The German Elections 2021
In the run-up to last Sunday’s federal election in Germany, opinion polls pointed to an exceptionally weak performance of outgoing Chancellor Merkel’s conservative parties (CDU/CSU), with an increase of the share of labour-in-name-only party (SPD) and the ludicrously warmongering-transatlanticist ‘Green’ party. German Media, irrespective of public (ARD, ZDF) or private ownership (Bertelsmann, Springer), particularly interested in promoting irrational, fear-based red-baiting deriving straight from a generation ago, with the main theme being, believe it or not, ‘red socks’ (see also the picture below, with the billboard reading ‘A Future instead of Left Front’, from the 1994 campaign).
There is, however, one other set of key players in this entire quagmire masquerading as ‘politics’: non-governmental organisations, or NGOs. This is perhaps best explored by looking at the Green party co-chair, Annalena Baerbock. According to one independent journalist, Thomas Röper, she is very much a typical career politician, German-style. After graduating, Baerbock was hired as chief of staff to a MP of the European Parliament; then she was a staffer for the Green party in the German Bundestag (in the meantime, Baerbock—unsuccessfully—tried to write a Ph.D.). Elected on a party ticket in 2013, she remains a MP for the Greens until the present.
So far, so good. Ms. Baerbock is further a member of the German Marshall Fund; she is a member of the advisory council on ‘European and Transatlantic Relations’ of the Heinrich Böll Stiftung (the Green party foundation, a tax-saving vehicle all major European parties have); and a member of the ‘Parliamentary Circle of Friendship [between] Berlin and Taipei’, an across-the-aisle group of German MPs with a distinct dislike of the People’s Republic of China; Ms. Baerbock is also a member of the Young Global Leaders of the World Economic Forum; and, finally, a member of the trustees of the Leo Baeck Foundation. According to Röper, who wrote about this in mid-April 2021, many of these links and cross-references have since been ‘cleansed’ from the respective websites. Honi soit qui mal y pense (trans. shame on anyone who thinks evil of it).
As regards the outcome, well, the SPD, once more, won a ‘plurality’ of the vote—a little over a quarter, followed by the CDU/CSU tandem with a little less than a quarter. About a generation ago, both major camps commanded some 80 percent of the vote, but history rarely matters these days. (Less than a decade ago, in fact, as little as eight years ago in 2013, the ‘victorious’ SPD lost the election—with about the same share of the election than it ‘won’ last Sunday.)
So, what’s going to happen?
There is no parliamentary majority for a left-of-centre gov’t (SPD, the Left, the Greens). In all likelihood, whichever of the two ‘big’ camps pays more attention—and dispenses more political handouts—to the functional equivalent of soft libertarianism à l’allemagne (the Free Democrats, or FDP) and the Greens will probably make it to the Chancellery.
And this means—a gov’t that will move (even further) to the right side of the political continuum. This also includes the option of a renewed coalition between the two larger (middling) camps, irrespective of whether that government will be led by Olaf Scholz (SPD) or whoever will end up as his counterpart from the CDU/CSU.
Why, you may ask?
Well, if past experience is any guide, there is virtually no-one in the German Bundestag these days who criticises the madness masquerading as military spending (with the notable exception of, e.g., former MP for the Left Fabio de Masi). If you need proof of this, go and watch the final ‘debate’ between the leading candidates. Fast-forward to 55:40 and ‘enjoy’ Olaf Scholz pontificating about foreign and security policy:
‘After all, the Bundeswehr has been cut to the bone. Shouldn’t we now realise that NATO's 2% [minimum defence spending commitment] is actually too little if we want to build a functioning security alliance without NATO?’
As a follow-up, Scholz then mentioned that during his tenure as Treasury Secretary—since 2018 (!)—he is proud to have increased ‘defence spending’ by 36 percent. In addition, he also thanked the German soldiers for their dangerous missions abroad.
Mind you, this is the chairman of the labour-in-name-only party, which once, a generation ago, stood for social democracy, peace through friendship, and disarmament. Sic transit gloria mundi.
Keep further in mind that the ‘neoliberal* turn’ under the last SPD-led government—with the Greens, no less—under Chancellor Gerhard Schröder (in office 1998-2005) has led to a drastic, long-term reduction of the German welfare state. Labelled ‘Agenda 2010’ (see Wikipedia for an introduction), this was the usual toxic mix known from other ‘third way’ politicians such as Bill Clinton and Tony Blair, it is worth pointing out that these actions resulted in similar outcomes: a drastic increase in low-wage, temporary employment; reduced social insurance policies, incl. means-testing; and a long-term decrease of retirement benefits.
No-one in German politics—again, with the notable exception of certain Left politicians such as Oskar Lafontain and Sarah Wagenknecht (with whom one doesn’t have to agree ideologically to accept the objective correctness of their assessments in these regards)—over the course of the past decade has even spoken about any policies that may or may not address the growing gap between rich and poor, the similarly growing ranks of impoverished pensioners, or the policy follies of trying to suck up to transatlantic illusions. O tempora, o mores.
To tentatively answer the above question—so, what’s going to happen?—the short answer is: more of the same, but with an even less charismatic (no pun intended) cast of despicable characters in charge.
* I am aware that the term ‘neoliberalism’ needs (begs) for a more in-depth exploration, which I will provide in due course.