around the poor resources that East Germany had. As well as this, the socialist construction program also assumed that the working classes would be behind the programme. This brought up the problem of the legitimacy of the SED in East Germany. If the working classes were resisting their changes, then how could they legitimise themselves to the East German public at large? There came an added tension between the working class between the working classes and the SED about what role the Trade Unions should play. The working classes wanted a return to the more traditional role of trade unions, but the SED took the typical Soviet view of Trade Unions. If they were constructing a Communist society where everyone was equal and working towards the greater good, then why would they need the Trade Unions to be solely focusing on the workers conditions and rights? This problem just began to get worse over the issue of rates of pay that the East German working class was used to receiving. Their base rate of pay was very generous after the end of the Second World War, but both party and state saw these rates of pay as a problem. The first five-year plan reduced these rates of pay and replaced them with their own “technical agreements”. The workers refused to agree to this change in pay, despite increased intimidation. Many were dependent on the system staying as it was fir their standards of living. The Communist party newspapers criticised this resistance, but the protests were largely successful. The changes to the work norms were dropped in 1952. This attempted change in policy, and arguments over it, ended up with a hindered productivity, which in a system making rash productivity targets was not a good sign. This climb down by the party suggests though, that they were vulnerable to the workers. It showed that resistance and protest could bring about change. In the short term however, it is useful to look at the events of the winter,...
