Talk:Walter Ulbricht

Rewrite Completely

I completely agree with the below comment. The article is informal bordering on sensationalistic, and highly biased. The entire Anlauf-Lenck murders section appears to be lifted directly from the John Koehler "Stasi" book, which is fine but there's no reason to write it like a 10 cent drama or a cops n' robbers crime flick. Citing a historian who calls him a dictator is one thing, but the entire page is full of disparaging remarks. "Ulbricht uncritically followed Stalin..." "Goods were of shoddy quality..." "Ulbricht remained loyal to Marxist-Leninist principles throughout his life, rarely able or willing to make compromises. Inflexible and unlikeable, a "widely-loathed Stalinist bureaucrat well known for his tactics denouncing rivals",[31] he was an unlikely figure to attract much public affection or admiration." Whereas the police captain shot is a sympathetic figure - a 'recently widowed man with three daughters". the Captain gasped, "Wiedersehen... Gruss..." ("So Long... Goodbye..."). (I'm deleting the section.) The article could easily be rewritten from the complete opposite to portray Ulbricht as a brave revolutionary fighting Nazi fascism and American imperialism, and would be just as misleading a caricature.

This article is not written in a neutral style, it needs to look more like an encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.146.120.32 (talk) 20:22, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

This article could really do with some expansion. Ulbricht was head of the DDR for 22 years! He's a major historical figure and worthy of a much longer article -- compare the length of this one with the one on Erich Honecker -- Palthrow 06:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

No -- the article follows the RS [reliable sources] which treat him the same way, both in English & German. The job of Wikipedia is to follow the RS. A "bias" pr "POV" appears in Wiki when an editor does not follow the RS. In Wiki rules. "neutral" means neutral between the RS, and NOT neutral toward the biographee. Rjensen (talk) 06:23, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Had to quit ... I had to quit reading this topic when I realized it was a hatchet-job on Ulbricht who seemed to be surrounded by more corpses than Jessica Fletcher in a season of her TV shows, except he was their killer. Ha! I could not trust what I was reading and gave up. What a shame that Wikipedia has allowed itself to be used for brazen propaganda. We live and learn.--OrodesIII (talk) 15:01, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree that it is a biased article. For example, the statement "Ulbricht presided over the total suppression of civil and political rights in the East German state, which functioned as a communist-ruled dictatorship from its founding in 1949 onward." is extreme and not referenced by any neutral historical text. Who is going to repair this hatchet job? Petersmillard (talk) 14:28, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Did some expansion, but more is needed

I added quite a lot of text, some drawn from my own work, some translated from the German Wikipedia, but much needs further expansion, particularly about the significant years 1965-1971. -- ilja.nieuwland

missing?

Did he fight in the Spanish Civil War? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.110.221.182 (talk) 22:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

Interestingly enough, although the German Wikipedia entry does not say that he did, the Encyclopedia Britannica does say this. Further investigation reveals that, although he was awarded the Hans Beimler Medal for service in the war, he actually made only a very small contribution - one aggrieved veteran described this as "he never had a gun, he only spoke on the radio" (Anti-Fascism and Memory in East Germany: Remembering the International Brigades, 1945-1989 By Josie McLellan, p67). It seems he was briefly a political commissar before being ordered home.Rbreen 09:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

International Lenin School

the article states "Ulbricht attended the International Lenin School of the Comintern in Moscow in 1924/1925" but that school was founded in 1926 (according to the link). Can someone fix the inconsistency? The article in German is silent on the period. Incidentally, can anyone say whether & where Ulbricht met Lenin? (as he later bragged to Brezhnev). Coughinink 15:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

In answer to the first question, the sources seem to contradict each other. It seems clear that the Lenin School was not opened until late in 1926, and indeed one source says Ulbricht was one of the personnel (ie staff, not student) when it opened. (Jane Degras, The Communist International, 1919-1943 (1971): Documents, p272, as a GDR period source, this may well be unreliable) Matthew Worley, In Search of Revolution: International Communist Parties in the Third Period, I.B. Tauris (2004) says Ulbricht was trained at the school but gives no dates. Hope Millard Harrison, Driving the Soviets Up the Wall: Soviet-East German Relations, 1953-1961, (Princeton, 2003) says Ulbricht was trained at the school and appears to date this in 1923-24. Peter Grieder, The East German Leadership, 1946-73 (Manchester University 1999), says he was at the school and does not give dates but it seems to be some time between 1923 and 1926. Perhaps the school existed in an earlier form under a different name, or Ulbricht attended later. A number of German sources refer to him visiting the school, so perhaps it was only a brief visit in the late 20s.

In answer, possibly, to the second question, Hope Millard Harrison says in 1922 Ulbricht was a delegate to the Fourth World Congress of the Comintern, where he met Lenin. I think this all needs a bit more research. Rbreen 19:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

According to this source, the Comintern also known as the Third International and the Communist International, was founded in 1919. It is described as an association of national communist parties and also a Soviet organ to control international communist movement. Ulbricht's 1926 participation is therefore plausible and this is also supported by sources. Darwin Naz (talk) 12:16, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks for all the pointers; I wish someone more informed than I would update the article on this and other areas. Coughinink 11:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Graves

Why do the gravestones of Ulbricht, Pieck and Grotewohl all look identical? Sca (talk) 16:03, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Kocka quote at bottom of 'Dismissal, death, and legacy' paragraph by Rjensen

Hi, I saw you reversed my removal of the Kocka quote as the question whether "was the GDR a dictatorship / what were its policies is a major question for legacy of Ulbricht as #1)". If so, then the text needs to be embedded better and that statement made explicit. As things stand now, it is a rather misplaced appendix to this paragraph.

