| Eugen Richter | |
|---|---|
| Reichstag | |
| In office 1867–1871 |
|
| Reichstag | |
| In office 1871–1874 |
|
| Constituency | Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt |
| Reichstag | |
| In office 1874–1906 |
|
| Constituency | Hagen-Schwelm |
| Personal details | |
| Born | July 30, 1838 Düsseldorf |
| Died | March 10, 1906 (aged 67) Lichterfelde (Berlin) |
| Political party | Progress Party Freeminded Party Freeminded People's Party |
| Occupation | Journalist, Jurist |
| Religion | Protestantism |
Eugen Richter (Düsseldorf, July 30, 1838 – March 10, 1906) was a progressive German politician and journalist in Imperial Germany. Also his opponents recognized him as one of the major voices on the left of both the Prussian Diet and the German Reichstag.[1]
Contents |
Born as the son of a combat medic, Richter attended the Gymnasium in his home town of Düsseldorf. Since 1856, he studied Law and Economics at the Universities of Bonn, Berlin and Heidelberg, that he finished with a law degree in 1859. In those years Richter became a strong advocate of free trade, market economy and Rechtsstaat, views he held for all his life. In 1859, Richter became a civil servant in judiciary. His liberal views caused some trouble with the Prussian bureaucracy several times. Richter achieved renown for his essay Über die Freiheit des Schankgewerbes (On the liberty of the tavern trade). The Magdeburger Spukgeschichte of 1862 brought in a disciplinary procedure. However it was printed in the Niederrheinischen Volkszeitung and in the Magdeburger Zeitung.
In 1864 he was elected the mayor of Neuwied, but the election result was not confirmed by the president of the provincial government. After that, Richter left the civil service and fully entered into parliament and journalism. He became a parliamentary correspondent of the Elberfelder Zeitung to Berlin and established thus also political contacts. In 1867 Richter entered the Reichstag as a member of the Left liberals, and since 1869 he was also a member of the Prussian Lower House. In response to the Anti-Socialist Laws passed in 1878 banning the Social Democrat Party Richter said: "I fear Social-Democracy more under this law than without it".[2] Due to fears that Bismarck was going to introduce a tobacco monopoly Richter unsuccessfully sought to persuade the Reichstag to pass a resolution condemning such a monopoly as "economically, financially, and politically unjustifiable".[3] When Bismarck proposed a system of social insurance paid by the state Richter denounced them as "not Socialistic, but Communistic".[4]
He was the most influential leader of the German Progress Party (Deutsche Fortschrittspartei), since 1884 of the German Freeminded Party (Deutsche Freisinnige Partei), and since 1893 of the Freeminded People's Party (Freisinnige Volkspartei). Beside that he was one of the greatest critics of the policy of Otto von Bismarck as well as the National Liberal Party and the Social Democrats. From 1885 to 1904 he was the chief editor of the liberal newspaper Freisinnige Zeitung.
Antisemitism had been virulent already earlier in the 1870s in Germany. But when the renowned historian Heinrich von Treitschke and also Court Preacher Adolph Stöcker endorsed it in 1879, what had been more of a fringe phenomenon gained national attention. While at first mostly a debate in various newspapers ("Berliner Antisemitismusstreit"), it led to several attacks on Jews and calls for limiting their legal rights in 1880. A petition to the Reich Chancellor Otto von Bismarck was circulated throughout the country calling for administrative measures banning immigration of Jews and restricting access to positions in the judiciary and in education ("Antisemitenpetition", German Wikipedia).
This met with opposition from Eugen Richter's Progess Party and the former left wing of the National Liberals led by Theodor Mommsen and Heinrich Rickert (father of the philosopher Heinrich Rickert), whereas the other parties — Conservatives, Center Party, the right wing of the National Liberals, and the Socialists — mostly stayed aloof or even flirted with antisemitism. In November 1880, a declaration by 75 leading scientists, businessmen, and politicians was published in major newspapers condemning antisemitism ("Notabeln-Erklärung"). It was signed among others by the Mayor of Berlin Max von Forckenbeck, medical scientist and anthropologist Rudolf Virchow, historian and latter Nobel Prize laureate Theodor Mommsen as well as entrepreneur and inventor Werner Siemens (founder of Siemens AG).[5]
On November 20, 1880 the Progress Party brought the matter before the Prussian Diet and asked the government to take a stand on the antisemitic movement and on whether legal restrictions were meant to be introduced ("Interpellation Hänel"). The government had been conspicuously neutral on the antisemitic movement as it had attacked the Progress Party, and the Progressives suspected outright collusion. The government confirmed that the legal status of Jews was not to be altered. But it fell short of condemning the antisemitic movement. As Progressive Rudolf Virchow complained in the ensuing debate:[6]
Well, meine Herren (Sirs), even if I have called the reply given by the Royal state government correct, I cannot deny that on the whole it could have been somewhat warmer. It was correct, but cold down to the heart.
