Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:21:20.019Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

German Economic Planning for War and Peace

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

Fritz Redlich
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

WaltherRathenau's influence on the beginnings of both war economy and planned economy is generally recognized. In America, however, it is not so well known that two other men besides Rathenau stood at the cradle of these new forms of economic organization. These two men, Josef Koeth and Wichard von Moellendorrf, and their activities between 1914 and 1919 are the subject of this paper.

Type
Articles
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , July 1944 , pp. 315 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1944

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The author is indebted to Dr. Fritz T. Epstein of the Widener Library of Harvard University for valuable bibliographical advice and assistance.

2 Rathenau, Walther. “Deuschlands Rohstoffversorgung, Vortrag oehalten in der Deutschen Gesellschaft 1914 am 20. Derember 1915.” in Gesammelte Schriften in fün Bänden (Berlin, 1918), Vol. V, pp. 25 ff., especially 25–29Google Scholar.

3 In a later publication Rathenau significantly spoke of “Kriegssozialismus” (war socialism). Gesammelte Schriften. Vol. V. p. 249.

4 On the 8th of August, the very day on which Ralhenau had the preliminary conversation in the Prussian department of war, Moellendorff reduced his warnings to writing and sent Rathenau a letter on this matter, Federn-Kohlhaas, Etta, Walther Rathenau, Sein Leben und Wirken (Dresden, 1928), p. 126Google Scholar.

5 Moellendorff's opinion about these organizations (in 1918) are expressed in Konservativer Sozialismus (Hamburg, 1932), pp. 92 ff.Google Scholar This book is a selection from Moellendorff's writings and unpublished papers down to 1922.

6 “Deutschlands Rohstoffversorgung,” op. cit., pp. 55 ff.

7 Kessler, Harry Graf, Walther Rathenau, Sein Leben und sein Work (Berlin–Grunewald, 1928), pp. 184 ftGoogle Scholar. Federn, , op. cit., pp. 115 ff.Google ScholarSpiero, Heinrich, Schicksal und Anteil. Ein Lebensweg in deutcher Wendezeit (Berlin, 1929), pp. 237 ff.Google Scholar Spiero, historian of German literature, in his capacity as a reserve officer was connected with the KRA in its early days.

8 The decision to make this appointment dated back to February, 1915.

9 Obituaries in Wissen und Wehr, 1936, No. 6, pp. 337–339Google Scholar and in Der Deutsche Volkswirt, Vol. X, 1936. p. 1856Google Scholar. Goebel, Otto, “Koeth, der Meister der deutschen Kriesswirtschaft im Weltkriege.” Jahrbuch für Wehrpolilik und Wehrwissemchaften, 1937–1938, pp. III, ff.Google Scholar

10 An experimental battery.

11 Spiero, , op. cit., p. 253Google Scholar. Goebel, , op. cit., pp. 114ff.Google Scholar

11a The willingness of Koeth lo seek enlightenment from scholars and his readiness to take their advice into consideration are noteworthy. He cooperated especially with Professor Sering of the University of Berlin.

12 Vier Tischreden in Erinnerung an Jen 29.9.1917 (Rathenau's fiftieth birthday), als Handschrift oedruckt. The pamphlet is in the Houshton Library of Harvard University. (*42.2470).

13 Op. cit., p. 4. The same feelings were also expressed by Koeth in his address at the dedication of a plaque in memory of Rathenau, passages of which are quoted by Spiero, , op. cit., pp. 299, 300Google Scholar.

14 Tischreden, pp. 8 and II. During the war Koeth advanced from major to colonel and finally gained such prestige and power that his influence was rather that of a minister. When the war ended he became minister of demobilization. After this job was done he retired into private life. keeping aloof from politics in contrast to many other retired officers of the imperial era. He remained interested. of course, in problems of war economy, as indicated by an address in 1935, “Von der Wehrwirtschaft” published in Wehrfreiheit, Jahrbuch der Deutschen Gesekkscgaft für Wehrpolitik und Wehrwissen schaften, 1935. pp. 66 ff. Koeth was at that time the chairman of a workshop on war economy, of that association, the report of which, signed by him, is reprinted ibid., pp. 101. 102. He died in 1936. Incidentallt, when minister of demobilization. Koeth gave an interview to representatives of the German press. the high lights of which were reprinted in the New York Times of March 31. 1919 in an article entitled: “German Socialists called export bar.”

15 As to Koeth see Tischreden. p. 8

16 “Von Kommenden Dingen,” (first published in February 1917) in Gesammelte Schriften, Vol. III (Berlin, 1918)Google Scholar. passim, especially pp. 297, 94, 95, 96, 102. 153 ff. The address “Problems der Friedenswirtschaft, Vortrag gehalten in der Deutschen Gesellschaft 1914 am 18. Dezember 1916” in Gesammelte Schriften (Berlin, 1918)Google Scholar, Vol. V expresses similar ideas, but more with a view to specific German necessities.

