The Historical Changes and Real Predicaments of the German Social Democratic Party

The German Social Democratic Party (hereinafter referred to as the SPD) emerged from the workers’ movement. It is the earliest working-class party founded in Germany, the oldest existing political party in the Federal Republic of Germany, and one of the social democratic parties with the longest governing experience in European countries. Over nearly 160 years of historical development, the SPD has gradually transformed from a representative of the interests of the proletariat into a “center-left catch-all party.” At its peak, its membership exceeded one million, and it remains the party with the largest membership in the Federal Republic of Germany today. Entering the 21st century, the party has fallen into difficulties under the influence of multiple factors and has adopted a series of reform measures in response. Its basic situation is a microcosm of contemporary Western left-wing parties, especially center-left parties in Europe.

德国社会民主党（以下简称“社民党”）脱胎于工人运动，是德国最早成立的工人阶级政党，是联邦德国现存历史最悠久的政党，也是欧洲国家执政时间最长的社会民主党之一。在近160年的历史发展中，社民党逐渐从无产阶级的利益代言人转型成为“中左翼的全民党”，其党员规模最多时超过百万，目前仍是联邦德国党员人数最多的政党。进入21世纪，该党在多重因素的作用下陷入困境，并为此采取了一系列改革应对措施，其基本状况是当前西方左翼政党尤其是欧洲中左翼政党的一个缩影。

I. The Historical Development and Programmatic Evolution of the SPD

一、社民党的历史发展与纲领演化

(A) Key Stages of Development

（一）重要发展阶段

The SPD has experienced four periods of turbulent change to date. It was suppressed by Bismarck during the German Empire, briefly held power during the Weimar Republic, faced a party ban and persecution under the Nazi regime, and participated in or led the government several times during the Federal Republic period, promoting the construction of the welfare state and the protection of labor rights based on the concept of social justice. Throughout its long development, the SPD has witnessed the formation and growth of the German working class and the restructuring and changes of social structure, while itself undergoing several route transformations.

社民党迄今历经四个时期的风云变幻。它在德意志帝国时期遭到俾斯麦的打压，在魏玛共和国时期短暂上台执政，在纳粹帝国时期遭遇党禁和迫害，在联邦德国时期则数次参与或者领导政府，以社会公正理念推动福利国家建设和劳工权益保障。在长期发展过程中，社民党见证了德国工人阶级的形成壮大与社会结构的重组变化，自身也完成了若干次路线转型。

The predecessor of the SPD was the General German Workers’ Association (ADAV), founded in Leipzig in 1863 by the social democratic activist Ferdinand Lassalle, which was also the first working-class party in Germany. In 1869, August Bebel and Wilhelm Liebknecht founded the Social Democratic Workers’ Party (SDAP) in Eisenach. In 1875, the two parties formally merged into the Socialist Workers’ Party (SAP) at a unity congress held in Gotha, after which it became a primary target of Bismarck’s repression. In 1890, after the repeal of the Anti-Socialist Laws, the party was renamed the Social Democratic Party (SPD), a name it retains to this day. At the party congress the following year, the SPD adopted the Erfurt Program, establishing Marxism as its guiding ideology. Thereafter, the SPD entered a phase of steadily rising support, with its membership continuously expanding, and it developed into the largest political force before World War I. To this day, there are differing opinions within the party regarding the recognition of its founding year, reflecting factional divisions: pragmatists regard the founding of the General German Workers’ Association in 1863 as the party’s origin, while factions supporting the Marxist tradition are more inclined to recognize the SPD of the Eisenach period in 1869 or even the Erfurt period in 1891.

社民党的前身是社会民主活动家拉萨尔1863年在莱比锡创立的全德工人协会（ADAV），这也是德国首个工人阶级政党。1869年，倍倍尔和李卜克内西在爱森纳赫创建社会民主工人党（SDAP）。1875年，两党在哥达举行的合并代表大会上正式合并为社会主义工人党（SAP），此后成为俾斯麦的重点打压对象。1890年，在《反社会主义法》废除后，该党更名为社会民主党（SPD）并沿用至今。在次年的党代会上，社民党通过《爱尔福特纲领》，将马克思主义确立为指导思想。此后，社民党进入支持率稳步上升的阶段，党员队伍不断壮大，一战前发展成为最大的政治力量。时至今日，党内对于建党年份的认定仍存在不同意见，从中也可见派系分歧：实用主义者将1863年全德工人协会的成立作为本党的创建源头，而支持马克思主义传统的派系更认可1869年爱森纳赫乃至1891年爱尔福特时期的社民党。

Toward the end of World War I, the workers’ movement showed signs of division. In 1917, disagreements within the party over war loans led some radical elements advocating for the overthrow of the system to withdraw, becoming the founding source of the Communist Party of Germany (KPD), which correspondingly weakened the SPD. During the Weimar Republic, the SPD played a key role in establishing the democratic republic, electing its first president, Friedrich Ebert, maintaining a membership of around one million in the 1920s, and remaining the largest political force until 1932, though it only held power briefly. In June 1933, the SPD was dissolved by the Nazis and was reestablished in October 1945.

一战末期，工人运动出现分裂势头。1917年，党内围绕战争贷款问题产生分歧，部分主张颠覆体制的激进力量退出，成为德国共产党（KPD）的建党来源，社民党的实力相应削弱。在魏玛共和国时期，社民党对于民主共和制的确立发挥了关键作用，推举出首位总统艾伯特，在20年代维持了百万之众的党员规模，在1932年之前始终保持最大政治力量的地位，但仅仅短暂执政。1933年6月社民党被纳粹解散，于1945年10月重建。

After the founding of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1949, the SPD dominated the left-wing camp for a long time. The Communist Party of Germany was banned in 1956 and later reorganized into the German Communist Party (DKP) in 1968, but it always remained on the political margins, unable to rival the SPD. Nevertheless, the SPD’s development in the early years of the republic was not smooth. Because its main right-wing competitor, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), achieved great success in implementing the concept of the social market economy, the SPD’s left-wing programmatic features failed to show significant advantages, and its influence was limited. It was not until November 1959, with the formulation of the Godesberg Program, which realized a political alliance between “the enlightened bourgeoisie and the working class” (in Willy Brandt’s words) and adopted a political pragmatist line, that the SPD experienced a period of ascent in the 1960s and 1970s. From 1966 to 1969, the SPD joined the CDU cabinet as a governing partner for the first time; from 1969 to 1982, it governed as the leading party for the first time, first under Brandt and then under Helmut Schmidt, in coalition with the Free Democratic Party (FDP), and in the 1972 federal election it achieved a vote share exceeding that of the CDU for the first time.

1949年联邦德国建国后，社民党在很长时间里独占左翼阵营。德国共产党在1956年遭到党禁，后于1968年重组成立德国的共产党（DKP），但始终处于政治边缘地位，无法与社民党匹敌。尽管如此，社民党在建国初期的发展并不顺利，由于其主要的右翼竞争对手基民盟在实施社会市场经济理念方面大获成功，社民党的左翼纲领特色未能展现显著优势，影响力有限。直到1959年11月，制定《哥德斯堡纲领》，实现“开明的市民阶层与工人阶级”之间的政治结盟（勃兰特语），走上政治实用主义路线，该党才在六七十年代经历了一段上升期。1966—1969年，社民党首次作为执政伙伴加入基民盟内阁；1969—1982年，首次作为主要执政党，先后在勃兰特和施密特的领导下与自民党联合执政，并在1972年的大选中首次实现得票率超过基民盟。

During this period in government, the SPD left a deep imprint on the domestic and foreign policy of the Federal Republic: in economic policy, it reconciled with the market economy while simultaneously advocating for enhanced state macroeconomic regulation and intervention, reducing economic risks by emphasizing Keynesian state regulation, thereby gaining an edge over the CDU in economic competence; in social policy, it pursued the expansion of the welfare state, increased educational opportunities for ordinary people, granted unions more co-determination rights, and advocated for cultural pluralism and equal rights for minorities; in foreign policy, it accepted Konrad Adenauer’s pro-Western orientation while simultaneously, under the design and promotion of Brandt and his advisor Egon Bahr, implementing a new Ostpolitik of “change through rapprochement,” which greatly eased relations between the Federal Republic and the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries.

在此轮执政期间，社民党为联邦德国的内政外交打下深刻烙印：在经济政策上，该党既与市场经济和解，同时又主张加大国家宏观调控和干预能力，通过强调凯恩斯式的国家规制来降低经济风险，在经济能力上针对基民盟扳回一局；在社会政策上，该党以扩建福利国家为方针，增加普通民众受教育机会，赋予工会更多参与决定权，主张文化多元和少数群体平等权利；在外交政策上，该党既接受了阿登纳的亲西方政策，同时又在勃兰特及其幕僚埃贡·巴尔(Egon Bahr)的设计和推动下，实施了“以接触促转变”的新东方政策，极大缓和了联邦德国与苏联和东欧国家的关系。

In 1982, the SPD lost the federal election to the CDU led by Helmut Kohl, entering a period of stagnation in the 1980s and 1990s. It was not until 1998, under the leadership of Gerhard Schröder, that it ended Kohl’s long tenure, forming a coalition government with the Greens that lasted until 2005. During its time in government, Schröder’s economic and social policies failed to immediately reverse high unemployment and public debt, and it only gained significant popular support in foreign policy through its stance on the Iraq War. Since 2005, although the SPD has participated in grand coalitions three times as the junior partner, it has been unable to conceal its decline and symptoms of crisis, with its status as the second-largest party and a catch-all party simultaneously threatened by both the left and right camps.

