百科问答小站 logo   百科问答小站
问题

德国的地域矛盾真的很厉害吗？

回答
提到德国的地域矛盾，这可不是什么新鲜事，说它“厉害”吧，也不是那种天天剑拔弩张、非要闹翻的程度，更多的是一种深入骨髓的、在日常生活中不断被提及和感受到的微妙张力。这种矛盾，与其说是尖锐的对立，不如说是文化、经济、历史遗留问题在地理上的集中体现，久而久之，就形成了一些独特的“梗”和“刻板印象”，让德国人自己都乐此不疲地拿来调侃。

最常被拿出来说事的，无疑是“北富南穷”或者说“东穷西富”的说法。二战后，尤其是冷战时期，德国被分裂成了两个国家。西德，也就是我们现在常说的德国，经济实力雄厚，得到了美国的马歇尔计划等援助，工业基础也得到了较好的保留和发展。而东德，也就是后来的前民主德国，则处在苏联的势力范围，经济模式和发展方向与西方截然不同，而且其工业体系很多都被苏联式的老旧模式束缚，效率低下。

所以，当1990年两德统一之后，西德的经济发达地区，比如巴伐利亚、北莱茵威斯特法伦州，一下子要承担起“输血”东德的任务。这可不是一件轻松的事，经济发达的地区自然不愿意看到自己的钱财被“无偿”地投入到另一个相对落后、需要大规模重建的地区。这种经济上的差距，直接导致了经济上的“地域矛盾”。至今，我们仍然能看到，虽然东部地区在统一后取得了长足的进步，但人均收入、就业机会、产业结构等方面，与西部发达地区相比，还是存在一定的差距。这种差距，在经济不景气的时候，就更容易被放大，成为一些地方民众抱怨的焦点。

除了经济，文化和生活习惯上的差异也是地域矛盾的重要组成部分。比如，北德人普遍被认为更保守、更内敛、更讲究规矩，甚至有点“冷淡”，他们可能更喜欢直接、务实的沟通方式。而南德，特别是巴伐利亚，则以热情、豪放、注重传统和节日气氛著称，他们的生活节奏可能更慢一些，更懂得享受生活。这种刻板印象，在德国人看来，就是一种大家心照不宣的“地域文化”。

举个例子，说到啤酒，北德人可能觉得啤酒就是啤酒，但到了巴伐利亚，那可就是学问了。巴伐利亚有各种各样的啤酒节，有各种各样的啤酒花园，人们在那里喝酒聊天，气氛热烈，充满了生活气息。再比如，北德人可能更喜欢海鲜，而南德人则更偏爱猪肉和香肠。这些细微的饮食习惯差异，虽然看似微不足道，但长期以来，也在潜移默化地塑造着不同地区的身份认同。

更有意思的是，即使在同一个西德内部，地域矛盾也同样存在。比如，北威州，作为德国人口最多、工业最发达的州，其首府杜塞尔多夫，在很多人看来，是一个国际化大都市，但与此同时，紧邻的鲁尔区，曾经是德国重工业的中心，现在则面临着产业转型和失业的问题。这也会让一些鲁尔区的人感觉，自己是被抛弃的，而北威州的其他地区，比如科隆，也有自己独特的文化和认同感，与杜塞尔多夫又有所不同。

这种地域差异，还体现在政治上。德国的政治光谱，在不同地区也有所侧重。比如，一些东部地区，由于历史原因和经济现状，可能更容易出现一些极端的政治倾向。而南部地区，比如巴伐利亚，则有自己强大的基督教社会联盟（CSU），长期以来都是保守派的铁票仓。这种政治上的差异，也间接地反映了不同地区在价值观和发展诉求上的分歧。

总而言之，德国的地域矛盾，不是那种一触即发的冲突，更多的是一种历史、经济、文化共同作用下形成的，一种大家习以为常的“内部差异”。这种差异，既是德国多元性的体现，也时不时会成为一些讨论和争论的焦点。德国人自己也很享受这种“互怼”的乐趣，用带有地域特色的幽默感来化解和调侃这些差异，这或许也是德国人处理内部矛盾的一种独特方式吧。

网友意见

user avatar

Traditionally, the conflict is North-South; only the re-unification in 1990 after 40 years of separation made the conflict East-West predominant

I am a German national. My background is in engineering and business, but I am interested in history. I am convinced you can find literature on both the traditional North-South difference, as well as the more recent East-West division of the country.

For the North-South difference, you have to go back to the time of the reformation of the Church (2017 is celebrated as the Luther year, 500 years ago).

For the East-West difference you only have to go back to 1990, or not even, because the effects of the re-unification of Germany have not fully been overcome until this day, and can still be felt as I am writing this.