17 See “Von Kommenden Dingen,” op. cii., pp. 44 ff.. 69 ff., 100, 110, 127, 131.

18 Ibid., pp. 146 ff.; “Probleme der Friedenswirtschaft,” op cit., pp. 80 ff.; “Neue Wirtschaft” in Gesammelte Schriften, Vol. V, pp. 213 ff.Google Scholar

19 “Von Kommenden Dingen,” op. cit., pp. 297 ff.

20 Op. cit., Vol. V. especially pp. 202 ff.

21 Local industries were supposed to be controlled and regulated by the local communities. Ibid., p. 246.

21a However, the principle of semi-public organizations of industries as a possible basis of socialization was first suggested by Albert Schäffle in Quinlessenz des Sozialismus, first published in 1874.

22 Ibid., pp. 231 ff. See also the good description and evaluation of these plans in Graf Kessler's book, chapter VIII, pp. 184 ff.

23 The Moellendorffs belong to the Alimärkische Uradel. However, from the time of Wichard's greatgrandfather this particular branch of the family always intermarried with commoners and was hardly prominent socially in imperial Germany. See Golhaisches Genealogisches Taschenbuch der Uradligen Häuser (Gotha, 1918), pp. 672 ff.Google Scholar For the following account see Konservativer Sozialismus, pp. 7 ff. It is noteworthy that a Protestant, Moellendorff; a Catholic, Koeth, and a Jew, Rathenau, had equal shares in the early development of the new economic systems.

24 (Berlin, 1916).

25 Op. cit., p. 12. Incidentally Rathenau speaks of “fessellose Wirtschaftskampf.” “Von Kommenden Dingen,” op. cit, p. 125. It is worthwhile mentioning that the word Volksgenosse (racial comrade), one of the pet words of the Nazis, can be found in Rathenau's writings, see “Die Neue Wirtschaft,” op. cit., p. 246.

26 Ibid., 18–20, 27, 28. Werner Sombart then thought in similar terms, Händler und Helden (München, 1915)Google Scholar.

27 Ibid., 29–32, 41 ff.

28 (Jena, 1917). The booklet was published as number 1 of a series of monographs, entitled Deutsche Gemeinwurstscgaft, and intended to promote Rathenau's and Moellendorff' economic ideas. The editor of the series was Erich Schairer.

29 In his review of Rathenau's, “Neue Wirtschaft” in Technik und Wirtschaft, XI, 1918, pp. 114 ff.Google Scholar (“Wer meine Vorschläge Kennt, Weiss, wie innig sie sich mil Rathenaus berühren”)

30 Herkner, Heinrich, Die Arbeilerfrage, 8th ed. (Berlin and Leipzig. 1922), Vol. II, pp. 81, 113, 174Google Scholar.

31 Theodor, Heuss., Friedrich Neumann, Der Maim, das Werk, die Zcit, (Stuttgart, Berlin, 1937), pp. 79, 229Google Scholar. Naumann and Rathenau belonged to the same generation.

32 It would be interesting to know whether or not Rathenau and Moellendorff were in this respect inspired by Gustav ven Schmoller's address entitled “Das Verhältnis der Kartelle zum Staate,” delivered at the Mannheim meeting of the Verein für Sozialpolitik in 1905, a provocative meeting which impressed the public. (Schriften des Vereins für Sozialpolilik, Vol. 116, Verhandlungen der Generahersammlung in Mannheim, Leipzig, 1906, pp. 237 ff.Google Scholar, especially pp. 259 ff.) In that speech Schmoller had suggested that the state should control the Kartelle and participate in their profit. It is more probable that Rathenau was inspired by this speech than Moellendorff. Friedrich Naumann had not only attended that meeting but also had participated in the debate, attacking Schmoller. However, in 1917 under the impact of war economy he remembered the hot debate in Mannheim, changed sides, aand arrived at suggestionssimilar to those of both Rathenau and Moellendorff. He wished to see after the war an economic organization regulated by the state according to its needs, the Kartelle becoming semi-public and the pillars of taxation. Although keenly interested in these ideas, Naumann did not propagate them publicly. See Heuss, , op. cit., pp. 445, 446Google Scholar.

33 Clearly expressed in Tischreden, p. 10.

34 Technik und Wirtschaft, Vol. XI, 1918, pp. 114–118Google Scholar.

35 “Geschichte der Planwirtschaft” in Recht und Wirtschaft, IX, 1920, pp. 9–11Google Scholar.