While on the first day of the debate a consensus seemed to emerge against the antisemitic movement, on the second day, November 22, 1880 representatives of the Conservative and Center parties openly displayed their antisemitism. In his speech, Eugen Richter went on the attack. He predicted the eventual consequences of the antisemitic movement:
Meine Herren, the whole movement has by all means a similar character regarding its final goal, regarding its methods, as the Socialist movement. (Call from the floor.) That is what matters. The small gradual differences completely cede into the background, that is what is particularly insidious about the whole movement, that while the Socialists only turn against the economically better-off, here racial hatred is nourished, that is, something the individual cannot alter and that can only be ended by either killing him or forcing him out of the country.
He concluded his speech with the words:
Exactly to give the government the opportunity to speak its mind, how it stands on the matter, including the Reich Chancellor, that is why we have introduced this interpellation, and we are pleased about the success and wish that from now on throughout the country a sturdy reaction will crush this antisemitic movement, which truly does not confer honor and adornment on our country.
Responding to an antisemitic meeting on December 17, 1880, the Progress Party invited all electors for the Prussian Diet to a meeting in the Reichshallen on January 12, 1881 to demonstrate that the citizens of Berlin were not in support of the antisemitic movement, but condemned it. Progressive Rudolf Virchow, National Liberal Albrecht Weber and Eugen Richter delivered speeches before an audience of 2.500 electors. In his speech, Eugen Richter lashed out against antisemitic university students:[7][8]
And what do we see now as an outrageous phenomenon? Young people who have not even lived through the great time with a political consciousness like we have — because they were still in 6th and 5th grade (Amusement) — Young people who have not yet proved what they are worth force their way to the fore and dare to hurl at the Jewish cavaliers of the Iron Cross and at the fathers who have given their sons to Germany that they do not belong to the German nation?!! (Longlasting, tempestuous applause. Calls of Boo!)
He turned the antisemitic accusations around:
Nowadays it is seen as the act of an hero if you drink more than the Jews, and as an educated nation you reproach the Jews for sending so many children to higher education. And after you have worked all those valiant deeds, then you sing: "Deutschland, Deutschland über Alles!" (Tempestuous amusement.) Truly! Our friend Hoffmann von Fallersleben has been saved by a kind fate from experiencing this abuse of his magnificent song. Since, that's something I admit openly, if this is supposed to be German, if this is supposed to be Christian, then I want to be anywhere else in the world but in Christian Germany! (Vigorous applause.)
Already in February 1880, the German Crown Prince and latter Emperor Frederick III had called the antisemitic movement in a private conversation with the president of the Jewish corporation of Berlin, Meyer Magnus, "a disgrace for Germany" (in some reports also "a disgrace of our time" or "a disgrace for our nation"). Eugen Richter now referred to these words, and the Crown Prince confirmed them two days later:
One day, it will not be the smallest leaf of laurel in the wreath of our Crown Prince that already at the first stirrings of this movement, something that our deceased colleague Wulffsheim overheard with his own ears and which has also been confirmed otherwise as trustworthy — he declared to the president of the Jewish corporation of Berlin that this movement is a disgrace for the German nation! (Tempestuous, long lasting applause.)
He rejected the claim that the antisemitic movement had grown from the ranks of craftsmen, workers, and businessmen:
It confers honor on the German craftsmen, workers, and businessmen that this movement, which is supposed to be in their interest, did not arise from their circles, (Vigorous applause.) just like the corn tariff propaganda did not arise from peasant circles. It arose from young people who do not earn anything at all, but live out of their parents' pockets. Furthermore, from people who in positions of trust as officials obtain their salaries from the public coffers and often cannot have any idea of how a businessman sometimes feels who struggles to earn his daily bread and to pay the obligatory taxes! (Tempestuous, general applause.) Such people who call themselves “educated” have put Jew baiting into action. Indeed, here it shows again that superior mental culture if it is not aligned with a culture of the heart and true religiosity — not a religiosity that has God on its lips, but the devil in its heart — often only leads to nothing more than barbarity in a more refined form!
In his concluding words, he called upon his audience:
In this vein, let us also fight against the depravity of this movement in a league without party distinction and let us feel united in this resolution — drawing on the New Year’s Address of the city councillors to the Kaiser and his reply — that only if all powers of national life, before which no distinction of denominations is justified, work peacefully and peaceably together, the welfare of the German Reich and her individual citizens can prosper. (Vigorous, continuous applause.)
In a fierce campaign for the Reichstag elections of 1881, the Progress Party and Eugen Richter kept on defending their Jewish compatriots. On October 27, 1881 the Progress Party managed to decisively defeat the antisemitic "Berliner Bewegung" (Berlin Movement), easily winning all six seats for the capital, with Eugen Richter gaining 66% of the vote in the first round. The antisemitic movement gave up on Berlin from then on, and focused on the provinces.