1982年，社民党在大选中不敌科尔领导的基民盟，在八九十年代进入停滞阶段，直到1998年，才在施罗德的领导下终结科尔漫长的执政期，与绿党组成联合政府至2005年。执政期间，施罗德采取的经济社会政策未能立即扭转高失业率和公共债务的局面，只在外交上凭借对伊拉克战争的态度获得较多民众支持。自2005年以来，社民党尽管三度作为小伙伴参与大联合政府，但难掩下滑态势和危机症状，其第二大党和全民党的地位同时遭到来自左翼和右翼阵营的威胁。

(B) The Inheritance and Evolution of Programmatic Lines

（二）纲领路线的传承与演化

Since its founding, the SPD has formulated eight party programs: the Eisenach Program of 1869, the Gotha Program of 1875, the Erfurt Program of 1891, the Görlitz Program of 1921, the Heidelberg Program of 1925, the Godesberg Program of 1959, the Berlin Program of 1989, and the Hamburg Program of 2007. Historically, internal struggles within the SPD over programs and lines have led to party splits on several occasions and the creation of new parties.

社民党建党以来先后制订过八部党纲，分别是1869年的《爱森纳赫纲领》、1875年的《哥达纲领》、1891年的《爱尔福特纲领》、1921年的《格尔利茨纲领》、1925年的《海德堡纲领》、1959年的《哥德斯堡纲领》、1989年的《柏林纲领》和2007年的《汉堡纲领》。历史上，社民党围绕着纲领和路线的内部斗争曾数次导致党派分裂，并创建新的政党。

In the early period of the party’s founding, fierce line struggles took place between Marxism and realpolitik. The revolutionary faction, represented by Karl Kautsky, defended the orthodox status of Marxism, continuing Marx and Engels’ critique of capitalism and the idea of class struggle, and demanded the overthrow of capitalism in favor of a socialist system; the revisionist faction, represented by Eduard Bernstein, advocated for gradually improving the social conditions of the working class through social reform. The Gotha Program of 1875 emphasized realpolitik and compromise, while the Erfurt Program of 1891, although co-authored by Kautsky and Bernstein, clearly established the guiding position of Marxism. During the Weimar Republic, although the SPD attempted to maintain national stability and mediate between the left and right camps, the left camp lacked internal cohesion, was unable to unite democratic progressive forces and win the support of the bourgeoisie, and ultimately failed to prevent the rise of the Nazi Party.

建党初期，该党在马克思主义和现实政治之间展开激烈的路线斗争。以考茨基为代表的革命派捍卫马克思主义的正统地位，延续马克思、恩格斯对资本主义的批判和阶级斗争思想，要求颠覆资本主义，代之以社会主义体制；以伯恩施坦为代表的修正派则主张通过社会改良，逐步改善工人阶级社会现状。1875年的《哥达纲领》偏重强调现实政治和折中妥协，而1891年的《爱尔福特纲领》虽由考茨基和伯恩施坦共同撰写，但清晰确立了马克思主义的指导思想地位。魏玛共和国时期，尽管社民党尝试维护国家稳定，在左右阵营之间发挥调解作用，但左翼阵营内部缺乏凝聚力，无法实现民主进步力量的联合并争取市民阶层的支持，最终未能阻止纳粹党的崛起。

The introduction of the Godesberg Program in 1959 was an epoch-making event in the history of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), marking the end of the party’s oscillation between Marxism and realpolitik, the realization of de-ideologization and a transformation of its ideological line, and its shift from a working-class party to a center-left catch-all party. In the program, the SPD explicitly established democratic socialism as its guiding ideology, made the expansion of the welfare state and the improvement of social security and employment levels its main policy goals, and positioned itself as a party representing the interests of all the people, including all democratic and progressive forces alongside the working class. It thereby opened itself to the middle class and became a pragmatic reform party. After transforming into a catch-all party, the SPD won over, in addition to traditional industrial workers, a large number of intellectuals, freelancers, and middle-class strata on the social ascent, and its ranks of members and supporters grew continuously.

1959年《哥德斯堡纲领》的推出是社民党历史上具有划时代意义的事件，标志着该党终结了在马克思主义和现实政治之间的摇摆，实现去意识形态化和思想路线转型，从工人阶级政党转变为中左翼全民党。社民党在纲领中明确将民主社会主义确立为指导思想，将扩建福利国家、提高社会保障和就业水平作为主要政策目标，并将自身定位为包括工人阶级在内的一切民主进步力量、代表全体人民利益的政党，由此向市民阶层开放，成为实用主义的改革党。在转型成为全民党之后，社民党在传统的产业工人以外争取到大量知识分子、自由职业者和处于社会上升通道中的中产阶层，党员和支持者队伍不断壮大。

In 1989, the SPD formulated the Berlin Program, which was revised in 1998. The new party program targeted the new characteristics of voter demands in post-industrial society, abandoned old growth thinking, placed greater emphasis on post-materialist value goals such as democracy, self-determination, gender equality, and economic and social sustainability, and incorporated new issues of the era in areas such as ecology and society. In 2007, the party introduced the Hamburg Program, which remains in effect today. It fully absorbed the lessons of the Schröder-era labor market reforms and social security system reforms, attempted to seek compromise between reformists and traditionalists, and emphasized the need to adapt to changes in the globalized world and correspondingly adjust basic values. In the three subsequent grand coalition governments, the SPD’s participation in government exhibited this kind of compromise in its line.

1989年，社民党制订《柏林纲领》，并于1998年进行了修订。新的党纲瞄准后工业化社会选民需求的新特点，告别旧的增长思维，更加强调诸如民主、自我决定、性别平等、经济与社会可持续性等后物质主义价值观目标，在生态、社会等领域纳入了新的时代议题。2007年，该党推出《汉堡纲领》并沿用至今，充分吸取了施罗德时期劳动力市场改革和社保体制改革的教训，尝试在改革派和传统派之间寻求妥协，并强调必须顺应全球化世界的变化，相应调整基本价值观。在之后的三次大联合政府中，社民党的参政行为都表现出这种路线上的折中。

After World War II, the SPD introduced the Godesberg Program, the Berlin Program, and the Hamburg Program, all of which continued the historical tradition of democratic socialism, but also reinterpreted this guiding ideology, establishing the basic values of freedom, fairness, and solidarity. Some scholars believe that, given that the concept of democratic socialism is also used by the Left Party and the Communist Party, creating a risk of mutual confusion, the SPD had already adopted the more precise concept of social democracy to replace it since the Godesberg Program. However, this view has not gained widespread support. In the three programs, both the expressions “democratic socialism” and “social democracy” coexist, while the positioning as a center-left catch-all party and the action principles of social democracy established in the Godesberg Program have continued to this day.

社民党在二战后推出《哥德斯堡纲领》《柏林纲领》和《汉堡纲领》，均延续了民主社会主义的历史传统，但同时也对这一指导思想进行了重新阐释，确立了自由、公平和团结的基本价值观。有学者认为，鉴于民主社会主义的概念同样被左翼党和共产党使用，存在相互混淆的风险，自《哥德斯堡纲领》起，社民党就已经采用更加精确的社会民主主义这一概念取而代之。不过，该观点并未获得广泛支持，在三部纲领中，民主社会主义和社会民主主义这两种表述均同时并存，而《哥德斯堡纲领》中所确立的中左翼全民党的定位和社会民主主义的行动原则一直沿袭至今。

(III) Social Base and Organizational Structure

（三）社会基础与组织结构

In terms of its social base, the SPD exhibits several characteristics.

在社会基础方面，社民党表现出若干特征。

First, in terms of social composition, industrial workers and the new middle class have become the backbone. In its early years, the SPD was long positioned as a working-class party, and the social composition of its members was predominantly industrial workers close to the trade unions. However, party researcher Frank Decker believes that the SPD was never a pure workers’ party. Even in the period before the Godesberg Program, the party did not rely solely on working-class support but had already opened itself to salaried strata on the social ascent. The reasons for this are, on the one hand, that the SPD always struggled to win the support of Catholic working-class voters; on the other hand, the party only performed well when it simultaneously won the support of both the working class and the new middle class. Currently, 42% of SPD members are employed in the public service sector.

