State and Politics in Germany

For ten years now there has been the office of the “Commissioner for Culture and the Media” in Germany. Thanks to the work done by various holders of the office it has managed to gain quite a remarkable reputation. That of course is no reason for resting on one’s laurels, as the head of the Deutsche Kulturrat (German Cultural Council), Olaf Zimmermann, said in an interview with goethe.de. In order to advance the cause of culture in Germany a Federal Ministry of Culture is necessary and culture should be enshrined in the German constitution as a national objective.

Mr Zimmermann, in its recently published 2008 annual review the Deutsche Kulturrat (German Cultural Council), complained – despite all the progress that has been made in the field of culture - that “a vision or two would not have gone amiss.” What visions does culture in Germany need for 2009?

In the field of culture at the moment we are being very pragmatic and are merely reacting to problems rather than acting on them. We should also be thinking more about the future of cultural institutions and structures in our society, as well as the politico-cultural challenges of a united Europe. For example we should be trying now to find out how to deal with the impact of digitalisation. What will it mean, if the internet ousts the traditional distribution outlets for artists and other creative individuals? How can we ensure that they will continue to enjoy the same exploitation rights? How should we react to this dimension of marketing? We need answers to these questions and to find them we need visions.

2009 is election year in Germany – with regional, national and European elections taking place. Is it not a favourable opportunity for politicians to tackle such issues?

First and foremost I think we – the cultural associations – are responsible. We have to find the courage to talk about things that up to now have been taboo – like a kind of “flat-rate for culture” with which users can access cultural services for a standard fee. We have to move forward, only then can we demand that politicians cooperate and make their contribution, too.

Politics has not exactly been idle – we have just celebrated ten years of having an official “Commissioner for Culture” in Germany. When the government at that time – the coalition between the SPD and the Green Party – appointed Michael Naumann as the first “Commissioner for Culture”, the new office was torn to pieces by critics from all corners. Today they are calling it a success story. How did this change of mind come about?

Cultural politics on a federal level was as good as dead and buried ten years ago. Things are different now – apart from those few people in the Federal Chancellery who are responsible for cultural policy nobody today would hit upon the idea of saying that the increased significance of cultural politics on a federal level that has taken place over the last ten years was a retrograde step. On the contrary. It was a huge step forward with respect to institutions, content and finances. Over the last ten years the federal government has taken over large cultural institutions, established foundations and national memorial sites and substantially increased film subsidies. And – it also succeeded in making society once again more sensitive to the subject of culture.

An independent Ministry of Culture

Would you like to see an independent Ministry of Culture?

Yes, that would be the most sensible. A Commissioner for Culture in the Federal Chancellery finds himself in a dependent position. A Federal Minister of Culture, on the other hand, could develop more of his own initiative, initiating debates and laws. He would have his own ministry, his own budget and his powers would be much more far-reaching than those of a Commissioner for Culture.

The fact however that culture is becoming more and more a task carried out on a national level in the overall interest of the state is coming in for harsh criticism from the individual states – the Länder. They are afraid of losing their cultural sovereignty. Is their fear justified?

Nobody, not even the German Cultural Council, is interested in doing away with the cultural sovereignty of the Länder or with cultural federalism in general. On a national level however it is a matter of setting parameters for a future cultural policy that will represent the interests of the whole of Germany. Germany does not, for example, send just one Minister of Culture to the European Commission in Brussels, but all those of the Länder. This is not conducive to asserting national interests. I consider this to be an anachronism.

The Länder criticise interference in their cultural sovereignty, calling it a breach of the constitution.

Do they? I think that the Länder have now also realised that cultural policy can no longer be effected the way it was 50 years ago. The Länder have simply noticed that it cannot be all bad when the Commissioner for Culture spends money on them, investing in projects and cultural institutions. The cultural sun is not going to set on Germany due to having more politico-cultural leeway at a federal level.

Do you have any suggestions on how the proposed legislative initiative – to enshrine “Culture as a National Objective” in the German constitution - could be given a second chance in the Bundesrat (upper house of the German parliament). Up to now it has always been blocked by the Länder.

The chances of achieving this in this term of office have somewhat diminished, but it is not entirely impossible. Admittedly the Länder said no. I hope however that the CDU party will get things moving on the federal level and place the ball in the court of the Länder.

Weathering the storm

If culture does not become a national objective, it certainly won’t be the end of Germany as a cultural nation. So why all this debate?

Because the clause that says “The state is to protect and promote culture” does not mean l'Art pour l'Art. Culture as a national objective – like any other national objectives – plays a major role. Expenditure on culture would no longer be on a voluntary basis - the government would be legally bound to finance cultural activities. Culture has to be transformed into practical politics.

In view of the present financial crisis might politico-cultural objectives and cultural projects soon be considered to be superfluous?

The crisis without doubt has jeopardised culture and the business of culture. My biggest fear is that the debts incurred today are going to bring about the austerity budgets of tomorrow. Culture will then have to undergo a blood-letting process. (For this reason alone we have to make sure that culture is firmly embedded in our society. Culture is not a playground for artists, but an immediate mission for our society that has consequences for everybody. Culture today focuses on integration equally as much as on a national identity.) This is why we have to look the financial crisis in the eye to weather the storm.