Wishing the wall back: the struggles of eight “unification losers” in post-socialist Berlin

ABSTRACT

Nowhere in Eastern Europe was the transition from socialism to capitalism so quickly accomplished as in East Germany, courtesy of unification with its wealthy western counterpart. To ascertain the impact of such changes on urban homelessness and the lived experiences of homeless people, I conducted original ethnographic research among 28 homeless people in Berlin including seven respondents who lived and grew up in former German Democratic Republic (GDR), East Berlin and, in one case, Poland during the late 1990s. In this paper, I am revisiting their experiences by focusing on four themes including 1) initial attitudes toward German unification, 2) adjusting to capitalism, 3) experiences with public support, and 4) social alienation, disaffiliation, and nostalgia demonstrating that the rapidity of changes and short duration of “post-socialism” outpaced the emotional, affective capabilities of most former East German respondents trying to adapt to the new, post-industrial, and increasingly “Americanized” circumstances..

KEYWORDS:

• Homelessness
• post-socialist cities
• life courses
• ethnography

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. For overview of qualitative research approaches in post-socialist geographic settings affirming the notion that that grounded-qualitative and ethnographic approaches are a more recent and relatively underutilized research methods, see Ferenčuhová and Vašát, this issue, (Grubbauer, 2012; Hörschelmann & Stenning, 2008).

2. For an understandable overview of the various elements involving the political, legal, and economic consolidation of the eastern and western halves as early as 1993 by essentially replicating the western system in the east, see Derlien (1993), Ehlers (1993), and König (1993). For a discussion of Berlin’s newly consolidated social welfare infrastructure and its implications for homeless service provision, see Neuberth (1997), Senatsverwaltung für Gesundheit, Soziales und Verbraucherschutz (2002), and Schneider (1998).

3. There is considerable discussion about the proper definition and meaning of the term homelessness. For a particularly useful overview of the debates and definition looking at the physical, legal, and social domains of homelessness, see Busch-Geertsema (2010). In West Germany prior to unification and the decade after two legally different definitions existed including “obdachlos” (eng. “roofless” incl. people who possess no dwelling and are subject to public order and safety legislation) and “wohnungslos” (eng. “houseless” incl. marginalized people who have a physical place to live (i.e. shelter) but no legal title to a place for exclusive habitation and are subject to social welfare legislation). My respondents almost exclusively fell into the second category of “wohnungslos” in that they all received public welfare and shelter (Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft Wohnungslosenhilfe, 2009).

4. Although homelessness in former East Germany was growing at a faster rate than in the West, less than 10% of the nation’s homeless resided in eastern Germany, compared with 22% of the overall population (Busch-Geertsema & Ruhstrat, 1997). Similarly, over three-quarters of homeless people in Berlin were registered in and had their last official residence before becoming homeless in western districts, compared with 60% of the overall population (Abgeordnetenhaus von Berlin, 1995, p. 5).

5. To assess the distribution across districts, I divided Berlin’s districts into four clusters, including Center West (Kreuzberg, Wedding, Tiergarten), Center East (Mitte, Friedrichshain, Prenzlauer Berg), City West (Neuköln, Charlottenburg,Tempelhof, Schöneberg, Spandau, Reinickendorf, Wilmersdorf, Zehlendorf, Steglitz), and City East (Lichtenberg, Hohenschönhausen, Weissensee, Marzahn, Pankow, Treptow, Köpenik, Hellersdorf). I also created a separate category for the five most affluent districts across Berlin (Wilmersdorf, Zehlendorf, Steglitz, Tempelhof in the former west, Treptow in the former east). For each cluster I determined three variables including its share general share of the total population, its share of homeless people, and its share of service facilities as percent of the city wide total (Von Mahs, 2013, pp. 71–76).

6. This does not mean, however, that homelessness did not exist in the GDR. Rather, people who “refused” housing were persecuted as “antisocial deviants” and as such never showed up in any statistics (Busch-Geertsema & Ruhstrat, 1997; Pape, 1996) or they pursued to occupy vacant building as Vasudevan details in this edition.

7. The spatial analysis of the geographic distribution and locational characteristics included 139 homeless services in Berlin, including 47 day centers, 11soup-kitchens, 23 emergency shelters, and 58 transitional shelters and housing facilities (for more detailed account, see Von Mahs, 2013, pp. 73–76).

8. For more information about the research methods, case studies, and respondents, please see Von Mahs (2013), chapter 2.

9. I am aware of the problematic, subjective, and potentially stigmatizing nature of terms such as regular or irregular, deviant, transient, or disabilities and have deliberately put those in parenthesis. I decided to use such terminology mainly because the respondents themselves used such terms to describe their lives.

10. For more information about the respondents including short biographies, see Von Mahs (2013), pp. 143–151.

11. Using welfare to subjectively bridge time so to overcome a temporary crisis such as unemployment to eventually optimize one’s poverty management is a common strategy suggesting welfare assistance does not inevitably lead to entrenchment (see Leisering & Leibfried, 1999).

12. In the late 1990s, Germany has a two-tiered system of income support. The first tier – unemployment compensation – is tied to previous employment paying eligible recipients 53% of their previous income (63% if dependents are present) for the first year (Arbeitslosenhilfe) and slightly less for a second year (Arbeitslosengeld). If unsuccessful or in cases where people have not enjoyed employment-based insurance in the first place, legal residents are entitled to social assistance (Sozialhilfe) featuring monthy welfare payments of app. $345 per month for single adults. The 2000 Hartz-welfare reforms eventually limited to the receipt of unemployment compensation to one year and consolidated Arbeitslosengeld and social assistance into one welfare benefit (Hartz IV) at a slightly lower level than previous social assistance.

13. According to Susanne Gerull (personal interview on 4 July 2019), such numbers have to be viewed with caution as the don’t clearly differentiate what types of populations are included and as such also include several thousand refugees. Still, according to her, the numbers of homeless people have been rising steadily since 2010.

14. In 2001, Berlin underwent redistricting to consolidate districts from 19 to 12 to achieve a more homogeneous administrative structure (Amt für Statistik Berlin-Brandenburg, 2011, p. 6; Abgeordnetenhaus Berlin, 1999, p. 4). This most recent data about the geographic distribution of homeless people and service facilities is quite similar to findings from the late 1990s (see Von Mahs, 2013, pp. 71–73).

15. The ongoing significance of Ostalgie finds multiple expressions as Bach’s (2019) fascinating book “What remains: Everyday Encounters with the Socialist Past in Germany” shows. Even if the public memory of the GDR is almost completely erased from the public eye (except for tourist traps showcasing Checkpoint Charlie or remnants of the wall and observation towers). Everyday objects, on the other hand, remain nostalgic reminders of a time that was at once more simple yet completely surveilled.