其一，从社会构成来看，产业工人和新中产阶层成为中坚力量。社民党早年曾长期定位为工人阶级党，其党员的社会组成也是以亲工会的产业工人为多。不过，政党研究学者弗兰克·德克尔（Frank Decker）认为，社民党从来都不是纯粹的工人党，即便在《哥德斯堡纲领》之前的阶段，该党也并非单纯依赖工人阶级的支持，而是已经向进入社会上升通道的职员阶层开放。究其原因，一方面，社民党始终难以争取到信仰天主教的工人阶级支持；另一方面，该党只有在同时争取到工人阶级和新中产阶层支持的情况下才会有较好表现。目前，社民党党员中有42%就业于公共服务部门。

Second, in terms of the educational background of members, the overall level of education has risen steadily. Although the average educational level of the party’s members was once lower than that of other parties, since the late 1960s it has attracted a large number of left-wing progressive forces from the well-educated middle class on the social ascent. In recent years, the educational level of members has further increased. In 2017, the proportion of members with a university degree or a university of applied sciences entrance qualification reached 54%, far higher than the German average of 33%.

其二，从党员教育背景来看，整体学历水平稳步上升。该党党员平均受教育程度虽一度低于其他政党，但自20世纪60年代末以来吸引了大量处于社会上升通道、受过良好教育的中产阶层中的左翼进步力量加入。近年来，党员学历进一步提升，2017年具备大学毕业文凭或者专科大学入学资格的党员比例达到54%，远高于德国33%的平均水平。

Third, in terms of regional distribution, development is uneven between East and West. The SPD has a relatively broad voter base and traditional strongholds in the industrial and Protestant-dominated western regions such as North Rhine-Westphalia, Hesse, and Rhineland-Palatinate, while its membership and voter base in eastern Germany are very weak. In three eastern states, it has already fallen to the fourth-largest political force after the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), the Left Party, and the Alternative for Germany (AfD).

其三，从地区分布来看，东西部发展不平衡。该党在北威州、黑森州、莱法州等工业密集和信仰新教的西部地区拥有较为广泛的选民基础和传统票仓，而在德国东部的党员和选民基础十分薄弱，在其中三个东部州已经沦落为基民盟、左翼党和选择党之后的第四大政治力量。

In terms of organizational structure, the SPD’s federal party congress, held every two years, is its highest authority. The leadership consists of a full-time executive board and a presidium, with organizational structures established at the federal, state, and local levels. Its basic organizational model is a committee model based on members, with specialized working groups and committees on issues such as youth, women, and employees established according to work areas. In its early days, the SPD could be classified as a mass party, with a large number of members and a relatively tight organizational structure, establishing a dense network of associations and trade union organizations and party schools, and creating its own official newspaper and other local newspapers and magazines, such as *Vorwärts*, first published in 1876 and still in circulation today, which served as a link to strengthen ties with members. However, since the Weimar Republic, the party has transformed into a professional voter party, continuously increasing the professionalization of its party organization, making more use of existing state institutions to realize its own ideas, gradually loosening its ties with trade unions, and making its internal organizational management more pluralistic. Compared with other parties, it places greater emphasis on grassroots democracy, striving to achieve a balance between top-down leadership and bottom-up democratic supervision.

在组织结构方面，社民党每两年召开一次的联邦党代会是其最高权力机构，领导层由专职的理事会和主席团组成，在联邦、各州和地方分别建立起各级组织机构。其基本组织模式是基于党员的委员会模式，按照工作领域建立起青年、女性和雇员问题等专业工作团体和委员会。社民党建党初期可归类为大众型政党，其党员人数众多而组织结构相对紧密，建立起密集的协会和工会组织网络和党校，创建自己的机关报和其他地方性报纸杂志，例如1876年创刊至今仍在发行的《前进报》，成为加强与党员的联系纽带。不过，自魏玛共和国以来，该党转型为职业选民党，不断提高政党组织的职业化程度，更多利用国家权力机关的既有机构实现自身理念，与工会之间的联系逐渐松动，其内部组织管理则趋向多元，与其他政党相比更加注重基层民主，力图在自上而下的领导和自下而上的民主监督之间取得平衡。

II. Symptoms of Crisis in Current Realpolitik

二、当前现实政治中的危机症状

Since losing its status as the main governing party in 2005, although the SPD has participated in government several times, its development in realpolitik and party competition has been barely satisfactory, showing clear symptoms of crisis. These are specifically manifested in a continuous slump in election vote shares, an overall decline in polling support, a long-term shrinkage of party membership, and an aging age structure.

自2005年失去主要执政党地位以来，社民党虽然数次参与执政，但在现实政治和政党竞争中的发展态势差强人意，呈现明显的危机症状，具体表现为选举得票率持续陷入低谷，民调支持率整体走低，党员队伍长期萎缩，年龄结构呈现老龄化趋势。

(I) Continuous Slump in Election Vote Shares

（一）选举得票率持续陷入低谷

In fact, the SPD has led the government in the Federal Republic of Germany for far less time than the center-right CDU, totaling 20 years as the main governing party to date. In 1969, the SPD led the government at the federal level for the first time, and in the 1972 federal election it achieved its highest-ever vote share of 45.8%. When Schröder came to power in 1998, the party’s support was still over 40%. However, since 2005, the SPD has steadily declined in successive federal elections and fallen into crisis. In 2009, it received only 23% of the vote, its worst performance since the founding of the Federal Republic, losing over ten million voters compared with ten years earlier, with more than one-fifth of its former supporters switching to the Left Party. Notably, a significant number of working-class voters also switched to the right-wing populist AfD.

事实上，社民党在联邦德国领导政府的经历原本就远少于中右阵营的基民盟，迄今作为主要执政党的时间总计20年。1969年，社民党首次在联邦层面领导政府，并在1972年大选中取得45.8%的历史最高得票率。1998年施罗德上台之际，该党支持率还超过了40%。然而，自2005年以来，社民党在历次大选中一路滑坡并陷入危机，2009年仅有23%的得票率，为联邦德国建国以来的最差表现，与十年前相比损失了上千万选民，其中1/5以上昔日拥趸转而投票支持左翼党。值得注意的是，还有不少劳工阶层转而支持右翼民粹主义的选择党。

In the 2017 federal election, the SPD received only 20.5% of the vote, again hitting a historic low. In this election, the SPD lost a large number of votes, and its voter base can be described as shaky. The net loss of voters from the SPD to the left and right camps was roughly equal: it lost 430,000 votes to the Left Party on the left, 380,000 to the Greens, 20,000 to the CDU/Christian Social Union (CSU) on the right, 450,000 to the Free Democratic Party (FDP), and 470,000 to the AfD.

在2017年大选中，社民党仅获得20.5%的选举支持，再次刷新了历史低位。在此次大选中，社民党大量失票，选民基础可谓摇摇欲坠。社民党向左右阵营净流失的选民规模大体相当，向左翼阵营的左翼党流失43万张选票，向绿党流失38万票，向右翼阵营的基民盟/基社盟流失2万票，向自民党流失45万票，向选择党流失47万票。

Furthermore, in recent state-level elections, the SPD’s performance has also been unsatisfactory. Of the total of 20 state parliament and European Parliament elections held since 2016, the party’s vote share increased only slightly in three state elections, while continuing its downward trend in other state elections. In particular, in state elections such as Saxony, Thuringia, and Bavaria, the party’s vote share was even below 10%.

此外，在近年来各州层面的选举中，社民党的表现同样不尽人意。在2016年以来举行的总计20场州议会以及欧洲议会选举中，只有三场州选的得票率略有增加，而在其他州选中延续了下滑趋势，尤其在萨克森、图林根和巴伐利亚等州选中，该党得票率甚至不到10%。

(II) Overall Decline in Polling Support

（二）民调支持率整体走低

The crisis symptoms of the SPD in recent years are also concentratedly reflected in the trend of its poll support. Since German reunification, the party’s poll support once rose and experienced violent fluctuations around the time Schröder came to power, but the overall trend has been consistently downward, falling from a peak of 44% in 1998–1999 to a low of 13% in 2019. The sole exception was in early 2017, when Schulz was elected party chair and nominated as chancellor candidate with an ultra-high popularity of 100%, triggering the “Schulz effect,” which attracted a large number of new members to the party in the short term. The SPD’s poll support surged, briefly returning to a high of 32% and even surpassing the CDU for a time. However, with several SPD defeats in state elections and the disastrous 2017 federal election, the “Schulz effect” proved ephemeral. Since 2020, the SPD’s poll support has hovered at a low of 15%–17%, dropping by more than half compared with its heyday, unable to escape a prolonged trough. It not only fails to rival the CDU but has also been consistently overtaken by the Greens, and is therefore increasingly questioned as to whether it can maintain its status as a catch-all party (Volkspartei). [9]9 The term “catch-all party” (Volkspartei) refers to a type of political party that seeks to appeal to a broad cross-section of the electorate rather than to a specific class or social group, a concept central to postwar German party politics.

