Third
Republic: Germany Enters a Dangerous New Political Era
An Essay by Dirk
Kurbjuweit
Stability
used to define Germany's political system. But the refugee crisis has
fundamentally changed the country's party landscape. The rise of the
fringe has eroded the traditional centers of power.
Seven or eight
months ago, Germany was a different country than it is today. There
were no controversial political issues demanding immediate action and
Chancellor Angela Merkel's leadership was uncontested. It was quiet
and comfortable. But then the refugees began streaming into Europe
and the country's sleepy tranquility came to a sudden end. Since
then, disgusting eruptions of xenophobia have come in quick
succession, a right-wing populist party is on its way to holding
seats in several state parliaments, Merkel has gained approval from
the center-left Social Democrats and from the Greens, some
conservatives want to throw her out and the state is overwhelmed.
Does anyone know what is happening? What is wrong with this country?
For Germany, this is
the second democratic republic, if one leaves out East Germany, since
it was only a faux democracy. First came the Weimar Republic, from
1918 to 1933, and then, since 1949, the Federal Republic, which
simply continued following the momentous events of 1989. But now, it
looks as though the refugee crisis has brought a significant rupture.
To be sure, the German constitution and the country's institutions
won't be called into question any time soon. But the conventions
governing Germany's political interactions are changing with
incredible speed.
A crisis of
representation is necessarily accompanied by jolts to the political
party system. Some of those jolts have been a long time in the
making, but they are now becoming apparent as the refugee crisis
takes hold. It could be that our country is currently experiencing
lasting change. The contours of a Third Republic are becoming
apparent.
In modern
democracies, politics takes place in a space of dual representation.
Politicians represent their voters in parliaments and governments,
while in between elections the electorate can exert influence on the
public debate, primarily through representation in the media.
Tabloids such as Bild operate as the "voice of the people,"
while outlets like Die Zeit speak for intellectuals. In truth,
though, it is two elites speaking with each other: politicians and
journalists. They almost seem like members of the same caste, which
would be a problematic state of affairs because it is the media's job
to keep a critical eye on the politicians.
Spinning Out of
Control
The Internet has
broken apart this intimate twosome. Now, anyone can join the
discussion. That in itself is a good thing, but in the refugee
crisis, the debate has spun out of control. One of the roles long
played by journalists is that of gatekeeper, largely filtering out
the hate, conspiracy theories and other lunacy. That allowed for a
more temperate, constructive debate. Despite at times passionate
disagreement, politicians and journalists were able to find common
ground and make compromise possible. Germany worked.
The crisis of
representation is particularly intense in eastern Germany. Prior to
1989, East Germans were led to believe that the Communist Party
completely represented the will of the people. The claim was easy to
see through, but difficult to confront -- until East Germans
ultimately got rid of their state. But when the revolution was over,
those who had risen up as one, found themselves once again
represented by others. The refugee crisis has revealed the lack of
acceptance that many in eastern Germany have for the federal republic
system. They don't trust the politicians and take action themselves,
in the form of protests. They don't trust the journalists and believe
in their own truths. All of that exists in western Germany as well,
but it's not as pronounced.
The two main pillars
of political representation in Germany have long been the Christian
Democrats (CDU) (along with their Bavarian sister party, the
Christian Social Union, CSU) on the one hand, and the Social
Democrats (SPD) on the other. For decades, these two parties were
able to represent the various positions on the right and left side of
the political spectrum, respectively. They did so in a media
landscape that was likewise divided to the left and right, with each
camp serving a like-minded public. Because the two milieus have begun
to fragment in recent years, Germany's two largest parties have begun
to shrink. The result has been more parties to choose from. But
people are also leaving their milieus to become individual actors.
And individuals no longer necessarily need a representative, because
they can represent themselves. Their stage is the Internet.
Then along came
Angela Merkel. Quite some time ago, she managed to transform the CDU
into a green-liberal-social democratic amalgam, having largely
exorcised conservatism from the party. Her unique brand of politics
can in part be explained by the fact that she isn't as wed to her
party's traditions to the degree that others -- those who spent their
youths defending their conservative worldviews against the
left-leaning high school mainstream -- might be. When the refugees
began flowing in, Merkel stirred things up for good.
An Odd Phenomenon
Many in Germany no
longer recognize the country's party landscape. There are those who
have spent their lives voting SPD or Green and thinking the CDU was
the epitome of evil -- and who are now passionate supporters of
Merkel. There are those who have spent their lives voting for the CDU
and who deified Merkel for her power instincts -- and who are now
calling for her ouster so that Germany might remain German and
Christian.
