by Adrian von Ferenczy //
August 1990 marked a transitional point in German history: A few months after the fall of the Berlin Wall and only a short time before reunification, questions about the past, present and future of the two German states were at the center of social debate. In the midst of this historical upheaval, Günter Gaus, one of Germany's most distinguished journalists, met Markus Wolf, the former head of the GDR's foreign intelligence service, to shed light on a complex personality in the ZDF series "On the Person".
Markus Wolf, the "man without a face", symbolized the ambivalences and contradictions of the GDR: a communist by conviction, a strategist of international espionage, but at the same time a man who had to wrestle with the decay of the system he served. This interview, profound in its intellectual and political implications, opens a window onto a world that many considered closed - and at the same time raises questions that still resonate in Germany today.
In an interview with Günter Gaus on August 6, 1990, Markus Wolf spoke about his role in the GDR state apparatus and the ideals that shaped his actions. A central theme was the ambivalence of power and morality. Wolf defended his employees' conviction that they were doing good in the service of socialism, but admitted that ideological blindness often led to oppression. He spoke openly about the so-called "ideological diversion", the systematic criminalization of dissenters, and called this "the greatest evil" of the GDR.
Wolf also reflected on his own role in the apparatus. As head of the Main Reconnaissance Administration (HVA), he saw himself as an actor in a political niche, separate from the Stasi's repressive domestic work. But the moral purity he claimed for his department remained fragile. Günter Gaus confronted him with the question of personal guilt and his involvement in the mechanisms of a system that persecuted dissidents. Wolf confessed that he had not put up enough resistance and painted a picture of powerlessness in the face of an apparatus characterized by party discipline, opportunism and ignorance.
Relevance for the present: A lesson in freedom of expression
The conversation reveals a timeless truth: the restriction of freedom of expression and the persecution of dissidents are among the most dangerous excesses of an ideologically narrow system. In the GDR, the stigmatization of members of the opposition led to alienation between the state and society. These experiences are also relevant in today's Germany, where, according to an Allensbach survey, only 40 percent of people still express their opinions freely. The political discrediting of dissenters through terms such as "lateral thinkers" and state repression reflect worrying parallels.
Markus Wolf's confession that dissenters were criminalized in the GDR serves as a reminder: freedom of expression is the foundation of a democratic society. Any restriction of this freedom, be it through state surveillance, social exclusion or ideological polarization, endangers the common good.
Markus Wolf remains a controversial figure: a man who acted in the shadow of a system that was characterized by ideals and oppression in equal measure. The interview with Günter Gaus shows how closely personal actions and historical responsibility are intertwined. It calls on us not to forget the lessons of the past and to defend freedom of opinion as an inviolable value.
The complete interview is available in the media library of the Club of clear words to see. You can also find more information about the media library in the FAQs here at CdkW.
English 
German 
Spanish
5 Responses
Funny, we have that again today !!! And that in a supposed democracy!
Either they have learned from the GDR, or they have put people with such attitudes in charge?
(Merkel, Faeser and Co, etc.)
There are many with a Stasi past - who are protected to this day and the facts are kept secret
Well, to put it more simply: we see time and again,,, and again and again,,, but especially in Germany, how people allow themselves to be made beacons of the authorities. They fulfill a function, they subordinate themselves, they hide their humanity behind the laws (as if these were not man-made and followed from the respective system) and an ideology, they cower and commit injustice. (The legal profession is trained to interpret "laws", no matter who made them) They are afraid and they have no overriding morality that would prohibit them from committing injustice. In the name of the law. Or in the name of an overriding ideology. "God is dead. We have killed him," says Nietzsche. But even HE was of no use. How much injustice was committed in the name of God/Allah? Just as much as in the name of ideologies. - "The world as will and imagination", Schopenhauer. Of course, people have no idea that their lives could be just an imagination, that they are just taking part in a play, just seeing the shadows on the wall. And that is why only one thing drives them through their little lives: The will to live. Nothing else.