社民党近年来的危机症状同样集中表现在民调支持率的发展走向上。自两德统一以来，该党的民调支持率在施罗德上台前后一度走高并经历剧烈震荡，但整体趋势一路走低，从1998—1999年44%的最高位跌至2019年13%的最低位。唯一一段例外是在2017年初，舒尔茨以100%的超高人气当选党主席并出任总理候选人，引发“舒尔茨效应”，短期内吸引大量新成员入党，社民党民调支持率激增，短暂回到32%的高位，甚至一度超过基民盟。然而，随着社民党若干次州选的失利和2017年德国大选的惨败，“舒尔茨效应”昙花一现。2020年以来，社民党的民调支持率始终在15%—17%的低位徘徊，与全盛时期相比跌落半数有余，无法走出较长期的低谷，非但无法与基民盟分庭抗礼，而且已经持续为绿党所反超，也因此日益被质疑是否能维持全民党的地位。

(3) Long-term shrinkage of party membership

（三）党员规模长期萎缩

As a mass party, the SPD experienced several peak periods of membership development over its century-long history and long maintained the status of the party with the most members in the Federal Republic of Germany; it is still barely holding onto this advantage. In 1914, the party’s membership exceeded one million for the first time. It reached a peak of 875,000 in 1947 after the end of World War II, then continuously declined, hitting a low of 586,000 in 1954. From the late 1960s onward, SPD membership steadily recovered and reached an all-time high of 1.02 million in 1976. At the time of German reunification in 1990, the party still had 943,000 members.

作为大众型政党，社民党在百年历程中经历过党员发展的若干高峰时期，并在联邦德国长期保持党员最多的政党地位，目前仍在勉强维持这一优势。1914年，该党党员人数首次突破100万大关，在二战结束后的1947年达到87.5万人的高峰，之后持续回落，并在1954年触及58.6万人的低位。60年代末以来，社民党党员人数稳步回升，并在1976年创下102万人的历史最高位。1990年两德统一之际，该党尚且拥有94.3万党员。

However, from the 1990s to the present, the SPD’s momentum in recruiting new members has markedly declined, and its membership has been reduced by more than half. In particular, since it came to power in 1998, the decline has accelerated. In 2019, the party had only 419,000 members. Concurrently, from 2006 to 2014, the number of local SPD party organizations decreased from 12,000 to 9,000. The sharp decline in membership is a common trend among Germany’s traditional major parties. The CDU’s membership has also shrunk by more than half over 30 years. Since 2005, the membership sizes of these two catch-all parties have been roughly on par, and the SPD was even overtaken by the CDU for a time; it currently holds only a slim advantage of about 14,000 members.

然而，20世纪90年代至今，社民党招募新党员的动力明显下降，党员队伍折损大半，尤其自1998年上台执政以来加速萎缩，2019年该党仅拥有41.9万党员。与此同步的是，2006—2014年，社民党地方党组织的数量从1.2万个减至9000个。党员人数的锐减是德国传统大党的共同趋势，基民盟的党员队伍在30年间同样损失过半，这两大全民党自2005年以来的党员规模基本持平，社民党甚至一度被基民盟反超，目前也仅有大约1.4万人的微弱优势。

(4) Severe aging of party membership

（四）党员老龄化现象严重

From a cross-party comparison, the aging trend of SPD members is more severe than that of other mainstream parties. On the one hand, the proportion of elderly members has been rising continuously. From 1974 to 2019, the share of members aged 60 and above surged from 17.6% to 56.4%, i.e., more than half—the highest proportion among all major mainstream parties represented in the Bundestag. The average age of current SPD members is 60. On the other hand, the proportion of young members has been declining steadily. Since German reunification, the share of SPD members under 30 has fallen year by year, from 10.2% in 1990 to 5.8% in 2005, performing worse than the Greens and the FDP in cultivating young reserve forces. Thereafter, although the party took measures to increase its appeal to young members, it still performed poorly compared with other parties. In 2019, the share of members under 30 was 19.3% for the Left Party, 17.8% for the Greens, and only 7.8% for the SPD. The aging structure of party membership not only fully reflects that the SPD’s mobilization capacity and incentive mechanisms for winning new blood remain inferior to those of other parties, but also means that the party’s talent pool for supplying public officials to various levels of public institutions is severely insufficient, weakening to a certain extent the SPD’s influence and developmental momentum in real politics.

从跨党比较来看，社民党党员的老龄化趋势比其他主流政党更加严重。一方面，老年党员比例持续上升。1974—2019年，60岁以上党员占比从17.6%激增至56.4%，即超过半数，这一比例在进入联邦议院的各大主流政党中达到最高，目前该党党员平均年龄为60岁。另一方面，青年党员占比持续下降。两德统一以来，社民党30岁以下青年党员比例逐年下降，自1990年的10.2%降至2005年的5.8%，在发展青年后备力量的效果方面不及绿党和自民党。此后，尽管该党采取措施提高对青年党员的吸引力，但与其他政党相比仍旧表现不佳。2019年，左翼党30岁以下党员占比19.3%，绿党占比17.8%，而社民党仅为7.8%。党员年龄结构趋向老龄化，既充分体现出社民党在争取新生血液方面的动员能力和激励机制仍旧逊于其他政党，同时，这也意味着该党向各级公共机构中输送公职人员的人才储备严重不足，在一定程度上削弱了社民党在现实政治中的影响力和发展后劲。

III. Roots of the Crisis: An Explanation Based on the Analytical Framework of Party Competition

三、危机根源：基于政党竞争分析框架的解释

The SPD’s current predicament stems both from the party’s own reasons and from the severe challenges posed to the party by overall environmental changes such as epochal developments and social transformations. Here, the author applies the analytical framework for party competition research developed by German political scientist Oskar Niedermayer, mainly starting from the supply-demand relationship, to analyze a series of problems and challenges the SPD faces in the “political market” competition, with a view to revealing the main causes of the SPD’s real crisis. The analysis proceeds from three aspects: first, framework conditions, including overall factors such as the external environment, major historical processes, or political and legal systems; second, the supply side, including factors related to the party and its opponents, such as organizational and mobilization capacity, positioning in social processes, and resources; third, the demand side, including factors related to voters, such as social structure, value orientations, and party affiliation.

社民党陷入当前困境既有政党自身的原因，也要归因于时代发展与社会变迁等整体环境变化给该党带来的严峻挑战。在此，笔者运用德国政党研究学者奥斯卡·尼德迈尔（Oskar Niedermayer）关于政党竞争研究的分析框架，主要从供求关系入手，分析社民党在“政治市场”竞争中面临的一系列问题与挑战，以期揭示造成社民党现实危机的主要原因，具体从三方面入手：其一，框架条件，包括外部环境、重大历史进程或者政治与法律制度等整体性因素；其二，供应方，包括政党及其对手的组织动员能力、在社会进程中的定位、资源等政党方面的因素；其三，需求方，包括选民的社会结构、价值导向、政党关联度等选民方面的因素。

(1) Development of the overall internal and external environment

（一）整体内外环境的发展

1. Structural transformation of Western democratic politics weakens the role of parties

1.西方民主政治的结构转型削弱政党作用

The SPD’s situation is a microcosm of the current state of traditional Western political parties, and research on party decline has correspondingly become a prominent field in political science since the 1970s. Currently, the information technology revolution and the proliferation of social media are driving the continuous emergence of new modes and channels of political mobilization. The function of parties as political representatives in political life is weakening, public trust in them is declining, and party actions are increasingly being replaced by relatively loose social movements or temporary initiative campaigns focused on specific issues. In these new social movements, political “amateurs” become political leaders, and core figures accumulate popularity through the power of fans rather than through party organizational work. In European countries such as France and Italy, this development trend is particularly pronounced, directly leading to the near-collapse of traditional party systems.

社民党的处境是西方传统政党发展现状的一个缩影，而政党衰落研究自20世纪70年代以来也相应成为政治学研究的显学。当前，信息技术革命和社交媒体的普及推动全新的政治动员方式和动员渠道不断涌现，政党在政治生活中作为政治代言人的功能削弱，公众对其的信任度在下降，政党行动日益为相对松散的社会运动或是针对具体事由的临时性倡议行动所取代。在新兴社会运动中，政治“素人”成为政治领袖，核心人物凭借粉丝的力量而非政党的组织工作积聚人气。在法国、意大利等欧洲国家，这一发展趋势尤为明显，直接导致传统政党体制濒临瓦解。

Compared with them, the German party system still appears stable and solid, with parties still playing a major role in political mobilization and the formation of the public opinion sphere. However, the influence of parties is also declining. Public trust in parties fell from 50% in the 1980s to 29% in 2010. At the same time, various social movements have become important channels for leading and representing public opinion. For example, the youth environmental movement “Fridays for Future,” the right-wing populist “Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamisation of the West” (PEGIDA), and the “Querdenken” movement opposing the government’s COVID-19 prevention measures have all attracted large numbers of supporters and generated relatively lasting social impact. In this regard, political scientist Henrik Müller points out that Western democracy is undergoing a fundamental structural transformation: competition in the “political market” has intensified, the threshold for participation has been lowered, and complex organizational structures and long-term ties are no longer needed, which is conducive to the organization and mobilization of social movements. Germany is not exempt from this transformation process.

