Pieck’s Disingenuity: False Promises And Appeals To Human Nature In A Move To Communism

It is difficult to imagine reeling from the horrors of a war one was defeated in; coming home after being a prisoner of war to “rubble,” a devastated city, destroyed by bombs in the aftermath of WWII (Pieck 2). In his speech “To the Returnees,” Wilhelm Pieck appeals to man’s desire for both autonomy and community, as well as hope; moreover, he absolves the former Nazi soldiers of any blame by attributing responsibility to Hitler and Capitalism, to cajole the Germans into participating in the Soviet Communist Party he represents. His diction and use of repetition illuminate his motive: coaxing the Germans to join the Soviet Communist party.

First, Wilhelm Pieck endeavors to draw support for the Communist Soviet party he represents by appealing to human nature: man’s need for independence, power, and control, as well as man’s social nature. He imposes responsibility into the hands of the people, offering hope if only they support his Communist cause.

Pieck empowers the Germans by highlighting the agency they have, pinpointing and drawing attention to this rare transitional moment in history. He states, “you are coming back at a time when our nation is confronting important political decisions…our nation…must now decide what is to happen to Germany, how our economy…our communities…our state…our nation…Our most important task is to relieve the misery of our people (Pieck 2, 3). His repetition of the word “our” underscores Pieck’s desire to convey unity amongst the German people. Pieck paints a picture of “us versus them”— “us” being the German working class and “them” being the Nazis and Capitalist bourgeoise. He begins the speech, addressing the crowd as “comrades” and “friends,” appealing to the human instinctual desire for camaraderie, support, and social identity (Pieck 1). His friendly and warm diction connotes Pieck bringing himself to the level of his audience as equals. Moreover, he appeals to the human sensibility for justice, fairness, and reciprocity, by obligating the audience in telling them that they are free because of the Soviets: “thanks to the Socialist Unity Party of Germany and the great good will of the Soviet military administration” the German prisoners of war are home (Pieck 1). He again repeats the phrase “good will” near the end of his speech: “we appeal to those who are of good will”. He implies that since the Soviets are responsible for the POW’s homecoming, there is a tit-for-tat expectation of political support.

Pieck also appeals to the very human need for hope: a desire for a better future with a “moving” “economy,” building “a new Germany,” with “educational opportunities for youth” to “better” shape “their future” (Pieck 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3). His use of the phrase “a new Germany,” which he repeats twice lends to an atmosphere of hope and renewal of their devastated nation. He tries to be as inclusive as possible, appealing not only to the youth, but also to women, who he promises will “have much greater influence than before on the economic and political shape of the new Germany” (Pieck 3). His false promises that “guarantees… peace…democracy…[and the] unity of Germany” illustrate rhetoric that promises the audience the world, if only they would follow the Communist party’s path (Pieck 2).

Secondly, Pieck assuages any lingering guilty conscience by attributing blame to powers beyond their control. He conflates Nazis with Capitalism and obfuscates Democracy and Communism. The dire consequences of being an aggressor and then losing a war include a collapsed economy; Pieck takes this pivotal moment in history as an opportunity to blame Capitalism as he attempts to replace the Allie’s influence and occupation with the Soviet Communist party.

By placing blame solely upon Hitler, he effectively absolves these former Nazi soldiers of any guilt or blame for the outcome of the war. If there is any guilty conscience amongst the former Nazi soldiers, Pieck makes sure to depict the former soldiers as martyrs and victims of a maniacal dictator whose “gang kept it going and going – the last soldier, the last house was to be sacrificed to this madness” (Pieck 2). He states that Hitler “gambled” German territory and that a country “divided into various states” will result in its “unity” being “destroyed” (Pieck 2). Pieck repeats the word “unity” three times in an almost brainwashing manner, to associate the unity of Germany with the party Pieck represents: the Socialist Unity Party of Germany. The word “democracy” is used once; its variations, the adjective “democratic” is repeated five times and its adverb form “democratically” is stated once. Ironically, his party already had an established power structure that could not be considered democratic. The word “free” was repeated twice, once when referring to “free elections” and once when addressing the POWs: “with your reentry into camp Gronefelde, you are once again free persons” (Pieck 2, 1). This parallel highlights Pieck’s disingenuity. Since the Communist party does not hold free elections, the people under the Communist regime will not be free.

Not only does he mislead the audience into believing his false promises for a democratic society, he conflates blame and agency of war criminals with the bourgeoise, stating “not only must the war criminals and those responsible for the war be punished for their crimes, but the corporate potentates and large landowners must be completely stripped of their power as well” (Pieck 2). Although it may be true that the ruling class were complicit to the rise of Nazi Germany, Pieck’s insistence on echoing Hitler’s rhetoric—the calls for a “unified” Germany reveals his desire to simply transfer totalitarian power. Pieck wants the audience to relinquish their opportunity to build in the Allies’ model of democracy and to simply usurp power from those who currently hold socio-political-economic power into the hands of the Soviet Communist Party who will rule over its citizens in a non-democratic society. Ascribing the demise of German economy to the bourgeoise as being bad actors along with the Nazi party, and vilifying the upper-class by assigning them into the same category as war criminals, only reinforces Pieck’s argument that his audience should follow his direction toward Communism.

Ultimately, history shows us Pieck’s assurance in the beginning of the speech that a restoration of a unified worker’s movement “will come” never does, as genuine democracy wins over the Soviet model of Communism.