Setzt der ‚Wille zum Leben‘ nicht eine Ahnung, eine Vorstellung voraus, wie dieses Leben auszusehen hat? Muß sich der Lebenswille nicht aus etwas tieferen speisen? Für uns Menschen gilt doch die Vermutung, das wir das Leben dazu nutzen Erfahrungen zu machen, uns Wissen anzueignen, ein Leben lang zu lernen und der Menschwerdung im Sinne der Natur, und nicht der Moral, zuträglich zu sein. Sieht man sich die brennensten Themen unserer Tage an, und beobachtet die Reaktionen aus Politik, Medien und der Mitte der Gesellschaft, dann fällt es schwer sich vorzustellen, das der Aktionismus nichts anderes ist als Reflex. Ein instinkthafter Reflex. Hieraus speist sich mein Pessimismus was den gesamtgesellschaftlichen Fortgang angeht. Zum einen weil all diese Menschen dazu neigen konditionierbar zu sein, und zum anderen weil ihnen jegliche Selbstkontrolle fehlt. Man verliert jede Fähigkeit zu differenzieren. Eine Abkehr von den evolutionären Vorteilen die die Natur dem Menschen mitgegeben hat. Also ein Leben das mehr bietet als Essen, Schlafen und Fortpflanzung. Ich vermute deshalb, das der Wille zum Leben zum reinen Überlebenskampf wird. Wir nähern uns dem marxistischen Ideal. In dem die Fähigkeit sich selbst zu organisieren, sein Talent und individuelles Können einzusetzen bestraft wird. Der aufgeklärte Mensch, so wie man sich ihn in einer Zeit ohne Lehnsherren und einem stetigen Informationsfluß vorstellen mag, dieser aufgeklärte Mensch, der selbst entscheidet wie die Welt in der er leben möchte auszusehen hat, ist auf dem Rückzug. Demokratie, Rechtsstaat, Gesellschaftsvertrag, Vielfalt, Individualität, freier Wille, Wissenschaft, Geschichte u.s.v.m. haben in dieser Gesellschaft nur noch einen nutzen, nämlich dem, ein kollegtives Feindbild zu konstruieren. Ein evolutionär-humanistisches Weltbild in diese Bewegung zu tragen wäre der reine Selbstmord.
That is why Trump pointed out in his first speech that only states in which freedom of speech prevails can call themselves democratic. And with his "Free Speech Initiative", he wants to ensure that freedom of speech prevails in the USA. Significantly, the German media are not reporting on this at all, or are reporting it in a completely distorted way. WELT behind the paywall. The same goes for the leading English media. Like André Breton, they actually believe that the European regulation of freedom of expression has something to do with freedom of expression. In reality, they are burying freedom of expression. Instead, they are viciously inciting hatred against Elon Musk because he opposes the regulations. The EU is immediately threatening to fine him millions for this. This is deeply disturbing, as the path to autotitarianism/totalitarianism leads first and foremost to the restriction of freedom of expression. The "left-liberals" believe they can win this way, but they have always lost. What is going on here is simply scary.
Im Denken unteres Mittelmaß, in der Denunziation in Höchstform. Das Paradies in diesem Land haben wir nicht erreicht, wenn das ‚Wahre, Gute und Schöne‘ den Wesenskern bestimmt, das Paradies ist erreicht wenn man das Selbstzerstörerische auf die proijezieren kann, denen man die Existenzberechtigung entziehen möchte. Das ist bei den Religionen so, und bei den Ideologien. Demokratie ist etwas sehr filigranes, etwas Intellektuelles bei dem man seine eigenen Befindlichkeiten zurückstellen muß um es erleben zu können. Demokratie ist Selbstreflektion und die Opferung des Falschen für die Freiheit. Dafür muß man sich zuerst von seinen imaginären Ängsten befreien und dem Kritikbewusstsein eine Chance geben. Wer aber keine ‚Vorstellung von Welt und Wille‘ hat dem fehlt ein ganzes Weltbild. Der muß seinen Instinkten folgen. Und wer dem Primitiven folgen muß, wer sich seinen Platz in der Herde erkämpfen will, dem bleibt eben nur sich selbst zum Objekt zu machen das eine Funktion erfüllt. Der politisch-mediale Komplex in diesem Land spricht genau diese Sprache. Aus diesem Grund wundert es mich, das nicht auch gegen Trump, vom internationalen Gerichtshof, ein Haftbefehl ausgestellt wurde.