与其相比，德国政党体制看起来仍旧稳定牢固，政党在政治动员和公共舆论场的形成过程中仍在发挥主要作用。不过，政党的影响力同样在下降，民众对于政党的信任度从20世纪80年代的50%跌至2010年的29%。与此同时，各类社会运动成为引领和代言民意的重要渠道，例如青少年环保运动“星期五为未来”、右翼民粹的“爱国欧洲人反伊斯兰化运动”以及反对政府新冠防疫措施的“横向思维”运动等，均吸引大批支持者，产生了较为持久的社会影响。对此，政治学者亨里克·米勒（Henrik Müller）指出，西方民主正经历根本性的结构转型，“政治市场”的竞争加剧，参与门槛降低，不再需要复杂的组织结构和长期的联系纽带，有利于社会运动的组织动员，德国同样不能免于这一转型过程。

As a result of the transformation of Western democratic politics, the status and role of parties in political life have declined, their organizational and mobilization capacity has weakened, and their social base has become increasingly loosened. According to statistics, in 1980, 4% of the German population of party-joining age had joined a party; currently, this proportion is only 1.7%. Meanwhile, the total membership of all parties represented in the Bundestag halved from 2.4 million in 1990 to 1.22 million in 2019.

作为西方民主政治转型的结果，政党在政治生活中的地位和作用下降，组织动员能力削弱，社会基础日渐松动。据统计，1980年，德国符合入党年龄的人口中还有4%加入了某一政党，而目前这一比例仅为1.7%，同时进入联邦议院的所有政党党员总人数则在1990—2019年间从240万减半至122万人。

2. Important historical processes intensify party competition

2.重要历史进程加剧政党竞争

For the SPD, a series of important political, economic and historical events after World War II directly affected and impacted it, mainly including the green environmental movement, German reunification and the refugee crisis. First, since the 1970s, the green environmental movement arose in Germany, leading to the formal establishment of the Green Party in 1980. The SPD was no longer the only influential political force on the left and found it difficult to compete with the Green Party on environmental issues. In recent years, the Green Party has once again risen strongly on the back of climate protection issues, showing signs of replacing the SPD as a catch-all party. Second, at the time of German reunification, the SPD failed to seize the historical opportunity to expand its influence and build up its grassroots organizational structure in the east, and could not prevent the Left Party from developing into a catch-all party in the eastern region. Currently, the total number of SPD members in the five new federal states is only 22,000, and its poll support in Saxony, Thuringia and Saxony-Anhalt is below 10%. Third, since the 1990s, globalization has entered a new period of development. The global economic crisis exposed the negative consequences of hyper-globalization, driving the fission of political party cleavages and the formation of new social divisions. Right-wing populist forces have gradually grown stronger by exploiting the anxiety and fear of some sections of the population. The refugee crisis, in particular, accelerated the rise of the AfD, and establishment parties were generally impacted. The SPD gave no clear answer to new trends in the socio-cultural sphere. Its members and supporters were divided on the relevant positions. Many supporters rejected the cosmopolitan ideas propagated by political elites and were deeply worried about the influx of refugees and immigrants, especially competition from low-wage foreign labor, causing the party to lose a large number of supporters to the AfD.

对于社民党而言，二战后一系列重要政治经济和历史事件对其产生直接影响和冲击，主要包括绿色环保运动、两德统一和难民危机。其一，70年代以来德国兴起绿色环保运动，催生了绿党在1980年正式成立，社民党不再是左翼阵营唯一有影响力的政治力量，难以与其环保议题抗衡。近年来，绿党再度凭借气候保护议题强势崛起，大有取代其全民党地位之势。其二，在两德统一之际，社民党未能及时抓住历史机遇扩大影响力，在东部扩建本党的基层组织结构，无法阻止左翼党发展成为东部地区的全民党。目前，社民党在五个新联邦州的党员总数只有区区2.2万人，在萨克森州、图林根州和萨安州的民调支持率不及10%。其三，自90年代以来，全球化步入新一轮发展时期，全球经济危机暴露超级全球化的负面后果，推动政党政治分野的裂变和全新社会分歧的形成。右翼民粹力量借助部分民众的不安和恐慌心理逐渐壮大，尤其是难民危机加速了选择党的崛起，建制派政党普遍受到冲击。社民党对于社会文化领域的新动向没有给出清晰的回答，其党员和支持者的相关立场分裂，不少支持者拒绝接受政治精英宣扬的世界主义思想，对于难民移民的涌入尤其是来自外来低薪劳动力的竞争忧心忡忡，导致该党向选择党流失大量支持者。

The German party system continues to undergo intense transformation. New parties constantly emerge and enter parliaments at all levels. The party system has evolved from "two big parties and one small party" into a "fluid multi-party system." Party competition is becoming increasingly fierce, and the SPD faces competition from parties on both the left and right at the same time.

德国政党格局持续激烈嬗变，新的政党不断涌现并进入各级议会，政党格局从“两大一小”演变为“流动的多党制”。政党竞争态势日趋激烈，社民党同时面临来自左右两个阵营的政党竞争。

(2) Changes in the Social Base of the Electorate

（二）选民社会基础的变迁

1. Changes in Social Structure Lead to Increasingly Diverse Social Backgrounds of Voters

1.社会结构变迁导致选民社会背景趋向多元

After the end of World War II, Western developed countries achieved economic recovery and rise. The industrial center of gravity shifted to the tertiary sector, i.e., the service sector, and they gradually entered a post-industrial society. According to data from the German Federal Statistical Office, from 1950 to 2020, the proportion of industrial workers in the employed population gradually decreased from 42.9% to 24%, while conversely, the proportion of employed persons in the service sector surged from 32.5% to 74.7%. With the continuous improvement of the social welfare system, the overall education level of the population increased, and social goals shifted from revolution to reform. Germany's socio-economic conditions and social structure changed accordingly. The personal socio-economic circumstances of a large number of people continuously improved. Upward mobility created a new middle class and a mainstay of society, thereby gradually expanding the ranks of the middle class, easing class antagonisms, and breaking down old class and social confrontations. Voters, as the demand side of the political market, have increasingly complex and diverse social backgrounds. The long-term qualitative and quantitative analysis of the German social milieu conducted by the Sinus Institute divides German society into ten types of social milieus with distinct characteristics based on cultural lifestyles and values, including civic middle class, conservative establishment, traditional, socio-ecological, liberal intellectuals, etc. The current proportions of these various social milieus range from 7% to 15%. This result also fully confirms that the current German social environment as a whole shows a trend of diversification and fragmentation.

二战结束后，西方发达国家实现经济复苏和崛起，产业重心向第三产业即服务业转移，并逐渐步入后工业化社会。根据德国联邦统计局的数据，1950—2020年，产业工人在就业人口中所占的比例从42.9%逐渐降至24%，反之，服务性行业就业人口占比从32.5%激增至74.7%。随着社会福利制度不断完善，民众受教育程度整体提高，社会目标从改革转变为改良，德国的社会经济状况和社会结构相应发生变化，大量民众个人社会经济境遇持续改善，向上流动成为新兴中产阶级和社会的中流砥柱，从而使得中产阶层的队伍日渐壮大，阶级对立趋于缓和，旧有的阶级和社会对峙被打破。选民作为政治市场的需求方，其社会背景日益复杂多元。德国西努斯研究所（Sinus-Institut）对德国社会环境展开的长期定性定量分析，认为德国社会可以根据文化生活方式和价值观划分成十类特征各异的社会环境，包括市民中产、保守建制、传统、社会生态、自由知识分子等，目前各类社会环境的占比分别为7%—15%不等。这一结果也充分印证了当前德国的社会环境整体呈现多元化和碎片化趋势。

2. Changes in Values Lead to Increasingly Complex Voting Behavior

2.价值观变迁导致选民选举行为日渐复杂

Changes in social structure drive changes in values. Voters' long-term political ties, such as the natural bond between the SPD and the working class and trade unions, have long loosened. Traditional social cleavages are increasingly supplemented by new social cleavages. Social lifestyles and cultural value orientations exhibit notable characteristics of individualization, diversification, fragmentation and post-materialism. Many scholars believe that after the end of the Cold War, the labor-capital cleavage on the socio-economic dimension is no longer the decisive cleavage reflecting the principal contradiction in Western European societies. On the socio-cultural dimension, a new social cleavage based on cultural values has emerged in Western European societies, namely integration versus demarcation, specifically manifested as the opposition between cosmopolitan openness and inclusion and communitarian closure and demarcation. Changes in values have shaken the social foundation on which political parties depend for survival, making it difficult for voters' political preferences, core demands and forms of participation to be fixed into an unchanging pattern.

