How did the Federal Republic of Germany navigate the “end of the boom” era, characterized by economic stagnation, the rise of post-materialist politics (the Greens), and the conservative restoration under Helmut Kohl, and to what extent did this period of domestic turbulence paradoxically stabilize the nation for the unexpected challenge of reunification?

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the final phase of the “old” Federal Republic, spanning from the 1973 Oil Crisis to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. It examines the erosion of the social-liberal consensus as the Wirtschaftswunder (economic miracle) ground to a halt, leading to the collapse of the Schmidt government and the rise of Helmut Kohl. The narrative explores the emergence of “new social movements”—environmentalism, feminism, and the peace movement—crystallizing in the formation of the Green Party, which disrupted the traditional three-party system. A significant portion is dedicated to the “Historians’ Dispute” (Historikerstreit), revealing the ongoing struggle over German identity and the Nazi past. The article also scrutinizes the massive protests against the NATO Double-Track Decision (Euromissiles) and Kohl’s controversial policy of “spiritual-moral turnaround” (geistig-moralische Wende). Ultimately, it argues that this era of perceived stagnation was actually a period of profound political maturation, where West Germany developed a robust, pluralistic civil society capable of absorbing the shock of 1989.

Introduction

In the early 1970s, the Federal Republic of Germany seemed to be cruising on the autobahn of success. Willy Brandt’s OstpolitikOstpolitik Full Description:The foreign policy of “Change through Rapprochement,” normalizing relations between the Federal Republic of Germany (West) and the nations of the Eastern Bloc. It marked a shift from the hardline refusal to recognize the communist East to a strategy of engagement and trade. Ostpolitik represented a pragmatic acceptance of the geopolitical status quo. Rather than insisting on the immediate collapse of the East German state, the West German government sought to build bridges through diplomacy, travel agreements, and economic cooperation, hoping that contact would gradually erode the authoritarian nature of the Eastern regimes. Critical Perspective:While often celebrated as a peace project, critics argue it was also a strategy of stabilization for the Soviet bloc. By recognizing borders and providing economic credits, the policy helped prop up stumbling communist economies. It prioritized geopolitical stability and the reduction of nuclear tension over the immediate freedom of dissident movements in the East. Further Reading Rising from the Ruins: The Anatomy of the Wirtschaftswunder The Adenauer Era: Integration, Stability, and the Invention of “Chancellor Democracy” The Great Silence: Collective Amnesia and the Legacy of the Holocaust Wiedergutmachung: The Luxembourg Agreement and the “Entry Ticket” to the West The Long Road Home: The Return of the POWs and the Visit to Moscow Wandel durch Annäherung: Willy Brandt, Ostpolitik, and the Silent Revolution 1968 and the Revolt Against the Fathers The Americanization of the Bonn Republic: Coca-Cola and Rock ‘n’ Roll The German Autumn: The Red Army Faction and the Crisis of 1977 From Crisis to Kohl: Stagnation, the Greens, and the End of the Bonn Republic  had eased tensions with the East, the economy was the envy of Europe, and the 1972 Olympics in Munich were meant to showcase a “cheerful games” for a new, friendly Germany.

Then came the shock. On October 17, 1973, in response to the Yom Kippur War, OPEC announced an oil embargo. The price of crude oil quadrupled. In West Germany, the government imposed driving bans on Sundays. For the first time since the war, the autobahns were empty. Citizens walked or roller-skated on the empty lanes.

It was a surreal image that marked the end of an era. The “Golden Age” of continuous growth, full employment, and expanding welfare was over. The Federal Republic entered a new phase defined by limits: limits to growth, limits to state power, and limits to the Cold War consensus.