Note: one might also argue that Ulbricht's legacy and the GDR's legacy are not at all the same thing. You could admire Ulbricht for his political stamina, and simultaneously denounce him and the state he headed for moral reasons.

--Ilja.nieuwland (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't follow your point. I did add some context to suit your request. Our job as Wikipedia editors this report with the scholars are saying – and Kocka is a leading scholar who in a few words summarizes the basic operational principles Ulbricht put into practice. "one might also argue" is not allowed for Wikipedia editors--It has to be based on a published reliable secondary source. As for "political stamina" that sounds somewhat similar to praise for all his Olympic swimmers: they too displayed a great deal of stamina and perhaps had additional help as well. Ulbricht had a very large Soviet army on East German soil ready to defend his regime, as it did in 1953. When Gorbachev's army refused to support the regime in 1989, it collapsed in a matter of days. Rjensen (talk) 00:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, but I must respectfully disagree. Kocka's quote (which is hardly contentious I think) refers to the GDR in general, not to Ulbricht's role in it in particular, and applies just as well to Grotewohl, Pieck, Honecker, or really anyone involved in the GDR's creation. It is *part* of Ulbricht's legacy, but cannot be a definition of his particular legacy wihtin the framework of GDR history - that must be more specific. But I will let the matter rest until I can come up with a more suitable quote. However, if anyone can offer something better, please do.

To avoid misunderstanding on another point: When I refer to 'stamina' I didn't mean so much in light of the international situation, but rather when faced with machinations within the SED. With the Soviets in place, the existence of the GDR regime itself was never seriously in danger. But as I said, the GDR's fate and Ulbricht's are two different things. --Ilja.nieuwland (talk) 14:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

There is no suggestion whatsoever that the Kocka quotation refers only to Ulbricht--It refers to the dictatorship as a whole. Of which Ulbricht was the single most important man, so his responsibility can scarcely be minimized. If Ulbricht was not in fact running and shaping the dictatorship, then every historian of East Germany has been strangely misled. Rjensen (talk) 14:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry to appear a pedant, but if I see a paragraph titled 'legacy' which is part of a biographical entry, I assume that it refers to the entry's subject. Ulbricht was of critical importance to the GDR in the first 22 years of its existence, but that does not make him identical to the GDR. I will think of a way to rephrase the paragraph that does justice to both Kocka's quote and something more specific to Ulbricht personally. --Ilja.nieuwland (talk) 14:55, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Well it certainly does apply to Ulbricht personally--If it did not, Kocka would not make it. Ulbricht ran the show 1950-71 and gets the credit and the blame for the major developments in that era. After 1971, his successors continued the same basic dictatorial policies. When you are the dictator, you really do get to make the decisions and shape the structure. It's like historians giving credit to Lenin, Stalin and Mao when they were in power. Ilja.nieuwland is completely vague about what the article should say: should it deny that he was a dictator? should it deny the dictatorship characteristics that Kocka emphasizes? should just skip over them in silence hoping that readers won't know about Ulbricht's role in all that? Rjensen (talk) 15:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, so you don't get it. Nothing shameful about that, even though I do resent that you choose to play the moral indignation card and apparently confuse a sincere argument with a wish to brush U's deeds under the carpet (which, to my knowledge, is not something I ever advocated). There is little point in continuing this, I'll try to cast my point in a re-working of the paragraph that perhaps makes my point more eloquently.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilja.nieuwland (talk • contribs) 17:49, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Request for Comments

There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages.

The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 06:28, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Walter Ulbricht Is an example of a major Communist leader in the Lenin tradition Who devoted an enormous amount of his time and energy to issues of religion. Some people want the info box only to talk about positive religion, ignoring the importance of negative approaches to religion in world history. Rjensen (talk) 06:40, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Voice

Ulbricht managed to achieve this position despite having a peculiarly squeaky falsetto voice. His Saxon accent, combined with the high register of his voice, made his speeches sound incomprehensible at times.

This I must hear, but couldn't find any recordings of him.. what a shame. I must say, the inclusion of that sentence is rather a tease to readers if we can't find a way to hear it. It's not like he's of an era where audio recording wasn't possible. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 04:55, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Nothing of the sort It is common for hostile narrators to attribute high falsetto voices to their targets. I have heard the same for any number of people and I used to believe it until I heard a recording of Heinrich Himmler which was nothing of the sort. --OrodesIII (talk) 14:54, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Walter Ulbricht. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090221212745/http://www.osaarchivum.org/db/fa/300-3-1-1.htm to http://www.osaarchivum.org/db/fa/300-3-1-1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:17, 5 December 2017 (UTC)