That is maybe also the reason why this element is more present in the public sentiment:

  • If you have significantly different voting results in provincial elections, depending if East or West....
  • If salaries in the East have still not caught up with the West....
  • If Western citizens still pay a "solidarity tax" to finance ongoing payments from West to East....
  • If the total transfer for only 16.5 million East Germans has passed 1 trillion € (hard to estimate really, but believed to be up to 1.200 billion €, a large number even by Chinese standards, especially if it refers to the population of less than 1 Chinese tier 1 city)....
  • The flux of citizens from the East has still not stopped, migrating to more promising Western regions...

With all these arguments you can see why today's Germans are more occupied by this than their traditional North-South (and therefore mainly religious) divide.

Germans in general are Christians (including Austrians). But the more you go north, the more protestants are there (after Martin Luther's reformation, exactly 500 years ago in 2017). The South is catholic, eg Bavaria. The same is true for Austria .

In fact, the bloodiest war ever fought on German soil was not WW 1 (outside Germany) or WW 2. It was the 30-years war from 1618 - 1648. No other war cost so many lives / population. Entire provinces were deserted, animals like wolves came back ....

Light brown: areas with at least 1/3 of population dead

Dark brown: at least 2/3 of population dead.

As so often, many reasons and power struggles were mixed, but it was fought strictly following religious lines, Catholics against Protestants. The main Catholic leaders were the the Austrian Emperor of the house of Habsburg, the arch duke of Bavaria, and of course generals (Wallenstein and Tilly respectively).

On the Protestant side, there was no such clear leadership at first within Germany, so at first, Denmark's king got involved, later the Swedish king Gustav II Adolf became the dominant leader of the Northern Protestants.

On this map you can see that "Germany" was really a big mess of small and smallest states.

Austria is the big yellow thing in the bottom right corner. Prussia is the tiny blue island inside the red Poland-Lithuania in the upper right hand corner. Of no significance at the time!

When this was over, after 30 years of bloodshed, without a winner, only losers, it was clear that the religious division would remain (much had been about freedom to exercise the protestant faith).

The patchwork Germany continued to Bismarcks age. In the meantime, Prussia grew into a major European power, to rival England, France, Spain Austria and Russia. But it was always much less than all of. Nonetheless, it's king Friderich II (called the Great for his talent as general) fought aggressive wars against Austria, for pure lust of conquest.

The religious divide continued to be so strong, that the French Emperor Napoleon III (Himself a catholic like all French) thought still in 1870, when he attacked Prussia (and the northern German states), that the Southern, Catholic, German manner would actually side with France, not with Germany / Prussia, and this even after the liberation wars to kick out the French of Napoleon I (Bonaparte) out of Germany which were still in the living memory of the people back than.
(I am not aware of anything similar being anticipated, or even happening in WW I, as the question suggests)

For Bismarck, holding together Germany (even without Austria) was more realistic to achieve than to have the eternal internal power struggle with Austria. Bavaria, the next largest catholic state, was already enough to handle. Bismarck wanted and forced the war with Austria to mark the dividing line.

As you can see here, the basic distribution is still valid today (people have not moved that much).

Protestants have the majority in the North, Catholics in the South.

But what is very visible too: just 40 years of atheist communism have eliminated either Christian faith quite substantially in the East German states: Athesism (no religious belief) has the majority there.

It must be noted that these numbers will be based on official Church membership. This membership costs taxes, and makes it more unlikely for East Germans to re-enter the Church, even if they personally have a belief (just as much as West Germans might still be in the Church without actually going to the service).


Having said all this, I think it is important to note that the rivalries today are all minor. While until 1870, states might go to war with each other, today's rivalries are much more like those of neighboring football clubs: People in Cologne will most emphatically point out they are not to be confused with Düsseldorf, which is just 1h away, and vice versa.
But this is by no means a "terrible territorial conflict" as the question suggests.

Bavaria is most proud and most outspoken to be somewhat distinct. In return, most other Germans consider Bavarians as somewhat strange and smile upon them.
On the other hand: I lived 10 years in Munich, the capital of Bavaria (I am born in Hamburg). Today, there are predominantly people like me in Munich, not true Bavarians.

Both North-South and East-West disputes today are almost exclusively economic debates: Richer states pay for poorer states, and the richer ones naturally don't like that.

Religion, which was responsible or at the center of many conflicts, plays hardly any role today.

Mobility of the people takes away most of the remaining differences.

类似的话题

本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息，本站不存储任何数据与内容，任何内容与数据均与本站无关，如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度，google,bing,sogou 等

© 2025 tinynews.org All Rights Reserved. 百科问答小站 版权所有

服务条款
联系我们
关于我们
隐私政策
友情链接
知乎
百度问答
搜狐
新浪