This article explores the tumultuous years between the Oil Crisis and the fall of the Berlin Wall. It was a time of “stagflationStagflation Full Description:A portmanteau of “stagnation” and “inflation,” describing a period of high unemployment coupled with rising prices. This economic crisis in the industrialized West shattered faith in the post-war order and provided the “window of opportunity” for neoliberalism to ascend. Stagflation was the crisis that Keynesian economics could not explain or fix. Triggered in part by oil shocks, it created a situation where traditional state spending only fueled inflation without creating jobs. This failure paralyzed the political left and allowed the neoliberal right to step in with radical new solutions focused on breaking unions and shrinking the money supply. Critical Perspective:Naomi Klein and other critics view this moment as the first major application of the “Shock Doctrine.” The crisis was used to justify painful structural reforms—such as crushing labor power and slashing social spending—that would have been politically impossible during times of stability.” (stagnation + inflation), terrorism (the RAF), and political realignment. It saw the rise of the Green Party, the first new party to enter the Bundestag in decades, challenging the industrial consensus. It witnessed the “German Autumn” of 1977 and the massive peace protests of the early 80s. Finally, it saw the rise of Helmut Kohl, the underestimated provincial politician who promised a “spiritual-moral turnaround” but ended up presiding over the end of the Cold War.

The End of the Boom: Economic Crisis and Social Reality

The 1973 Oil Crisis hit West Germany harder psychologically than materially. The country had built its identity on the Wirtschaftswunder (economic miracle). Legitimacy was performance-based. When unemployment reappeared (crossing the 1 million mark in 1975), it shook the foundations of the state.

Chancellor Helmut Schmidt (SPD), who succeeded Brandt in 1974, was a “Machher” (doer)—a pragmatic crisis manager. He scolded the Germans for their high expectations, famously saying, “Those who have visions should go to the doctor.” Schmidt focused on stabilizing the currency and managing inflation. He succeeded better than his neighbors (Britain and France faced far worse crises), promoting the FRG as the “World Champion of Exports” (Exportweltmeister).

However, the consensus between labor and capital began to fray. The “social partnership” that had kept strikes low was tested as unions demanded wages that matched inflation while companies faced shrinking profits. The era of expanding the welfare state was over; the era of austerity had begun.

The Rise of Post-Materialism: The Green Awakening

As the economy stuttered, a new political force emerged from the fringes. The “68ers” had grown up. They were no longer just Marxist students; they were teachers, lawyers, and civil servants. And they had new concerns.

In the late 1970s, the “New Social Movements” gained traction. These included the anti-nuclear movement (sparked by protests against nuclear power plants in Wyhl and Brokdorf), the feminist movement, and the environmental movement.

These groups felt unrepresented by the three established parties (CDU/CSU, SPD, FDP). The SPD was the party of the industrial working class and favored nuclear energy and economic growth. The conservatives were traditionalists.

In 1980, these disparate groups coalesced to form Die Grünen (The Greens). They were an “anti-party party,” rotating their leadership to prevent hierarchy and wearing sneakers and wool sweaters in parliament. In 1983, they entered the Bundestag with 5.6% of the vote.

The entry of the Greens changed the geometry of German politics. They introduced issues like acid rain (Waldsterben), women’s rights, and pacifism into the mainstream. They forced the other parties to “green” their platforms. Germany became the pioneer of environmental consciousness, recycling, and renewable energy debates.

The Peace Movement and the Euromissile Crisis

The most explosive issue of the early 1980s was the Cold War itself. In 1979, NATO adopted the “Double-Track Decision”: it offered to negotiate arms reduction with the Soviet Union, but threatened to deploy new intermediate-range nuclear missiles (Pershing II) in West Germany if talks failed.

Helmut Schmidt, the architect of this policy, found himself abandoned by his own party. The SPD base, increasingly pacifist, rejected the missiles. They feared that Germany would become the nuclear battlefield of World War III.

This sparked the largest mass protests in German history. In October 1981, 300,000 people demonstrated in Bonn. In 1983, millions formed a “human chain” stretching from Stuttgart to Ulm. The peace movement united church groups, Greens, trade unionists, and intellectuals. It was a massive display of civil society engagement.