36 Rathenau's books were very widely read at that time. Kessler, Graf, op. cit. p. 231Google Scholar.

37 Konservativer Sozialismus, pp. 10 ff.

38 However, the ideas, first expressed in the writings of Rathenau and Moellendorff between 1916 and 1918, which found their final official formulation in this memorandum were alreadythe basis of a few earlier official papers drafted by Moellendorff. In the Denkschrift des Reichsmirlschafsamts betreffend den Reichsfonds vom 28. November, 1918 (reprinted in Komervativer Sozialismus, pp. 220 ff.) Moellendorff suggested a fund for the purpose of what we call pump-priming today. This fund should work through the agency of WirtschafiszWeckverbände. These organizations would at the same time represent economic self-government and would put the relations between employers and employees on a sounder basis, since each group would be represented therein on a basis of parity.

The memorandum of November 1918 was followed by the Programm des Reichstvirtschafisamts für die nächste Zeit vom 3. Dezember 1918. (Ibid., pp. 225 ff.) This program proposed dealing with the German national economy as an organic whole and administering it according to the principle of self-government, employers and employees participating with equal rights and in such a way that all private interests were subordinated to social ends. As in the earlier memorandum, pillars of the proposed selfgovernment were to be Wirtschaftszwecliverbände which horizontal organizations of the various industries should be in the second instance vertically combined with all related ones. (This was, of course, Rathenau's original proposal.) There is a slight difference between the organizational set-up as suggested here and in the Denkschrift of May 1919. In the earlier plan the Verbände were to be run by representatives of employers and employees, consumers and related industries being represented by government; whereas according to the later scheme these groups were to participate through their own representatives. The latter proposal was more consistent with self-government of which Moellendorff was the exponent.

39 Der Aafbau der Gemeimuirlschaft, Denkschrift des Reichswirtschaftsministeriums vom 7. Mai 1919. Deulsche Gemeintuirlschaft. No. 9. (Jena, 1919)Google Scholar.

40 Heimann, Elduard, “Die Soziahsierung” in Archiv für Sozialivissemchaften und Soziaholitik, Vol. 45, 3, (1919), p. 561Google Scholar. Moellendorff, “Zur Geschichte der Planwirtschaft,” op. cit.

41 Denkschrift, p. 13.

42 Ibid., pp. 8. 10, 13.

43 Ibid., p. 12.

44 Although private property was retained, Moellendorff planned to design property taxation in such a way that the Reich would become a stockholder in numerous corporations, Ibid., p. 17.

45 Ibid., p. 8.

46 “Den Wirschaftsbünden liegt die Leitung der Wirtschaft auf ihren Fachgebieten ob.” ibid. p. 25.

47 Denkschrift, Appendix I, pp. 25, 26. A comparison of Moellendorff s organizational scheme with that presented by Rathenau shows that the two men differed with regard to the relative importance to be assigned to the two types of organization within the set-up.

Incidentally there were published two more official documents with respect to Moellendorff's plans, a memorandum of July 8, 1919 signed by Rudolf Wissell, and a draft, “Entwurf einer Erklärung auf die Interpellation Arnstadt und Genossen.” (See Wissell. Rudolf, . Praktische WirtschaflspolitiK Unlerlagen zur Beurteihmg einer fünfmonaligen Wirischaftsführung. Berlin, 1919, pp. 124 ff and 129 ff, respectivelyGoogle Scholar.) Moellendorff is the probable author of these documents because they were within his assignment, they are quoted by him in his “Geschichte der Planwirtschaft,” and the style of the documents is very similarto that of his known writings.

48 Parts of it were fust published on May 24. 1919 in the Vossische Zeilung. in Berlin, and slightly later the whole document was printed in Plulus, Vol. XVI, 1919Google Scholar. Then there came out the edition quoted above, see footnote 39, which was authorized by Moellendorff himself. Finally Rudolf Wissell, minister of commerce, reprinted it in a book meant to justify his official actions (see footnote 47). The fact that the Denkschrift was printed four times within a few months is indicative of the importance then assigned to it.

49 Wissell, R. and Moellendorff, W. von.Wirtschaftliche Selbsiverrealtung, Zwei Kwulgebungen des Retchslvirtschaftsmiinstcriiims. Deutsche Gemeintiiirtschaft, No. 10 (Jena, 1919), pp. 17 ff.Google Scholar especially pp. 25–29. Reprinted in Komervaliver Sozialismus, pp. 125 ff. See especially pp. 136. 137.

50 23d session of March 8, 1919, quoted by Kessler, Graf, op.cit., pp. 274, 275Google Scholar.

