Berlin election: The Left | With Zohran to Elif?

Diverse, but not “woke”: the election campaign of the Berlin Left Photo: Die Linke The longing for New York conditions seems great. No other city leader has been talked about as much in Berlin in recent weeks as the democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani, who has ruled the "Big Apple" since the beginning of the year. Born in Uganda, raised in South Africa and carried to office by a grassroots movement, the 34-year-old Mamdani seems to represent the opposite of Donald Trump in pretty much every way.

It's only natural that the Berlin Left has taken the New York mayor as a role model. Last fall, federal chairwoman Ines Schwerdtner announced: "If New York goes red, Berlin can do it too." Several party officials set out to have Mamdani's campaign explained to them, and the campaign motto "Make Berlin affordable" seems almost copied from New York's "affordability" election campaign: Like the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), the Berlin Left focuses on issues on which the vast majority of the population agrees: exploding Rents, expensive local transport, rising food and swimming pool prices. Although Die Linke visibly promotes diversity in its election campaign clips, there can be no question of a “woken” campaign.

The Left has obviously done well with this orientation. In current surveys it is between 20 and 23 percent - neck and neck with the ruling CDU and just ahead of the AfD, which has firmly established itself in the lower middle class belt outside the S-Bahn ring and in the prefabricated housing estates in Berlin. In recent years, Die Linke has remained two to three percent below the poll numbers in almost all state elections. But even in this case, she would probably be the strongest force in the red-red-green camp and could therefore claim the mayor's office.

The mayor of New York is calling on his city's citizens to organize unions.

The party owes this strength not only to its decision to campaign for social security and rents. The political constellation also benefits her. Tenant protests and, above all, the movement “Expropriate German Housing and Co” have politicized Berlin’s urban society over the past decade. In contrast to Munich or Düsseldorf, skyrocketing rents on the Spree do not appear as a natural phenomenon, but as what they are: a product of real estate speculation. Investments worth billions in Berlin have by no means led to new construction, but rather have driven up rents for existing housing stock. Because the SPD is no longer able to represent tenants' interests due to its ties with the real estate lobby, the left almost automatically has this task. The party has also gained credibility here through campaigns such as the free heating and additional costs check.

Furthermore, the Left is benefiting – if you want to put it so cynically – from the rise of the AfD. All over the Federal Republic, anti-AfD voters have recently gathered around the party that was perceived as the most important opposing force: in Saxony around the CDU, in Baden-Württemberg around the Greens and, according to surveys, around the SPD in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. This bonus could benefit the left in Berlin, which was already able to capitalize on the image of the anti-fascist counterpole in the federal election campaign.

Against this background, it almost seems somewhat paradoxical that the mood within the party is rather subdued. While Berlin's social institutions and associations have high hopes for mayor Elif Eralp, the mobilization of their own membership is quite muted compared to the federal election campaign. This certainly also has something to do with the fact that the federal election at the beginning of 2025 was about the political survival of the Left and the party was literally overrun by people who wanted to get involved in the door-to-door election campaign. Some normality has returned here.

But differences in content also play a role. Like the party leadership, part of the party has great hope in a left-led coalition government that would have a similar mobilizing charisma as Mamdani in New York and assumes that the government will open up further political leeway. In parts of the base, however, there is a fear that, given the poor budget situation, a policy like the red-red coalition of the 2000s could ultimately emerge. Back then, too, the PDS, with its top candidate Gregor Gysi, performed sensationally well and received 22.6 percent of the vote. However, the hoped-for left turn did not materialize. Interestingly, this memory is much more present in the party base today than in urban society, which longs for concrete improvements.

What is also not entirely insignificant for the mood within the party is that the Left in Berlin has opted for a different communication strategy than its New York model. Zohran Mamdani had decided to take an offensive approach to the campaigns directed against him, even though New York's Jewish community was deeply divided over the question of Palestine. He acknowledged the BDS boycott movement, which once helped politicize him, and when asked about Israel's right to exist, he replied that he "cannot approve of a state that provides for a hierarchy of citizenship on the basis of religion." Such statements may have been irrelevant in terms of local politics. But with them, Mamdani demonstrated that he is prepared to defend his convictions even against hostile media campaigns.

The Berlin Left is acting much more defensively - probably because they don't want to alienate potential coalition partners early on. However, the issue has not been gotten rid of: no matter how much the candidate Elif Eralp distances herself from the Palestinian solidarity movement in the city, the Berlin media companies still return to their accusations of anti-Semitism. Eralp really has nothing in common with the New York mayor on this issue. Mamdani's Middle East positions are more similar to those of former Berlin Left member Ramsys Kilani, who was expelled from the party last year.

How much willingness the Left should show for conflict remains controversial within the party. At the grassroots level, many people want Die Linke to resolutely contradict the media and political competition. A large part of the electorate, on the other hand, wants concrete changes in their own lives. Elif Eralp has fulfilled this wish with the immediate program that was presented last week. It provides for a rent cap for the 400,000 state-owned apartments, the expansion of an authority against exorbitant rents and a regular bulky waste day. One might smile at the latter - the rent cap for state-owned apartments would be an important first step for many Berliners. However, in view of rising interest rates, even this demonstratively realistic plan could soon cause problems. The state-owned housing companies have debts of 20 billion euros. If interest rates rise by just one percent in the debt crisis that is currently escalating globally, that would be an additional 200 million euros annually.

As in New York, everything in Berlin will depend on whether the social balance of power changes beyond the elections. Without higher taxes on the rich and redistribution, even modest social measures will not be financed. Against this background, Zohran Mamdani calls on New Yorkers to organize themselves into unions. And in an interview with the “nd,” his campaign manager Andrew Bard Epstein explicitly emphasized: “Many Democratic politicians are currently trying to imitate our election campaign by using the word affordability. They completely ignore the confrontational part of our campaign. That’s bad politics.”

However, the scope for confrontation in Berlin is limited. A state government could only independently increase trade, property, real estate transfer and second home taxes. None of them is a classic tax on the rich. By the way, trade tax, the most important individual item for Berlin, brings in around 3.3 billion euros a year. Fun fact: That's pretty much exactly the amount the country has budgeted for its police annually.

The »nd.Genossenschaft« belongs to its readers and authors. They are the ones who make our journalism accessible to everyone through their contribution: We are not backed by a media company, not a large advertising customer or even a billionaire.

Thanks to the support of our community we can:

→ report independently and critically → shine a light on topics that otherwise remain in the shadows → give space to voices that are often silenced → counter disinformation with facts → strengthen and deepen left-wing perspectives

With “Voluntarily pay” you contribute to the financing of our newspaper in solidarity. So that nd remains.