Although the protests failed to stop the deployment, they fundamentally altered the political culture. The unquestioning loyalty to the US alliance, typical of the Adenauer years, was gone. A distinct “German interest” in détente was emerging, even on the left.

The Fall of Schmidt and the Wende

Caught between the economic stagnation, the rising Greens, and the rebellion in his own party over the missiles, Helmut Schmidt lost control. The liberal FDP, the junior coalition partner, sensed the wind changing. In 1982, they switched allegiances, abandoning the SPD to form a coalition with the conservative CDU/CSU.

On October 1, 1982, Helmut Kohl was elected Chancellor through a “Constructive Vote of No Confidence.” This was the Wende (The Turn).

Kohl promised a “spiritual-moral turnaround” (geistig-moralische Wende). He wanted to roll back the “liberal excesses” of the 68ers, restore traditional values (family, hard work, patriotism), and reinvigorate the economy through deregulationDeregulation Full Description:The systematic removal or simplification of government rules and regulations that constrain business activity. Framed as “cutting red tape” to unleash innovation, it involves stripping away protections for workers, consumers, and the environment. Deregulation is a primary tool of neoliberal policy. It targets everything from financial oversight (allowing banks to take bigger risks) to safety standards and environmental laws. The argument is that regulations increase costs and stifle competition. Critical Perspective:History has shown that deregulation often leads to corporate excess, monopoly power, and systemic instability. The removal of financial guardrails directly contributed to major economic collapses. Furthermore, it represents a transfer of power from the democratic state (which creates regulations) to private corporations (who are freed from accountability).
Read more.

The Era of the Black Giant: Helmut Kohl

Helmut Kohl was initially ridiculed. He was a provincial Catholic from the Palatinate, not a sophisticated intellectual like Schmidt or Brandt. He spoke with a thick accent and was often the butt of jokes about his weight and alleged lack of intelligence.

Yet, Kohl possessed a brilliant instinct for power. He secured his legitimacy by winning the snap election of 1983. He successfully managed the deployment of the missiles (ignoring the protests), which reassured the Americans and strengthened the Atlantic alliance.

Economically, the “turnaround” was more rhetoric than reality. Kohl did not dismantle the welfare state (unlike Thatcher in the UK or Reagan in the US). He practiced a cautious, consensus-based conservatism. The economy recovered slowly, unemployment remained high (the “new normal”), but prosperity returned for the majority.

The Historians’ Dispute: Who Owns the Past?

In the midst of the Kohl era, a ferocious intellectual battle erupted: the Historikerstreit (Historians’ Dispute) of 1986-1987.

It began when conservative historian Ernst Nolte published an essay suggesting that the Holocaust was essentially a defensive reaction to the “Asiatic barbarism” of the Soviet Gulags—that Hitler copied StalinStalin Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin (18 December 1878 – 5 March 1953) was a Soviet politician, dictator and revolutionary who led the Soviet Union from 1924 until his death in 1953. Read More. He implied that the obsession with Nazi guilt was a burden preventing Germany from becoming a “normal” nation.

The philosopher Jürgen Habermas led the counter-attack. He accused Nolte and other conservative historians of trying to whitewash the past to create a new, unburdened national identity for the Kohl era. Habermas argued that the only valid form of patriotism for a German was “Constitutional Patriotism” (Verfassungspatriotismus)—loyalty to democratic values, not to the nation-state.

The dispute was waged in the feature pages (Feuilleton) of major newspapers. It was a proxy war for the soul of the Berlin Republic. In the end, the liberal view prevailed: the singularity of the Holocaust was affirmed, and the attempt to relativize Nazi crimes was rejected by the mainstream. This proved that the critical memory culture established by the 68ers was robust enough to withstand a conservative challenge.

Bitburg and the Blunders of Memory

Kohl’s clumsiness with history was displayed in the “Bitburg Controversy” of 1985. To commemorate the 40th anniversary of the war’s end, Kohl invited President Ronald Reagan to visit a German military cemetery in Bitburg.