51 Autonome Wirtschaft, Deutsche Cemeinmirisehaft, No. 16 (Jena, 1919), especially pp. 9, 10, 15, 22, 23Google Scholar.

52 Kessler, Graf, op. cit., p. 276Google Scholar; Federn, , op. cit., pp. 174, 175Google Scholar.

53 The stockholders of the industrial enterprises should become bondholders and in their stead workers and employees should own the establishments. The latter should receive the net profits, but should not run the enterprises. Policy making and administration were to be centralized under strong state control.

54 The extent to which Wissell identified himself with Moeilendorff's ideas can be seen from various speeches. See Wissell, and Moellendorff, , op. cit., pp. 1Google Scholar ff andWissell, Rudolf, Praktische Wirtschaflspolitili. Unlerlagen zur Beurteilitng einer fünfmonatigen Wirtschafhführung. (Berlin, 1919), pp. 62 and 82 ff.Google Scholar In this book, as already mentioned, Wissell reprinted Moeilendorff's Denkschrift of May 1919, which fact is in itself indicative of his acceptance of the latter's scheme.

55 Wissell, , op. cit., pp. 17 and 135 ff.Google Scholar

56 When Moellendorff resigned in the summer of 1919, the world seemed to him full of dire forebodings. He thought the liberal-capitalistic nations were doomed and that a world catastrophe lay ahead. (Open letter to Reboux, Paul in Tagebuch, Vol. I, 1919, pp. 1175 ff)Google Scholar. He was not so wrong, as we all know, but for another two decades life went on without cataclysms and he became less radical. He lived in a pleasant suburb of Berlin and around 1926 was president of the Siaatliche (Prussian) Materialprufungsana. In that year with the backing of Carl Bosch, the leading man of the German Dyestuff Trust, he came to America. His purpose was to study industrial conditions and to gather information on the collection and use of statistical data in this country with a view to making use of such methods in Germany. The result of that trip was the book, Vollgslvirtschafllcher Elemenlarvergleich zwischen den Ver. Staaten von America, Deulschland, Crossbritannien, Frankreich, Italien (Berlin, 1930)Google Scholar. (See the introduction to this publication and a notice in the New York Times of November 27, 1931). In the 1930's he was described in a directory as follows: Diplomingenieur, Unterstaatssecretär a. D. Professor, Berater (adviser) der I. G. Farbeninduslrie.

57 The idea of responsibility underlies all of Rathenau's suggestions. As to Moellendorff, see Wissell, and Moellendorff, , op. cit., pp. 28, 29Google Scholar; Denlpchrift, p. 13. Among the Nazi writers C. Luer stressed the responsibility of the entrepreneur. See his Der Unternehmer als Venealler da Volksvermögens, (Berlin, 1935)Google Scholar.

58 Moellendorff, , Von Einst zu Einst, p. 6Google Scholar.

59 Wissell, and Moellendorff, , op. cit., pp. 25, 27Google Scholar. Rathenau thought in terms of human rather than national solidarity. Kessler, Graf, op. cit., pp. 96, 199, 268Google Scholar, quotes from publications covering the various periods of Rathenau's life.

60 Rathenau's ideas on limited autarchy can be found in “Von KommendenDingen,” op. cit., pp. 302 ff; “Probleme der Friedenswirtschaft,” op. cit., p. 69, 74; “Die Neue Wirtschaft.” op. cit., p. 190. As to Moellendorff, see Wissell, and Moellendorff, , op. cit., p. 26Google Scholar. It is noteworthy that Moellendorff wanted a world eccnomy in which relations were established between nations and not between firms (ibid., p. 25), which became the trend under Nazism.

61 Wissell, and Moellendorff, , op. cit., p. 28Google Scholar; Denfcchrift, p. 13.

62 Sombart, Werner, Deutscher Sozialismus (Charlottenburg, 1934)Google Scholar. However the term was not coined by Moellendorff. As early as 1877 Rudolf Todt had published a book entitled Der radikale Deutsche Sozialismus und die chrislliche Cesellschaft.

63 “Der Deutsche Sozialismus hat sich so friihzeitig und ehrlich wie moglich in seiner ganzen Härte zu offenbaren und vor nichts so sehr zu hüten wie vor dem Anschein als ob er ein weichhches Schlaraffien hervorbnngen könne.” Denfyschrift, p. 13. See also Von Einst zu Einst, pp. 3, 4.

64 “Von Kommenden Dmgen, op. cit., pp. 297 ff.

65 Ibid., pp. 161, 162. Moellendorff, , Deutsche CemeinTvirtschaft, pp. 29–32Google Scholar; Von Einst zu Einst, p. 29; Wissell, and Moellendorff, , op. cit., p. 28Google Scholar.