社会结构变迁带动价值观变迁。选民的长期政治联系，例如社民党与劳工阶层以及工会之间的天然纽带早已松动，传统的社会分歧日益为新的社会分歧所补充。社会生活方式和文化价值观取向表现出个人主义化、多元化、分散化和后物质主义的显著特征。不少学者认为，冷战结束后，社会经济维度上的劳资分歧不再是反映西欧社会主要矛盾的决定性分歧。在社会文化维度上，西欧社会出现了新的、基于文化价值观的社会分歧，即融入—划界，具体表现为世界主义式的开放包容与社群主义式的封闭划界之间的对立。价值观变迁动摇了政党赖以生存的社会基础，导致选民的政治偏好、核心诉求与参与形式难以固定为一成不变的模式。

Changes in values have brought several specific consequences for traditional parties. First, more and more citizens no longer participate in general elections. Over several decades, voter turnout in elections at all levels has declined. Taking the German federal election as an example, its turnout fell from a high of 91.1% in 1972 to a low of 70.8% in 2009. Second, voters' sense of identification with and loyalty to political parties has declined. Voter mobility and the uncertainty of voting behavior have increased. Loyal voters who vote for the same party in two consecutive federal elections have become a minority. Cross-party and even cross-bloc voting is common. A center-left SPD voter might support the right-wing populist AfD in the next election. From 1972 to 2009, the proportion of core voters among all voters fell from 55% to 32%, while the proportion of swing voters increased from 20% to 38%. This has a particularly large impact on traditional major parties that have long relied on a base of core voters. Third, it is increasingly difficult for traditional major parties to attract large numbers of voters through their political programs. Unlike small parties that focus on representing the interests of a specific group, traditional major parties aim to win over as many voters as possible. However, as the German social environment becomes increasingly complex and diverse, the political programs and policy propositions of catch-all parties either cannot cover the demands of all parties, or their domestic and foreign policies gradually converge with those of other parties, increasingly losing their own programmatic distinctiveness.

价值观变迁给传统政党带来若干具体后果。其一，越来越多公民不再参加大选。数十年间，各级选举参选率下降，以德国大选为例，其参选率从1972年91.1%的高位跌至2009年70.8%的最低水平。其二，选民对政党的认同感和忠诚度下降。选民流动性和选举行为的不确定性增强，连续两次大选投票给同一政党的忠诚选民成为少数派，跨党派甚至是跨阵营投票的现象司空见惯，中左翼的社民党选民可能在下一次选举中支持右翼民粹的选择党。1972—2009年，铁杆选民在所有选民中的占比从55%降至32%，而摇摆选民占比则从20%增至38%。这对于长期依靠铁杆选民票仓的传统大党影响尤其大。其三，传统大党通过政治纲领吸引大量选民日渐困难。与专注担纲某个特定群体利益代言人的小党不同，传统大党的目标是争取尽可能多的选民，但随着德国社会环境日益复杂多元，全民党政治纲领和政策主张要么无法涵盖各方诉求，要么其内外政策与其他政党逐渐趋同，日益丧失本党纲领特色。

(3) The Party's Own Evolution

（三）政党自身的演变

1. Centrist Positioning Is Not Conducive to Highlighting Programmatic Distinctiveness

1.中间定位不利于凸显纲领特色

Compared with the CDU, the Green Party or the Left Party, the SPD has long lacked irreplaceable programmatic issues and core competencies with exclusive representation rights. In the early days of the Federal Republic of Germany, the CDU successfully implemented the concept of the social market economy, weakening the SPD's distinctive advantage on social justice issues. During the chancellorship of SPD member Helmut Schmidt, the importance of environmental issues was neglected, leading to the rise of the Green Party. The adoption of the Godesberg Program pushed the party to transform into a center-left party. The Schröder era saw the publication of the "Schröder-Blair Paper," which attempted to push the party onto a "Third Way" between socialism and capitalism at the turn of the century, further shifting towards the "political center ground." To reduce long-term unemployment, Schröder implemented drastic reforms of the welfare state starting in 2003, introducing social reform measures centered on the "Hartz Acts" and "Agenda 2010" with a market-liberal character in the labor market and social security fields. This weakened the traditional image the SPD had established on social justice issues, leading workers and the lower social strata to become disappointed with and abandon it. Since the 21st century, during the international financial crisis and the European debt crisis, the SPD, as a governing party, supported the CDU's neoliberal line and austerity policies, which was also seen as a departure from social democratic principles and a compromise with neoliberalism. Although the SPD's strategy of moving towards the center gave it a strong advantage in forming political alliances, it also brought its political positions increasingly closer to those of the center-right parties, blurring its programmatic distinctiveness. At the same time, it left a representation vacuum on the political fringes, providing space for the development of smaller fringe parties.

与基民盟、绿党或左翼党相比，社民党长期缺乏无可替代、具有单独代表权的纲领议题特色和核心能力。联邦德国建国初期，基民盟成功实践了社会市场经济理念，弱化了社民党在社会公正方面的特色优势。社民党人施密特执政时期，忽视环保议题的重要性，导致绿党的崛起。《哥德斯堡纲领》的出台推动该党转型成为中左翼政党，施罗德时代发表《施罗德—布莱尔文件》，试图推动该党在世纪之交走上社会主义和资本主义之间的第三条道路，进一步转向“政治中间地带”。为降低长期失业率，施罗德自2003年起对福利国家进行大刀阔斧的改革，先后在劳动力市场和社会保障领域推出以“哈茨法案”和“2010议程”为核心的市场自由主义色彩的社会改革措施，削弱了社民党在社会公正议题上树立的传统形象，导致工人及社会底层对其失望和摒弃。而自21世纪以来，在国际金融危机和欧债危机中，社民党作为参政党支持了基民盟的新自由主义路线和财政紧缩政策，同样被视为背离了社会民主主义原则，向新自由主义妥协让步。社民党向中间靠拢的策略尽管赋予其很强的政治结盟优势，但也导致其与中右翼政党的政治主张日益接近，纲领特色不再清晰，同时也在政治边缘地带留下代表性真空，为边缘小党的发展提供了空间。

2. The Conciliatory Line Drags the Party into a Governing Predicament

2.调和路线将自身拖入参政困境

As a political representative of broad social strata, the SPD consciously plays the role of a political stabilizer, assumes overall responsibility, is accustomed to supporting “consensus politics,” and functions in public communication, compromise, and political mediation, seeking to form social consensus. The SPD has repeatedly participated in government as a junior coalition partner, and the grand coalition government has precisely become a dilemma and “curse” that the SPD finds difficult to break: the more it participates in government and exerts political influence, the worse its polling and election results become, and the greater the damage to the party itself. In the grand coalition government, the SPD has never been able to escape the shadow of the CDU; public perception of it is low, with voters attributing policy achievements more to the CDU or turning to support opposition parties. Consequently, whether to participate in the grand coalition government has sparked persistent controversy within the party. In fact, in several grand coalition governments, the SPD successfully promoted social policies such as the statutory minimum wage that protect labor rights, but it was unable to convert these achievements into electoral gains for itself. After losing the 2017 federal election, although the SPD initially announced it would no longer participate in a grand coalition, it ultimately joined the government again out of consideration for stabilizing Germany’s political situation, after the CDU made significant concessions on policy demands and ministerial positions when it faced a deadlock in forming a government.

作为广泛社会阶层的政治代表，社民党自觉发挥政治稳定锚的作用，承担起整体责任，习惯于支持“共识政治”，在公众沟通、妥协和政治调和方面发挥作用，谋求形成社会共识。社民党多次作为执政小伙伴参与执政，而大联合政府恰恰成为社民党难以打破的两难困境和“魔咒”，即越是参与执政，发挥政治影响力，民调和选举结果越差，对本党的损害越大。在大联合政府中，社民党始终无法走出基民盟的阴影，公众对其感知度偏低，将政绩功劳更多记在基民盟名下，或是转向支持在野党。由此，是否应当参与大联合政府也在党内引发持久争议。事实上，在数次大联合政府中，社民党成功推动了法定最低工资标准等一系列保护劳工权益的社会政策，但均未能将这些政绩转化为本党的红利。在2017年大选失利后，尽管社民党第一时间宣布不再参与大联合政府，但仍在基民盟陷入组阁僵局、且对其政策诉求和部长职位安排作出较大让步的情况下，出于稳定德国政局的考虑再度参与执政。

3. Factional power struggles affect internal unity

3.派系权力斗争影响内部团结

From past experience, the SPD has long found it difficult to effectively contain internal centrifugal forces, factional strife, and critical disputes. Periods of tacit cooperation like that between SPD Chancellors Brandt and Schmidt and parliamentary group leader Wehner in the 1960s and 1970s are rare in the party’s history. Leadership figures have often fallen into open personal conflicts, leading to frequent high-level personnel changes and causing significant negative impact on the party. During the Schröder era, factional struggles between the “traditionalist faction” represented by party chair Lafontaine and the “reformist faction” centered on Chancellor Schröder over social reforms directly led to internal splits. Some left-wing senior figures and party members left the party and founded the Electoral Alternative for Labor and Social Justice (WASG), which, under Lafontaine’s impetus, merged in 2007 with the eastern Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS) to form the nationwide Left Party, becoming a strong competitor on the left. In 2018, the internal infighting between Schulz and Gabriel also left both sides damaged.

