tent, to some readers, will not seem allnthat encouraging. Space precludesnmore than a few examples.nOne of the best essays in GermanynToday is Laqueur’s chapter on what hencalls “the cultural revolution”: that is,nthe sea-change in the perception ofnbourgeois-democratic society and valuesnamong the West German culturalnelite. The radicals'”Generation ofn1968″ utterly failed to shift Germannsociety off its bourgeois-democraticnbase politically, but in the sphere ofneducation and culture its triumph hasnbeen just about complete. The administrationnof universities and secondarynschools was “democratized,” curriculumsnwere watered down, radical graduatenstudents were “bought off” withnwell-paying jobs within the system.nBut many of the latter are now tenurednprofessors (often on the basis of verynshoddy work) in a system that allowsntenured professors enormous power.nAnd these people have absolutely nonscruples about using their power tonindoctrinate students: as a radical Britishnacademic once put it, “the phrasen’scholarly objectivity’ is a powerfulnweapon of bourgeois class domination.”nThe result is what the olderngeneration calls the Bildungskatastrophe:nsharply falling standards of educationalnaccomplishment mixed withnhighly politicized pedagogy.nWell, how important really are thenpolitics of the German professoriat?nThe answer, of course, is that they arenthe people responsible for training thennext generation of leaders of the country.nThat next generation is beingntaught (for instance) that the MarshallnPlan was simply a plot of American bignbusiness to capture postwar Europeannmarkets. It is being taught that thengreatest threat to Germany is Americannworld policy and American culturalnimperialism. (The left-wing ideologistnThomas Schmid fumes at then”imperialist de-Nazification of thengod-damn Yankees who have prescribedndemocracy for our country.”)nThat next generation is also beingntaught that bourgeois-democratic society,npolitics, and values trivialize all ofnlife and life’s emotions, whereas thenrevolutionary moment is being heldnup as a shining example of “wholeness”nand “authenticity.” In 1982 twonleaders of the Green Party were movednto declare: “We entered [Qaddafi’s]ntent reverently and paid rapt attentionnto his words. In contrast to the pettybourgeoisnfussiness of our own Bundeskanzlern[Helmut Schmidt], Qaddafinradiates a ceremonial dignity.” Finally,nthe next generation is being taughtnthat unilateral disarmament and withdrawalnfrom the Western alliance isnGermany’s one route to safety in annirrational world. As far as the SovietnUnion is concerned, what is necessarynis Entfeindung: getting rid of thenimage, indeed, the very concept, of annenemy.nYet even as he chronicles in detailnthis upheaval in German educationalsocialnvalues, Laqueur urges us not tonworry overmuch. Youth revolt is anGerman generational constant, andnthe youth in revolt usually ends upnsettiing down to becoming a solid,nuseful citizen. Final judgment oughtnto be reserved on the generation thatnproduced the huge antidefense protestsnof 1983—and even on the Generationnof 1968, since hardly any of themnsupported the overthrow of Germannbourgeois society by violence, as advocatednby the Baader-MeinhoflF terroristsnof the 70’s. Moreover, the very factnthat the German economy is currentlyngoing through difficult times militatesnagainst the growth of radicalismnamong the young, because many morenyoung people have become concernednsimply with economic survival (gettingna job). Perhaps Laqueur is right: anrecent article in the ISew York Timesnreported on a new, conservative trendnamong the youth of the Federal Republic.nIt is often the fate of professorsnnot to be listened to.nWhen we turn from the educational-culturalnscene to politics, Laqueurnis similarly sanguine. He discounts thenimportance of the Green Party, doubtsnthe Party’s staying power. Indeed, alreadynsince the publication of GermanynToday, the Greens have becomensplit between those who are willing tonwork within the system and formnstrong alliances with the establishednSocial Democratic Party (the old leftnwing), and those who see this as anbetrayal of radical purity. Given thenbitterness of the split within thenGreens, they may not even continuento receive the necessary votes for representationnin the Federal Parliament.nYet the very existence of the Greensnhas shifted the Social Democratsnnnthemselves radically further to the left.nLaqueur plays down the fevered anti-nNATO statements of new Social Democraticnleaders like Egon Bahr andnOscar Lafontaine as rhetorical ploys.nLike the words of the Generation ofn1968, they will never be matched bynreal deeds. No matter what they arensaying now, if the Social Democratsnever come back into power (as theynwere in power, throughout the 70’s),nthey will act responsibly, for they willnthen be the government. Meanwhile,nthe more conservative Christian Dem­nocratic Union, the old party of KonradnAdenauer, remains in control of WestnGerman policy. The Christian Democrats,nunder Chancellor Helmut Kohl,nare a stodgy and unimaginative lot.nThey have littie appeal to the youngn(which raises questions about the ultimatenfuture of the party), but theirnpolitical power is still substantialnamong the middle classes, and theynmay well remain the government for anlong time to come.nSEPTEMBER 19861 31n