196 WINFRIED SÜß
lems that were supposed to be remedied by the welfare state were seen as
temporary manifestations of transition in the “construction of socialism.”
Not the level of social security but, rather, a higher standard of living was
considered to be indicative of victory in the rivalry between the systems.
As the superior productivity of the market economy became apparent
in the wake of the West German “economic miracle,” social security in-
stitutions in East Germany had to counter this by providing evidence of
the advantages of state socialism. At the same time, the SED leadership
increasingly sought to legitimize itself through social policy when it was
no longer able to generate legitimacy through democratic rights of par-
ticipation.^11 Social inequality, unemployment, and the return of poverty
in West Germany beginning in the 1980s were topics repeatedly picked
up by the media in the GDR in order to contrast the socialist leitmotif of
a social safety net with the inevitably risk-laden industrial social order
of West Germany that was subject to the whims of the market economy.
Whereas the competition between the two welfare states was merely
a “by-product of Germany’s division” for the Federal Republic in that the
GDR was not a signifi cant point of reference, the comparison between the
two Germanys acquired an “existential dimension” for the legitimacy of
the SED regime over time.^12 Such contrasts became highly problematic for
the GDR when specifi c areas were concretely rather than abstractly com-
pared. The GDR came away on top in only a few areas, such as subsidized
prices for basic consumer goods or its vaccine program. In other areas,
such as working hours, pension amounts, or social housing, the GDR did
not perform nearly as well. As a result of this asymmetric rivalry with the
West, the GDR leadership was greatly limited in its scope of action. Espe-
cially since the standard of living and social policy were so important as
a source of legitimacy for the regime, the social order of the GDR and the
power monopoly of its political leadership was put on the line whenever
economic effi ciency was prioritized over social needs.^13 Social policy also
latently functioned as a source of legitimacy in the Federal Republic, but
it was much less pervasive. It was bound up in the competition between
two national parties that were proponents of the welfare state, namely the
Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Social Democratic Party (SPD),
making it diffi cult to carry through with any major cuts in social benefi ts
despite the worsening economic situation of the mid-1970s.
Patterns of Inequality during Phases of Affl uence
and Upward Social MobilityJust a few years after the collapse of the Nazi dictatorship, the “collapsed
society” (Zusammenbruchsgesellschaft) of Germany, with its many dam-