从以往经历看，社民党一直难以有效抑制内部的离心力、派系争斗和批评争议，像20世纪六七十年代社民党总理勃兰特、施密特和议会党团主席维纳尔那样默契配合的局面在党内历史上不多见，领导层时常公开陷入个人矛盾，导致高层人事更迭频繁，给该党带来较大负面影响。施罗德时期，以党主席拉方丹为代表的“传统派”和以总理施罗德为核心的“改革派”围绕社会改革展开派系斗争，直接导致内部分裂，部分左翼高层和党员退党后成立劳动与社会公正选举联盟（WASG），并在拉方丹的推动下于2007年与东部民社党合并成立全德范围内的左翼党，成为左翼阵营的有力竞争对手。2018年，舒尔茨和加布里尔之间的内斗同样两败俱伤。

Furthermore, in addition to the committees and working groups stipulated in the party constitution, there have traditionally been some informal factional groups within the SPD. Among the most influential are the right-leaning conservative “Seeheim Circle,” the left-leaning “Parliamentary Left” composed of MPs, the “Networkers” group of younger MPs advocating a reformist path, and the “Democratic Left 21 Forum (DL21),” mainly consisting of non-parliamentary party members. Members of these groups often form unified positions on major party issues, and their existence has, to some extent, deepened internal friction.

此外，除了党章中规定的委员会以及工作团体之外，社民党内部传统上存在一些非正式的派系团体，其中最有影响力的派系有偏右翼保守的“泽海姆团体（Seeheimer Kreis）”，由议员组成的偏左翼的“议会左翼团体（Parlamentarische Linke）”，由主张走改革路线的年轻议员组成的“网络派团体（Netzwerker）”，以及主要由议会外党员组成的“民主左翼21论坛（DL21）”。这些团体内的成员往往在党内重大问题上形成一致立场，其存在也一定程度上加深了内耗。

4. Lack of political authority and stability in leadership

4.领导层缺乏政治威信和稳定性

In the 20 years the SPD led the federal government, it produced three chancellors, while the CDU, in 52 years of leading the government, had only five chancellors. The latter were mostly political “evergreens” with high political authority and influence within the party, with relatively long average tenures in European countries. Among them, Adenauer governed for 14 years and served as party chair for 16; Kohl governed for 16 years and served as party chair for 25; Merkel governed for 16 years and served as party chair for 18. In contrast, although the SPD has also seen charismatic leaders like Bebel and Brandt, there are fewer leaders who can maintain lasting influence within the party. During Kohl’s tenure as CDU chair, the SPD had five party chairs and multiple chancellor candidates; during Merkel’s tenure as CDU chair, the SPD changed nine party chairs. The CDU has mostly combined the roles of party chair and chancellor candidate to demonstrate party unity, while within the SPD these two roles have often been separated, leading to instability in high-level personnel. For example, the 2021 chancellor candidate Olaf Scholz lost the 2019 party chair election and had principled differences on fiscal and economic policy with the then-dual chairs. Additionally, the trend towards professionalization, elitism, and higher education in party politics has led the SPD’s middle and senior-level dignitaries, advisors, and cadres to be “out of touch with the grassroots,” having less contact with ordinary members and being detached from production and life practices.

社民党领导联邦政府的20年间共推出3位总理，而基民盟领导政府52年间仅有5位总理，后者多为在党内拥有较高政治威信和影响力的政坛“常青树”，平均执政时间在欧洲国家较长。其中，阿登纳执政14年，担任党主席16年；科尔执政16年，担任党主席25年；默克尔执政16年，担任党主席18年。反观社民党，尽管也曾出现过倍倍尔和勃兰特这样的魅力型领袖，但在党内能够保持持久影响力的领导人较少。在科尔担任基民盟主席期间，社民党前后出现5位基民盟主席和多位总理候选人，默克尔担任基民盟主席期间，社民党更换过9位党主席。基民盟大多集党主席和总理候选人职务于一身，以彰显党内团结，而社民党内这两重职务时常分开，高层人事缺乏稳定性。例如，2021年的总理候选人奥拉夫·肖尔茨（Olaf Scholz）就在2019年的党主席选举中落败，且在财经政策上与现任双主席存在原则性分歧。此外，政党政治的职业化、精英化和高学历化趋势，也导致社民党的中高层政要、顾问和干部“不接地气”，较少接触基层群众，脱离生产生活实践。

IV. The SPD’s Response Measures

四、社民党的应对举措

Faced with criticism from both inside and outside the party regarding its loss of programmatic direction, the SPD has since its 2009 election defeat focused on implementing reforms in core characteristics, programmatic content, organizational structure, and social participation. After the 2017 election defeat, the SPD accelerated its reflection on its strategic direction and policy responses. The 2019 leadership change reflected this adjustment process, and the 2021 election manifesto further refined relevant plans and proposals, striving to highlight the party’s differences from other parties, especially the CDU, hoping thereby to improve its political mobilization capacity and enhance public recognition and acceptance of the party.

面对党内外关于纲领和方向迷失的批评之声，社民党自2009年大选失利以来，着力从核心特色、纲领内涵、组织结构和社会参与等方面实施改革。2017年大选失利后，社民党加速了对路线方向的反思和政策应对，2019年的高层换届折射了这一调整进程，在2021年竞选纲领中又进一步细化相关方案设想，努力凸显本党与其他政党尤其是基民盟的差别，希望由此改善政治动员能力,增强公众对本党的认知和接受度。

(I) Reclaiming core issues, strengthening the tradition of social justice

（一）重拾核心议题，强化社会公正传统

As a left-wing party, the SPD’s traditional core issue is to “tame” capitalism through labor rights, distributive justice, and sustainability in the social sphere. Over the past decade, the party has worked to strengthen its traditional characteristics, establishing social justice as a priority political agenda to regain the trust of middle- and low-income groups and repair the negative aftermath of the Schröder-era labor market reforms. In policy areas such as social welfare, pensions, the labor market, taxation, education, and care, the party has continuously introduced policies aimed at achieving new demands for equal rights for vulnerable groups and facilitated their implementation. It was largely due to the SPD’s strong push that Germany introduced minimum work standards and a basic pension system. In its 2021 election manifesto, the party proposed numerous social rights demands, including raising the minimum wage to 12 euros per hour, replacing the “Hartz IV” unemployment benefit with a “citizen’s income” to provide a higher level of basic security, expanding free childcare and all-day primary and secondary schools, strengthening policy supervision of contract workers, and increasing child benefits.

作为左翼政党，社民党的传统核心议题是通过劳工权益、分配正义和社会领域的可持续性来“驯服”资本主义。十余年来，该党致力于强化传统特色，将社会公正议题确立为优先政治议程，以重新争取中低收入阶层的信任，修复施罗德时期劳动力市场改革的后续负面影响。在社会福利、养老、劳动力市场、税收、教育、护理等政策领域，该党持续为弱势群体推出旨在实现新的平等权益诉求的政策，并促成政策落地。正是在社民党的大力推动下，德国引入了最低工作标准和基本养老金制度。在2021年竞选纲领中，该党又提出众多社会权益诉求，包括将最低工资标准提高至每小时12欧元，将“哈茨四”失业金改为“公民福利金”以提供更高水平的基本保障，扩建免费的托儿所、全日制中小学等基础设施，加强对劳务工的政策监管，提高子女补贴金。

(II) Enriching programmatic content, seeking opportunities of the times

（二）充实纲领内涵，寻找时代机遇

The SPD hopes to adapt its existing programmatic content to the new economic and social situation and the demands of the times. This approach was already outlined in the Hamburg Program, and the 2021 election manifesto placed even greater emphasis on integrating contemporary issues, clearly highlighting tasks and challenges such as digitalization, social affairs, and carbon neutrality. Currently, the SPD focuses on three major issue areas to propose its own innovative policy ideas. First, critique of capitalism and alternatives. Facing the symptoms of capitalist crisis and the problem of wealth polarization, the SPD has proposed various critiques, innovations, and alternatives in policy areas such as ownership and social welfare, along with specific policy proposals. For example, the Berlin SPD, while in government, introduced a rent cap to curb rising rents in large cities; Kevin Kühnert, former chair of the SPD’s youth organization, advocated for the nationalization of large corporate groups like BMW and large real estate companies. Second, digital transformation. The SPD continues to conduct in-depth discussions on “digital capitalism” and “Work 4.0,” exploring their impact on core party issues such as the world of work and the protection of labor rights, and proposing specific countermeasures. For instance, it demands that employees’ co-determination rights be guaranteed in the digital transformation of enterprises. Third, climate protection. The party hopes to make up for its shortcomings on environmental issues, and the 2021 election manifesto included many specific demands. For example, it advocates for at least 15 million electric vehicles on the road by 2030, covering all of Germany’s energy needs with renewable energy by 2040, and a speed limit of 130 km/h on highways.

