Right-wing populism and democracy: potential not exhausted

T he future of the parties has changed completely with the election results in Saxony-Anhalt, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and Berlin. The business model of the once large popular parties no longer works; competition from the left and right offers cheaper and simpler solutions from the voters' perspective. More and more people are turning away from the CDU/CSU and SPD because they have the feeling that their interests and their situation in life are not being taken seriously.

This is especially true for the working middle class. For them, migration is no longer the central issue, but rather the economic situation with rising prices. Berlin is postponing the future. Long-needed reforms in work, care and health are being postponed or approached as short-term cost-cutting programs. The Union and the SPD are neither willing nor able to radically address the future. Both surpass each other in their poverty of ideas and thought.

is a futurologist and founder of the Institute for Future Policy (www.institut-zukunftspolitik.de).

This makes longing for the supposedly better past easy. The main beneficiary is the Alternative for Germany (AfD), which is particularly good at mobilizing the potential of protest voters and non-voters. The emotional change has long since replaced the ecological one. While in the 1980s the Greens benefited from the fear of supposed doom, today the right-wing populists are the winners of the doom and gloom.

The taz is an independent, left-wing and opinionated daily newspaper. We have been arguing in our comments, essays and debate texts since the taz was founded in 1979. We often cannot and do not want to agree on an opinion. That's why you'll find some completely opposing positions here - all part of the very broad left-wing spectrum of opinions.

The real reason why people vote for AfD is their desire for Germany to become strong again, according to sociologist Detlef Pollack. The trend of a growing radical center is also spreading in Germany, belatedly but all the more sustainably. Confidence in politicians' ability to solve problems is just as low here as the demand for fundamental reforms is high. “Radical” is meant positively: consistently and uncompromisingly for democracy and the rule of law, against populism and extremism from the right and left.

The potential of convinced Democrats has recently grown to 79 percent. A potential that the CDU and SPD in particular are not taking advantage of. They are increasingly unable to mobilize their voters. Fewer and fewer citizens trust the two parties to solve the problems in Germany. The AfD is doing little better. The vast majority of Union voters also reject pandering or even collaboration with the AfD. The Union is losing more voters to the left and to abstention than to the AfD.

What should a political concept for the radical center look like? It's about market-based solutions to social problems and a strong state when it comes to issues of migration and security. Economically it is about the new possibilities of digitalization and artificial intelligence, socially the radical middle is neither liberal nor conservative, but independent and wants to have as many choices as possible in their lives and always get a fair chance.

Only this creates confidence in all classes: that your children and grandchildren are better off than you are. And that there is no desire for destruction, but rather a desire for the future: for Europe, progress, belonging, equality and justice. More justice can only come about through freedom and the chance of realization. Distribution, performance, opportunity and generational justice are not opposites, but should be brought into balance.

The principle of revenue-oriented spending policy should be the guiding principle. In addition to budgetary discipline, it is also about reforming the public school system. This includes roughly equal spending for all school districts, free choice of schools, hiring better teachers and more powers for existing school management and educators. A commitment to market-based solutions in healthcare, energy and the environment is required, provided that the state carefully regulates these solutions so that they serve the common good.

“Courage for the future” is the slogan of a radical center party at a time when others are relying on “retropia” that Zygmunt Bauman wrote about – a past that can supposedly be restored. When cheap gas still flowed from Russia, the combustion engine kept running, the German mark was hard and people with immigration backgrounds were called “guest workers”. No, the motto should not be “make us strong again”, but rather “make Germany stronger than ever”.

We can learn from Canada how to have courage for the future. The Prime Minister there, Mark Carney, is pursuing the goal of making his country more independent of the USA and economically stronger with large infrastructure and raw materials projects with his idea of ​​“nation building”: “Build, baby, build,” is his appeal. Instead of unreasonable demands, he speaks of “opportunities”, of possibilities and chances.

The task of political leadership is to turn the feeling of increasing insecurity into a policy of new security, to provide orientation and to ensure a better future. At its core, the answer to the radical center is a “pure center” party that creates orientation, self-critically looks for solutions, is future-proof, remains decent, adheres to the laws and maintains its language.

Who will turn this into new political majorities? If neither the Union nor the SPD are capable of “pure center”, a new radical center party will probably be founded that takes care of the fears, interests and passions of citizens and asks the really important questions: What are the social evils of our time, how do we solve them and who takes responsibility for them?