In shaping her
refugee policies, Merkel followed the tenets of humanism and
internationalism, both of which are rooted in Christianity but whose
political home had thus far been on the left side of the political
spectrum. In the campaign ahead of elections this Sunday in
Baden-Württemberg, this state of affairs has produced an odd
phenomenon: Governor Winfried Kretschmann, of the Green Party, is a
passionate adherent of Merkel's policy course in the refugee crisis
while Guido Wolf, the lead candidate from Merkel's own CDU, has
distanced himself from the chancellor. Voting used to be easier.
Particularly now that Merkel appears to be distancing herself from
herself and is pursuing more restrictive refugee policies. What is
one voting for now when one votes for the CDU?
This is, of course,
far from the first time that state politicians have run a campaign in
opposition to the federal government. It also isn't the first time
that the leaders of the CDU and CSU, despite being paired in a
decades-long conservative alliance, have battled it out in public as
Merkel and Bavarian Governor Horst Seehofer are doing today. Back in
the 1980s, there was little lost love between Chancellor Helmut Kohl
and Bavarian Governor Franz Josef Strauss. But Strauss and Kohl were
in agreement on the fundamental questions facing their era: nuclear
power and defense. By contrast, Merkel and Seehofer are so divided by
refugee policy that the CSU is considering challenging Merkel's
refugee policies at the Constitutional Court.
It used to be that
the two conservative parties at least had a common enemy, and when it
came to attacking the Social Democrats, the CDU and CSU were happy to
put their differences behind them. But what do the Social Democrats
stand for today? Who do they represent? SPD head Sigmar Gabriel,
after all, recently said that the state has to do more for Germans, a
position that would find broad agreement among supporters of the
right-wing populist Alternative for Germany (AfD). Germany's party
landscape has been stood on its head.
Insurance Against
the Fringes
Because Merkel has
abandoned those on the right wing of the CDU, the AfD has filled the
void and has been boosted by the refugee crisis. That, in turn, could
spell the end to the CDU's firm grip on the conservative half of
Germany's political spectrum. It is a development long since seen on
the left, with support for the SPD having stagnated in recent years
at around 25 percent or lower.
It used to be that
the CDU and the SPD dominated the political landscape. Referred to as
"Volksparteien," or "people's parties," they
consistently divided up 80 percent of the vote between them and their
sheer size served as insurance against the fringes. They were
guarantors of consensus and compromise. The business-friendly Free
Democrats (FDP) and the environment-oriented Greens were well-meaning
additions to the landscape and were easily integrated.
But SPD missteps and
the emergence of the far-left Left Party in 2007 fragmented the left
half of the spectrum. The AfD is in the process of doing the same now
to the right. Other parties on the extremist right wing, of course,
have managed to find their way into some state parliaments, but their
successes were largely the product of protest votes. They never
really had their own electorates to speak of. The AfD, though, does
and has profited from the Internet, transforming itself into the
voice of online xenophobic trends and channels. Should the party's
success prove lasting, Germany will end up with a political spectrum
that is closer to the European norm -- but one which is nonetheless
uncomfortable given the country's history.
Ahead of Sunday's
state election in Baden-Württemberg, pundits are speculating about
the creation of a "Germany Coalition," a coalition that
would bring together the CDU, SPD and FPD, whose party colors are
those of the German flag. It is reminiscent of the "Weimar
Coalition" between the wars, that alliance of center-left
parties that was forged to defend democracy, but which proved no
match for the dark forces on the fringe. Things aren't nearly that
bad yet, of course, but the system feels more instable than it has in
a long time.
The First Steps
On the whole, it
seems as though the republic is changing form. It is a slow, largely
organic change -- and one strongly influenced by eastern Germany. Is
that good or bad?
It would, of course,
be possible to reestablish the kind of dualism seen in the heyday of
the CDU and SPD -- via the introduction of a majoritarian system.
That would have the advantage of making it easier to form
governments, but in a situation like today, many voters would feel as
though they were being shut out. That's not an option. Which is why
we have to get used to a more varied party system. The disadvantage
is that it will become more difficult for future governments to find
consensus. The advantage, though, is that no party will be able to
impose its own ideology -- pragmatism is the only route to consensus.
And the shrunken Volksparteien will have to release their grip on the
state and public broadcasters because they no longer represent the
country the way they once did.
The United States
these days is putting another possible outcome of the crisis of
representation on display. Republican presidential candidate Donald
Trump is dependent neither on his party's establishment nor on the
established media. He is creating his own electorate with the help of
the Internet. That is the path of extremely direct democracy.
It isn't difficult
to see the black dystopia that may result: Anger, fear, unchallenged
claims to truth and conspiracy theories create a mood that elevates
those politicians who are best able to manipulate that mood, in part
because he or she helped create it. Identity replaces representation,
just like in a dictatorship. All checks and balances -- including the
party system and the media -- fall away. Democracy falls prey to
emotion.
Germany is still far
away from such a fate. But the first steps have been taken.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário