Thecontentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates tothe Balkans or Eastern Europe, a contentious topic. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with thecontentious topics procedures before editing this page.
East Germany is a formerfeatured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check thearchive.
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, pleasejoin the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country
This article is within the scope of theMilitary history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see alist of open tasks. To use this banner, please see thefull instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofsocialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofpolitics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofGermany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of thehistory of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
Well, I recently uploaded a file that was East Germany anthem because you might need to see the final version of the anthem that I found on YT. Here's the file if you need:File:Auferstanden aus Ruinen - Vocal.ogg
@Nikkimaria andRickyBennison:I have problems with the descriptions in the infobox: East Germany was never a federal republic and East Germany was transformed into a parliamentary/liberal democratic republic on 17 June 1990. Just because the SED lost power in 1989 does not mean that the entire state structure suddenly became liberal democratic/parliamentarian. Considering that the state stopped more or less functioning four months later one wonders if that is even relevant (and not just complicates the picture).
I propose the following description: Unitary communist state. It is short and not misleading (except for the last four months). But this article is not about the last four months of the GDR.... and people coming here are mostly not interested in the last four months of GDR existence...TheUzbek (talk)07:27, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also cannot figure out where this "federal" designation until 1952 came from as a similar claim is not made in the article body. I agree with TheUzbek that the current description is convoluted, likely inaccurate, and not backed up in the article body (which it should be, perMOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE). The GDR was also never a parliamentary republic in the liberal democratic sense as the SED conceding power did not mean an immediate change in government structures or constitutional powers. The new wording proposed by TheUzbek is concise and accurate to what is stated in the Government section of the article body.Yue🌙19:10, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Free elections were held in the states under Soviet occupation in 1946 and the states became part of the GDR when it was established in 1949. New elections were then held in each state with only SED approved candidates allowed. The states were then abolished in 1952. (See:1946 Soviet occupation zone state elections.) So it was a federation in the beginning.
I agree though that there was no constitutional change when the SED lost power. The government merely allowed candidates it otherwise would have rejected.TFD (talk)21:44, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They were, and their elected governments continued to operate after the states were federated. That's typical of federations: a group of states join together to form one country while retaining residual powers in areas not delegated to the central government.TFD (talk)22:00, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think we are mixing hairs. The 1949 GDR constitution did not establish a federal republic (and nothing in the document implies it). Article 1 of the GDR constitution states, "Germany is an indivisible democratic republic, the foundations of which are the German Laender. The Republic decides on all issues which are essential to the existence and development of the German people as a whole, all other issues being decided upon by independent action of the Laender. As a rule, decisions of the Republic are carried out by the Laender." This is a strange form of federalism, and a federalism that stresses centralisation. I cant find a third oarty source that describes the GDR as fedeeal either...TheUzbek (talk)22:07, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The constitution was based on the Weimar Republic and is similar to the constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany, both of which are described as federal republics. I cannot find much about the federal period, but otoh that means that there are no sources it was a centralized state either. The Soviet Union btw is described as a "Federal Marxist-Leninist state".TFD (talk)22:51, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The essence of federalism is that essential powers are delegated to the central government. These include such things as foreign policy, the military and currency.TFD (talk)00:09, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It was defacto because the SED controlled all the states after the first election and only SED approved candidates were allowed to participate in the second election. Since SED officials took their orders from the party, which also administered the central government, it was a defacto unitary state.TFD (talk)12:09, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would keep the last four months as a separate stage. It is listed on Wikipedia as theModrow government. The four months itself is split into November 1989 to February 1990 (socialist) and February to March 1990 (National unity government). Perhaps you could say something like 'Transitional: Socialist to National unity government'?RickyBennison (talk)17:51, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Modrow government was the executive organ of the state, and not the entire state system. That Modrow was a reformist does not mean that the state form changed either.TheUzbek (talk)09:01, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Volkskammer removed the provision guaranteeing the SED's monopoly on power on December 1, 1989, de jure ending East Germany's communist rule and turning it into a parliamentary republic, as is also described in Harry Möbis' 1999 book "Von der Hoffnung gefesselt - zwischen Stoph und Mittag - unter Modrow"Maxwhollymoralground (talk)13:07, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheUzbek The 1 December 1989 constitutional amendment de jure ending communist rule isn't a interpretation or "a view" of mine, it's their stated intention and a constitutional, historic and political fact that nobody else brought up in the previous discussion and you keep pretending doesn't exist. "How can a system based on unified power suddenly become a fusion of power system." de facto separation of powers?! Changing it in the way I did also brings it inline with theinfobox on the Constitution of East Germany article or theSocialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. By your interpretation, the de Maizière Government ran a "communist state", which would be an unfathomably pedantic and asinine take. And IMHO you'd be spitting in the face of the 400 freely elected Volkskammer members. The German Historical Museum correctly points out that during the Wende, the GDR "was decided on by a parliamentary democracy":https://www.dhm.de/programm/tagungen-und-symposien/archiv/das-letzte-jahr-der-ddr/. Unlike yourself, mainstream historians aren't concerned with niche Marxist-Leninist constitutional semantics. Oh, and btw "But this article is not about the last four months of the GDR...." it is.Maxwhollymoralground (talk)20:15, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are so full of yourself that you forget the fact that unified power was abolished on 17 June 1990. You need to differentiate between communism as a belief and the communist state aka the communist form of government. You clearly aren't capable of that. Moldova elected communists to power in liberal democratic elections, but did Moldova become a communist state? Of course not since the underlying institutions were liberal democratic...TheUzbek (talk)23:16, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did East Germany practice fusion of power and a parliamentary system since the SED lost power? Yes, certainly de facto; read Möbis 1999. Or the Volkskammer hansard past October 1989.Maxwhollymoralground (talk)13:35, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How can that have happened when, legally speaking, the courts and the procuracy were directly accountable to the Volkskammer? In January 1990, the People's Chamber still ordered the East German Supreme Court what to do... How can that be when the procuracy was still directly accountable to the People's Chamber for all its work, and was even criticised by the People's Chamber for it? They even removed the officeholder in question twice in 1990. This is factually incorrect.TheUzbek (talk)13:46, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"While founded on the basis of a nominally liberal democratic constitution with states and a bourgeois office of President, East Germany was de facto ruled as a one-party state from its inception. The 1968 constitution enshrined the communist system into law, unequivocally declaring that "the leadership of the state is to be exercised through the working class and its Marxist-Leninist party". The later clause was struck by the Volkskammer on 1 December 1989."
Everything here is wrong. The GDR was established as apeople's democratic state based on asupreme state organ of power andunified power (notice article 3 & 49; how is that the People's Chamber is supreme, meaning it stands above all othe state organs, and that all power emanates through it even liberal democratic?), and not a state based on a liberal democratic facade. In 1968, the GDR officially adopted a constitution that said it had established thesocialist mode of production and, in turn, asocialist state (communism). I don't think the office of the president is considered bourgeois in itself, so why is that even mentioned? Total confusion, total misunderstanding of Marxist–Leninist doctrine, and complete arroganse. Stop this.TheUzbek (talk)07:43, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is the articlepeople's democratic state based on Marxist-Leninist writers or Western scholarly works? Ah, the last one. How do I know? I wrote it.... They do apparently care, and you even mention it yourself when pointing to the 1968 constitution.TheUzbek (talk)13:29, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Careful coverage of this socialist state excludes summarizing it as unitary communist at any point in time. It need not be attributed a federal parliamentary system either. Our choice is not between these two. East Germany is a vital Soviet satellite in Europe that is not Poland and not West Germany. It's a unique and complicated system that should only have the simple description of Communist as an attributed claim.EnjoyLightEnjoyTruth (talk)21:28, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I, wholeheartedly agree! Thank you for stating this: my whole is that should have been discussed on the talk page, but he was forced his views on Wikipedia. If the community faultly goes for his position, that is fine, but forcing it is not acceptable.TheUzbek (talk)13:48, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify the point of disagreement: the SED's loss of power in late 1989 marked the beginning of the end of East Germany's communist state and the start of a political transformation toward liberal democracy. However, this transformation was not instantaneous at the constitutional–institutional level. The constitutional system ofunified state power remained in place until mid-1990. At the practical level, this continuity is also reflected in the fact that the communistModrow government remained in office until 12 April 1990. The 17 June 1990 constitutional amendments abolished the unified state power system and introduced a parliamentary system characterized by executive–legislativefusion of power andjudicial independence. In that sense, the fall of the SED initiated the transition, but the formal replacement of the communist state system occurred later. It would therefore be misleading, from a constitutional–institutional perspective (government type/form of government), to describe East Germany as having a parliamentary system prior to 17 June 1990. Five months later, the state reunified with West Germany. Adding further detail to the infobox would not improve accessibility; these distinctions are better explained in the article body rather than the infobox. --TheUzbek (talk)14:03, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
the existence of parallel purchase path of consumer goods is not mentioned - such as payments on private base in D-Mark for better service by privateer businesses .. or the possibility to purchase Western world consumer goods by "FORUM", either with D-Mark as a gift from Western family relatives, or by spending a lot of GDR money for more upscaled quality products ..some of them even initially produced in GDR for international export ..or produced in GDR as a contracted or licensed "low wage" production area for Western-Germany companies
..this should all be mentioned and put into detailed aspect, for a way more intellectual understanding on why so called "Ossi" mentality is somewhat that of an anti-government Redneck self governing attitude ..and how livin in GDR was to be for us, who had stayed in the East - even with portions of own family livin in Western World~2026-39260-5 (talk)21:55, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is ratedB-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale.