社民党希望顺应经济社会新形势和时代要求，对其现有纲领内容进行相应的调整，在《汉堡纲领》中就已经明确了这一思路，而在2021年的竞选纲领中，更是注重结合时代议题，明确突出了数字化、社会、碳中和等任务和挑战。目前，社民党重点聚焦三大议题领域提出自身的创新政策主张。第一，资本主义批判与替代方案。面对资本主义的危机症状和贫富分化问题，社民党就所有制、社会福利等政策领域提出各种批判、革新和替代方案，并拿出具体的政策主张。例如，柏林社民党在执政期间出台有关房租上限的规定，以抑制大城市房租上涨的势头；社民党青年组织前党主席凯文·屈纳特（Kevin Kühnert）主张将宝马等大企业集团和大型房地产企业国有化。第二，数字化转型。社民党持续就“数字资本主义”和“劳动4.0”展开深入研讨，探讨其对于工作世界和劳工权利保护等本党核心议题带来的影响并提出具体应对建议。例如，要求在企业数字化建设中保障职员的参与决策权。第三，气候保护。该党希望弥补在环保议题上的短板，2021年竞选纲领中提出不少具体要求。例如，主张2030年前实现至少1500万辆电动汽车上路，2040年前以可再生能源覆盖德国所有能源需求，高速公路限速130公里/小时。

(III) Enhancing inner-party democratic participation, innovating organizational forms

（三）增强党内民主参与，创新组织形式

In recent years, the SPD has focused on innovating organizational forms in Party building, increasing direct democratic procedures for members’ participation in decision-making, and granting ordinary members more rights in important intra-Party personnel and political affairs. Its main objectives are, on the one hand, to strengthen the democratic legitimacy of high-level decisions and resolve intra-Party disputes over relevant decisions, and on the other hand, to create a cultural atmosphere of democratic participation, mobilize grassroots enthusiasm, and enhance cohesion. Specific innovative measures include: First, important personnel decisions adopt intra-Party primary elections. In the nomination of important personnel such as the Party chairperson and the chancellor candidate, candidates need the support of several grassroots and federal state Party organizations to be nominated, and must appear at regional conferences held across the country to canvass for votes, engage in full discussion with Party members, and then produce the final candidate through a primary election process involving all Party members. In 2019, the Party, for the first time in its history, produced a dual chairpersonship that took gender equality into account; after several months of campaigning, the final result was determined by ordinary Party members through a primary election vote. Second, decisions on major affairs seek opinions from ordinary Party members. In 2013 and 2017, the SPD twice adopted the form of a member consultation, allowing grassroots members to jointly decide whether to form a coalition government with the CDU, achieving good results. In the 2013 member consultation, nearly 78% of Party members participated, of whom nearly 76% voted in favor of coalition governance, effectively quelling intra-Party controversy over this issue. Third, promote intra-Party digitalization. The Party applies digital means to all areas of Party work, from election procedures to opinion surveys, thereby improving the efficiency and transparency of relevant decisions.

社民党近年来在政党组织建设方面重视创新组织形式，增加党员参与决策的直接民主程序，在重要的党内人事和政治事务中赋予普通党员更多权利。其主要目标，一方面在于强化高层决策的民主合法性，解决党内对于相关决策的纷争，另一方面在于创造民主参与的文化氛围，调动基层积极性，增强凝聚力。具体创新举措包括：第一，重要人事决定采取党内初选。在党主席、总理候选人等重要人事的推举上，候选人需要得到若干基层和联邦州党组织的支持方可获得提名，并需要在全国各地举行的地区大会上亮相拉票，与党员展开充分讨论，然后通过全体党员的初选程序产生最终人选。2019年，该党历史上首次诞生兼顾性别平等的双主席，经过数月竞选，最终通过初选的形式，由普通党员投票表决产生。第二，重大事务决策征求普通党员意见。2013年和2017年，社民党两度采取党员问询的形式，由基层党员共同决定是否与基民盟组成联合政府，收到良好效果。在2013年的党员问询中，近78%的党员参加了问询，其中近76%对联合执政投了赞成票，有效平息了党内对于这一问题的争议。第三，推动党内数字化建设。该党将数字化手段运用到政党工作的所有领域，从选举程序到意见征询，以此提高相关决策的效率和透明度。

(4) Promoting social participation and increasing public acceptance

（四）促进社会参与，提高民众接受度

In recent years, the SPD has increasingly sought to extend the principle of direct democracy from within the Party to the broader public, achieving a certain degree of openness to non-members. Party organizations at all levels, especially local and grassroots organizations, actively explore channels for citizen dialogue, carefully design target groups for various sectors of society, organize regular or irregular, online or offline citizen dialogues, forums, and discussion meetings to discuss issues of public concern, or seek advice from the people, inviting non-members to offer suggestions for the Party’s election platforms or municipal construction. Some have even set up dedicated coordination bodies for this purpose, aiming thereby to consolidate the social foundation, participate more actively in social processes, promote public understanding and acceptance of the Party, enhance the Party’s public recognition and its appeal to non-members, and compete with various political forces, including populist parties and social movements, for dominance over public opinion.

近年来，社民党日益寻求将直接民主原则从党内拓展到广大民众，实现某种意义上向非党员的开放。该党各级组织机构、尤其是地方和基层组织积极挖掘公民对话渠道，针对社会各界精心设计目标群体，组织定期或不定期、线上或线下的公民对话、论坛以及讨论会，商谈民众关切的问题，或者问计于民，邀请非党员为本党在竞选纲领或者是市政建设方面出谋划策，甚至为此设立专门的协调机构，以期由此夯实社会基础，更积极参与社会进程，促进民众对于本党的了解和接受度，提高本党的民众认可度以及对非党员的吸引力，与包括民粹政党和社会运动在内的各类政治力量争夺公众舆论的主导权。

V. Conclusion

五、结语

Faced with a long-term downturn, the SPD has adopted various crisis response measures for some time, achieving some results. 2021 was Germany’s “super election year”; apart from Thuringia, which ultimately canceled its state election plans, Germany held one federal election and five state parliamentary elections. In the Rhineland-Palatinate state election on March 14, the SPD won with 35.7% of the vote, leading the CDU by eight percentage points. In the month before the September federal election, the SPD suddenly reversed its decline and caught up, ultimately becoming the party with the highest vote share by a narrow margin of 1.6%. This performance was largely related to the mistakes of candidates from the Union parties and the Greens, as well as the stable performance of SPD candidate Olaf Scholz. However, the SPD still faces two structural problems. On the one hand, regarding the direction of programmatic development—whether to completely return to the traditional core characteristic of social justice or to continue the line of “consensus politics” and political compromise—there remain significant differences within the Party. Moreover, there is considerable controversy within the Party over several new proposals, including the nationalization of large enterprises, a wealth tax, and a universal basic income. On the other hand, the increase in forms of intra-Party democratic participation has not quickly led to more direct participation; participation in some intra-Party primaries is insufficient, and the enthusiasm of ordinary Party members for participating in major affairs has not yet been fully mobilized.

面对长期低迷的现状，社民党一段时间以来采取了各种危机应对措施，也收到一定成效。2021年是德国的“超级选举年”，除去最终取消了州选计划的图林根州，德国总共举行了一次联邦议院选举和五次州议会选举。在3月14日的莱法州议会选举中，社民党以35.7%的得票率领先基民盟八个百分点胜出，而在9月联邦大选前一个月时间里，社民党更是突然一改颓势奋起直追，最终以1.6%的微弱优势跃升为得票率最高的政党。这一表现在很大程度上与联盟党、绿党候选人的失误以及社民党候选人肖尔茨发挥稳定有关。不过，社民党仍旧面临两个结构性问题，一方面，对于纲领发展的方向性问题，是彻底回归社会公正的传统核心特色，还是延续“共识政治”和政治妥协路线，党内仍旧存在较大分歧，而党内对于若干新主张，包括大型企业国有化、富人税、全民基本收入等，同样存在较大争议；另一方面，党内民主参与形式的增加并未迅速带来更多的直接参与，不少党内初选的参与度不够，普通党员对于重大事务上的参与热情尚未得到充分调动。

Currently, Western capitalist societies are accelerating into the post-industrial, globalized, and information age, facing entirely new challenges and difficulties, including the intensification of distributional conflicts in the welfare state, the structural transformation of the world of labor, data protection, cybersecurity and the regulation of large internet companies, and the pressure to achieve climate protection goals. All these urgently require major political parties to produce adjustment and response plans. How to find an appropriate positioning and balance between tradition and reform, freedom and security, openness and closure—preserving one’s own inheritance on characteristic issues while seizing the opportunities of the times, responding to the changes of the times, excavating and enriching the programmatic content, and demonstrating unique value in fierce party competition—is the century-spanning challenge facing a century-old party like the SPD.

当前，西方资本主义社会加速进入后工业化、全球化和信息化时代，面临全新挑战和难题，包括福利国家分配冲突的加剧，劳动世界的结构转型，数据保护、网络安全和大型互联网企业的监管，气候保护目标的实现压力等，均迫切要求各大政党拿出调整和应对方案。如何在传统与改革、自由与安全、开放与封闭之间寻找恰当的定位与平衡，既保留自身在特色议题上的传承，又抓住时代机遇、因应时代变局、挖掘和充实纲领内涵、在激烈的政党竞争中彰显独特价值，是摆在社民党这样的百年大党面前的世纪挑战。

Online Editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心