It was meant to be a gesture of reconciliation—shaking hands over the graves of soldiers. However, journalists discovered that the cemetery contained the graves of 49 Waffen-SS soldiers.

The outcry was global. Jewish organizations and the US Congress begged Reagan to cancel. The famous author Elie Wiesel implored Reagan: “That place, Mr. President, is not your place.” Reagan went anyway, but the visit was a PR disaster. It showed that Kohl’s desire for “normalcy” (drawing a line under the past) was premature and insensitive. It highlighted the persistent tension between the desire to be a normal ally and the burden of being the successor to the Third Reich.

Richard von Weizsäcker’s Speech: A New Consensus

Ironically, the Bitburg disaster was overshadowed weeks later by one of the greatest speeches in German history. On May 8, 1985, Federal President Richard von Weizsäcker addressed the Bundestag.

He radically reframed the end of the war. For decades, Germans had referred to May 8, 1945, as the “Collapse” (Zusammenbruch) or the “Catastrophe.” Weizsäcker declared: “May 8 was a day of liberation. It liberated all of us from the inhumanity of the National Socialist tyranny.”

By defining defeat as liberation, Weizsäcker integrated the German experience with the European one. It allowed Germans to be on the side of the victors—morally, if not militarily. This speech became the moral gold standardGold Standard Full Description:The Gold Standard was the prevailing international financial architecture prior to the crisis. It required nations to hold gold reserves equivalent to the currency in circulation. While intended to provide stability and trust in trade, it acted as a “golden fetter” during the downturn. Critical Perspective:By tying the hands of policymakers, the Gold Standard turned a recession into a depression. It forced governments to implement austerity measures—cutting spending and raising interest rates—to protect their gold reserves, rather than helping the unemployed. It prioritized the assets of the wealthy creditors over the livelihoods of the working class, transmitting economic shockwaves globally as nations simultaneously contracted their money supplies. of the Federal Republic, cementing the consensus that the democratic Germany was the antithesis of the Nazi state.

The GDR in Decline and the Surprise of 1989

While West Germany argued about missiles and history, East Germany was quietly rotting. The GDR economy was collapsing under the weight of debt and inefficiency.

In 1987, Erich Honecker became the first East German leader to visit Bonn. He was received with full state honors by Helmut Kohl—a flag, an honor guard, a banquet.

To conservatives, this was a betrayal. It seemed to cement the division forever. But in reality, it was a desperate plea for money. The GDR needed West German loans to survive.

The West German public had largely given up on reunification. It was a nice idea for Sunday speeches, but no one believed it would happen. The two states seemed to be drifting apart culturally. West Germans were obsessed with travel, consumption, and the environment; East Germans were trapped in a grey, surveillance state.

Conclusion: The End of the Provisional State

When the Berlin Wall fell on November 9, 1989, the Federal Republic was caught completely by surprise. The Chancellor was in Warsaw; the Bundestag was in session debating routine matters.

Yet, the West Germany of 1989 was uniquely prepared for the challenge. The crises of the 1970s and 80s had toughened it.

1. Economic Resilience: It had weathered the oil shocks and remained an industrial powerhouse.
2. Democratic Maturity: It had survived the terrorism of the RAF without becoming a police state.
3. Civil Society: The peace and green movements had created a vibrant, participatory culture. The Germans were no longer “subjects.”
4. Moral Clarity: Through the Historians’ Dispute and Weizsäcker’s speech, it had achieved a stable consensus on its past.

Helmut Kohl, the mocked provincial, seized the moment. With the “Ten Point Plan,” he pushed for rapid reunification. The “spiritual-moral turnaround” he promised never really happened—Germans remained liberal and secular. But he delivered the ultimate turnaround: the restoration of German unity.

The “Bonn Republic” ended not with a bang, but with a merger. It dissolved itself into the Berlin Republic. But the legacy of the years 1973–1989 remains. The Green Party, the pacifist instinct, the obsession with stability, and the constitutional patriotism—these are the pillars of modern Germany, forged in the stagnant, turbulent years before the Wall came down.