Since the 1970s urban spaces have increasingly been the focal point of conflict for politically active groups. Berlin, because of its occupied status, was in some aspects distinct from any other East or West German city, which is evident in the continuous negotiations between the municipal administrations and politics of both city halves to cope with the historical situation of the city. Though historical scholarship points to the transfers that occurred between East and West Berlin, this article claims that the Wall was not as permeable as the research suggests. Indeed contacts were scarce between East and West Berlin activist groups. The reason for only sporadic contact was not the Wall as such, but much more that the political groups on each side of the Wall had their own agendas. Given that East Berlin environmental groups have been the focus of a number of historical studies, this article will place the West Berlin protagonists and their actions at the center of the paper and analyze three ways of cooperation between two communal administrations and different environmental groups in East and West Berlin. It explores the circumstances under which reciprocal transfers between the different groups in East and West Berlin were possible and investigates how the environmental situation on one side of the city could influence the official politics on the other side through the geographic proximity and the common history of both city halves. It also explores the political groups and their environmental goals during the 1980s and locates these within the context of urban Berlin.
In winter 1947 the Association for the Protection of the German Forest was founded to prevent the eradication of the forest across Germany after suffering wartime destruction, overuse and firewood logging. Especially the occupying forces faced harsh criticism from the German people for their widespread deforestation even though it seems that the Allied Powers used the wood resources quite responsibly. This article argues that the uproar by nature conservationists, politicians and “normal people” reflected a German sense of powerlessness, and revealed images and convictions of the forest as a national symbol that was supposedly endangered in post-war Germany. These post-war discussions referred back to the discourse of the 19th century, when German intellectuals declared the forest to be the myth of the German people and developed a notion of “Heimat” that saw a close connection between nation and nature. The post-war discussions involved many of those images and convictions. Nevertheless, the discussions were not only retrospective: they also reacted to the contemporary political situation and adapted their answers and solutions accordingly. En el invierno de 1947, se fundó la Asociación para la Protección de los Bosques Alemanes para prevenir la destrucción de los bosques en Alemania después de la guerra, la sobre-explotación y la extracción de leña. Especialmente las fuerzas de ocupación fueron duramente criticadas por el pueblo alemán por la deforestación que causaban, a pesar de que, al parecer, las autoridades alidas explotaban los recursos de madera responsablemente. El presente artículo postula que las quejas de los ambientalistas, políticos y “gente de a pie“ indicaban que el pueblo alemán se sentía impotente y sacaba a relucir imágenes e ideas de los bosques en tanto símbolos nacionales supuestamente en peligro en la Alemania de la posguerra. Estas discusiones de la posguerra reflejaban los discursos del siglo XIX con que los intelectuales alemanes elevaron los bosques a la categoría de mito representativo del pueblo alemán y desarrollaron en la idea de “Heimat” [“Patria”] una íntima conexión entre nación y naturaleza. Las discusiones de la posguerra trataron de muchas de esas imágenes e ideas decimonónicas pero no se limitaron a tener de ellas una mera visión retrospectiva, pues hicieron que respondieran a la situación política del momento y aportaran soluciones de acuerdo a la nueva coyuntura.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.