, insight would naturally be the better thing. For the state they bring about in themselves must in the course of time lead to the perception of the unbearable situation in the defeated and thus to new catastrophes. The defeated, however, cannot wait, for every omission increases the impossibility of their living conditions.
[ 6 ] The threefold idea, however, is one that runs counter to the habits of thought and feeling of all those who have formed their mental constitution in adaptation to the orientation of the unitary state. To say unreservedly that the evils that are coming to light are the result of this orientation is currently for many people as if they were being asked to stand without ground beneath their feet. The ground they want to stand on is the unitary state. They would like to accept it and use it as a basis to set up institutions that they hope will improve conditions. But what is important is to gain new ground. They lack the courage to do so.
[ 7 ] The basic requirement for the effectiveness of the threefold idea must therefore be to ensure that as many people as possible become aware of how only something radical can help at present. Far too many people have so far formed their ability to judge public circumstances only from the narrowest circles of life. It is precisely those who are involved in the large-scale operations of our economic life who are in this position. They ascribe to themselves the ability to judge comprehensive circumstances; and they only know what has emerged from their narrow circle of life.
[ 8 ] Enlightenment about the interrelationships of public life, which is so scarce today, must be promoted. The idea of threefolding will meet with less resistance the more people will know how the forces of public life have been effective up to now and how they had to lead to the present catastrophe. Everything that can lead to the spread of an insight in this direction prepares the ground for the practical effectiveness of the threefold idea.
[ 9 ] There should therefore be little expectation of disputes with members of this or that party who, as long as they want to remain in the party, usually want to reinterpret every thought of a bearer of the threefold impulse in their own sense. As soon as one has recognized the fruitfulness of this impulse, one should ensure that it is understood in the widest possible circles. For it is not with those who do not want threefolding that anything can be done, but only with those who are imbued with it. With them alone it is only possible to talk about details of public life. It should be clear that we cannot talk to Erzberger about the healing of public life as long as Erzberger is Erzberger.
[ 10 ] I am writing this down because I can see that not everyone who believes in the threefold idea is sailing in the right direction. The idea of the threefold structure is one that must be served completely if it is to be served at all. It makes it possible to deal with everyone; but the discussion must not give up anything of the pervasiveness of the idea. One will act in this sense if one realizes what the real reasons for the decline are. From this insight must come the courage to take decisive action. After all, the prevailing helplessness is only the result of a lack of insight.