During the years immediately following the fall of the Berlin Wall, scholars and journalists produced scores of books and articles seeking to explain why the German Democratic Republic (GDR), apparently the most successful of Europe's socialist regimes, collapsed so suddenly in 1989 and 1990. Eventually, however, historians and social scientists realized that other important developments occurred within the confines of the GDR, events that, although they did not play a pivotal role in the regime's failure, were important anyway. The result has been a series of monographs and journal articles seeking to describe what it was like to live under the rule of the Socialist Unity Party (SED) and experience “real, existing socialism” as a citizen of the GDR. Ned Richardson-Little's book makes an important contribution to this ongoing intellectual enterprise.

Although it might be easy to dismiss the notion of human rights in the context of the SED dictatorship, Richardson-Little convincingly argues that such an approach would be short-sighted. Indeed, East German intellectuals developed a sophisticated rhetoric in defense of human rights, if only out of necessity. That is, such international developments as the 1948 Universal Declaration on Human Rights made it necessary for the GDR leadership to cultivate positions regarding human rights issues if socialist Germany wished to play an important role in world affairs. Yet the SED could not simply adopt Western notions concerning individual liberty, which might bring into question the party's constitutionally guaranteed monopoly on political power. The result was a uniquely East German understanding of what constituted human rights, one fostered by socialist intellectuals, with Humboldt University's Hermann Klenner playing a central role. In contrast to Western human rights activists, whom Klenner and his comrades viewed as dangerously bourgeois, East German thinkers fashioned a human rights rhetoric that catered to the needs of the SED. As a result, anti-imperialism and anti-racism became the cornerstones of East German human rights discourse. Not only was such an approach consistent with a Marxist-Leninist worldview, but it had the added advantage of undermining West German efforts to question the legitimacy of the GDR. After all, if every people had the right to self-determination, the West had no legitimate grounds to intervene in events within the borders of socialist Germany. Further, East German thinkers embraced the cause of anti-racism, especially issues concerning South Africa, as a way to legitimize the SED regime in the eyes of the world, especially the Global South. Richardson-Little convincingly concludes that these efforts met with, at best, limited success.

The Socialist Unity Party's discourse regarding human rights remained remarkably coherent over the course of four decades—at least until the final years of the regime. Proponents allied with the SED consistently steered discourse in a direction that legitimized the German Democratic Republic. This is not to suggest that the rhetoric did not evolve over time, however, as new issues arose within the international human rights community. During the 1980s, for example, thinkers in the GDR championed such campaigns as the peace movement, not to mention the effort to create a nuclear-free zone in east-central Europe. Looming over all this discussion concerning human rights, of course, was the question of emigration, with the West consistently criticizing the GDR's refusal to permit its people to leave for the Federal Republic, especially after East Germany signed the Helsinki Accords in 1975. Ironically, as the public discourse surrounding the introduction of the 1968 constitution made clear, this was the human right in which the population of the GDR was most interested. The right to emigrate, however, never became an important component of human rights discourse in socialist Germany—at least until the final years of the regime, when advocates not allied with the SED began to make their voices heard. The Human Rights Dictatorship concludes with a succinct, but thoughtful, analysis of the disagreements concerning human rights that took place in the context of unification, with many citizens of the new federal states seeking to preserve at least some of the social rights they had secured over the course of four decades.

Throughout the book, Richardson-Little exhibits a mastery of sources, both published and archival. He leaves no stone unturned in his effort to secure information, and his extensive footnotes are ample evidence of this—although the addition of a bibliography would have been helpful. The book is well written, and the author's ideas are thoughtfully and cogently presented. Perhaps most striking of all is Richardson-Little's evenhandedness; that is, he is willing to give credit where it is due. Refusing to be overly cynical, he concedes that there was much more to the human rights campaigns emanating from the GDR than an effort to legitimize the regime. Rather, East German human rights activists sincerely wished to end Western imperialism and racism, to make the world a better place—at least as they understood it. At the same time, the author points out the hypocrisy inherent in the GDR's refusal to permit emigration to the Federal Republic while appealing to its own human rights discourse as a defense. In short, Richardson-Little insists that things were much more complicated than they first appear, and it is impossible to argue with this conclusion. As a result, The Human Rights Dictatorship makes a valuable contribution to our understanding of the history of the German Democratic Republic and its role in international relations. The author should be commended for his success.